Free college fees? Should they be scrapped?

steddyeddy

I was having a discussion on another thread about colleges and the free fees system. I personally do not have anything against free fees for any group at the momentbut I know some people think that we should be paying for them in a recession. There’s another argument that free fees improve access to third level for people from disadvantaged areas but as other people have mentioned there’s a lot of other challenges facing people from those areas and I would agree with them tobe honest. If it came down to it for me I do think that there are people who can afford to pay fees in college who should pay fees if fees are brought in.Some people just drink their way through college and maybe it will change thatbut saying that at the moment free fees are something I’m ok with forevery body. What does everyone else think?

magicherbs

I think you need to fix your spacebar.

Free fees? 2k registration fee.

People on Local council grants are probably the only people getting free fees.

Free fees is based on parental income. How do you manage people with wealthy parents who don't give them money?

TBH I think there is too much emphasis put on university, at least 70% of the courses are ****e.

LostCorkGuy

Nope , too many people graduating as it is , we need more people doing manual work / manufacturing work and not pencil pushers and until they can bring in a more just barrier to entry so that only the people who deserve to be in Uni are there we need the cost factor as a deterrent

People from disadvantaged area's already get grants ect
As for the statment that people just drink their way through college ? Well that's a load of bollox , you've to work your ass off in college just to pass in my experience (I'm a repeat student paying 6K this year , Granted I'm studying Mandarin and naturally will have to work harder than a English Lit major , but I can tell you I worked hard enough last year , only going out once a week and I didn't pass , this business of thinking college is a doss is just stupid )

Rayne Wooney

magicherbs wrote: »

I think you need to fix your spacebar.

Free fees? 2k registration fee.

People on Local council grants are probably the only people getting free fees.

Free fees is based on parental income. How do you manage people with wealthy parents who don't give them money?

TBH I think there is too much emphasis put on university, at least 70% of the courses are ****e.

Hmm are you sure?

Pilotdude5

magicherbs wrote: »

TBH I think there is too much emphasis put on university, at least 70% of the courses are ****e.

Mabey not 70% but I agree here. Also a lot of courses are spread out over 4 years when they could easily be less. Saving on rent for a year or two could make a big difference to people.

Death and Taxes

Means test the fees and the grant. You pay or recieve proportionate to family income.
Free fees have not aided the disadvantaged at all, but they have allowed the wealthy to spend the fees they would have paid on grind schools instead, thus actually helping the better off at the expense of the less well off.

Boombastic

People who do arts courses should have to pay full fees

snubbleste

Free fees and maintenance grants have helped many people from disadvantaged backgrounds go to college in the last eighteen years.

It was a positive step to abolish fees.

MadYaker

This free fees thing is misleading. Its not free my parents pay €2750 registration per year for me and the same for my sister. That €5500 per year to put us through college and were both doing 4 year degrees. I know it would be a lot more if the government didn't chip in about €8000 per year on top of that but its still not free.

I have a part time job and don't live at home so I'm not as much of a drain on their income as my sister is but its still a lot. And neither of us qualify for any grants from anywhere.

TimeToShine

Boombastic wrote: »

People who do arts courses should have to pay full fees

Not this again...

Rayne Wooney

I think the free fees should be scrapped. Bring in a new system, say €15,000 for average points courses (more for courses such as medicine) but the amount you pay depends on you or your parents income. If both your parents earn over 100k a year, your pay 100% of the fees. If both of you parents earn €40,000 a year combined, you pay 10% of the fees.

jjbrien

Boombastic wrote: »

People who do arts courses should have to pay full fees

Well most of my teachers did arts so Id not charge for it either. Education is our way out of the mess the country is in. More Educated people instead of builders sitting on the dole will hopefully put this country back on its feet

snubbleste

More teachers in the Dáil!

The_Gatsby

I think the scum who can't afford college fees should learn their place and be scum forever.

Death and Taxes

snubbleste wrote: »

Free fees and maintenance grants have helped many people from disadvantaged backgrounds go to college in the last eighteen years.

It was a positive step to abolish fees.

Do you have any actual evidence of any dramatic improvment in the numbers from disadvantaged areas going on to third level increasing in the last 18 years?

shootie

Well I'm in 6th year...

snubbleste

WileyCoyote wrote: »

Do you have any actual evidence of any dramatic improvment in the numbers from disadvantaged areas going on to third level increasing in the last 18 years?

Erm no.
Just anecdotal evidence that many were the first in their families to go to college.
I'm sure there are statistics out there..such as the success of Access & Hear programmes.

Boombastic

jjbrien wrote: »

Well most of my teachers did arts so Id not charge for it either. Education is our way out of the mess the country is in. More Educated people instead of builders sitting on the dole will hopefully put this country back on its feet

True education is good, but some courses have only 6/7 hours / week in their final year- some (most?) business courses included in this. There is no need for these degrees to be 4 years as so little time is spent in the final year. The could be done in 3 years. The only reason they are stretched out is so the college can collect fees.

Not sure what relevance your teachers have?

Mal-Adjusted

OP, are you complaining about college fees (disguised a a "registration fee" which everyone has to pay and are about 2-3K at this stage and going up) or the grant (which is a totally separate issue)?

In an Irish Times article in November 2010, it was reported that the progression rate of schools in south Dublin to third level education was “more or less 100%”, while many schools from poorer areas of Dublin showed a progression of rate of less than 10%, and that these rates of entry “have hardly changed at all over the 15 years of ‘free fees’”. These statistics make complete sense. The introduction of free third-level education made little difference to those from disadvantaged backgrounds, as they have always been entitled to receive free or partially funded third-level education through grant systems. Thus, the introduction of free third-level education essentially made it free for those who could already afford it – the middle and upper-classes.
http://www.universitytimes.ie/2011/10/26/the-myth-of-free-fees/

I think a loan system or something like that would be better.

MadYaker

WileyCoyote wrote: »

Do you have any actual evidence of any dramatic improvment in the numbers from disadvantaged areas going on to third level increasing in the last 18 years?

If people from disadvantaged areas aren't going on to third level its because they are either too lazy or inept to get good enough points in the L.C. If your parents/parent are unemployed and you live in council housing you won't pay a red cent for college and you will get a maintenance grant and an accommodation grant and also most colleges have their own funds to help people from disadvantaged backgrounds so you'll most likely get a slice of that pie too. Ireland is a welfare state, all you have to do is qualify for certain criteria and you get a free ride. All you have to do is get the points.

Death and Taxes

snubbleste wrote: »

Erm no.
Just anecdotal evidence that many were the first in their families to go to college.
I'm sure there are statistics out there..such as the success of Access & Hear programmes.

there are stastics but they disprove the anecdotal evidence. I will look them up and post them tomorrow.

brummytom

I think there should be less emphasis placed on degrees. I'm currently at uni, paying £8,000 a year, mainly because it's impossible to get a half decent job without a degree.

I don't think access to education should be limited by wealth (of lack of), but I do think there is a mentality (and probable need) that everyone has to go to uni, even to do pretty Mickey Mouse courses.

Richard Hillman

I dont think 1st year should be free as it has the highest amount of drop outs. People out of school can try and get a job for a year and save up. Plus they will be more matured by an extra year and might have more of an idea in what they want to do. If people had to pay for it themselves then they would be more likely not to take it for granted and work harder.

I would say about 40% of my course has already virtually dropped out and a lot of them are just going through the motions, keeping their parents happy etc.

Laura_lolly87

I paid €2,250 to go back to college this year. It's €2,500 next year, I don't qualify for a grant so have to save the money myself. Hiking the cost up too about €5,000 only makes college available for the very rich.

Death and Taxes

MadYaker wrote: »

If people from disadvantaged areas aren't going on to third level its because they are either too lazy or inept to get good enough points in the L.C. If your parents/parent are unemployed and you live in council housing you won't pay a red cent for college and you will get a maintenance grant and an accommodation grant and also most colleges have their own funds to help people from disadvantaged backgrounds so you'll most likely get a slice of that pie too. Ireland is a welfare state, all you have to do is qualify for certain criteria and you get a free ride. All you have to do is get the points.

People from disadvantaged areas face a distinct obsticle in achieving the necessary points when faced with competition from those whose parents send them to private grind schools, of course they can afford the grind schools since they know they wont have to pay fees.
Check the stats on the schools most likely to feed into the third level system.

Herb Powell

Boombastic wrote: »

People who do arts courses should have to pay full fees

Shortage of graduates with decent language skills, so nah, **** that.

Boombastic wrote: »

True education is good, but some courses have only 6/7 hours / week in their final year- some (most?) business courses included in this. There is no need for these degrees to be 4 years as so little time is spent in the final year. The could be done in 3 years. The only reason they are stretched out is so the college can collect fees.

Not sure what relevance your teachers have?

6/7 hours of classes does not=6/7 hours of total work! THough I'm sure you knew that already.

cantdecide

bluewolf wrote: »

I think a loan system or something like that would be better.

Maybe for those who are by most people's definition well-off but like a lot of situiations in this country that involve means-testing, the people in the black and white areas will be grand but a huge proportion of people in the grey area will be plunged into hardship.

I think free education is principal we should stick by, tbh.

Chuck Stone

First things first. 3rd level is not free - the vast majority of the bill is picked up by the public whether they attend college, or have kids who will, or not.

I think there should be state funded scholarships for exceptional students from impoverished backgrounds and loans for people who can't pay up front.

Shirley the fairest way would see the user pay? Also, if the user pays it might encourage 3rd level institutions to streamline and not pay lecturers some of the highest wages in Europe for mediocre outcomes as regards league tables of college performance.

galait

In the US my sister and her Husband are setting out on a 6 yr Journey with their Daughter to Study Pharmacy in a Private Catholic UNI , The fees for Yr1 & Yr2 are $43,000 including Room & Board , Yrs 3 to 6 is north of $50,000 , They also have son who is 4 yrs from College and will be following a similar Path !!

Pumpkinseeds

I think that the system needs to be overhauled. There should be a loans system that is repaid, not unlike the system in the UK. Grants should be means tested and should only apply to those from low income backgrounds and to courses that are beneficial to society.

I think its time to stop sending people to university just for the sake of it. There are so many courses available that are quite frankly laughable. The grant system as it stands now seems to be more of a hindrance than a help from what I've been reading.

Ms. Pingui

Of course we should have free fees. Why should college be reserved for the wealthy???

MadYaker

A loan is a good idea in theory, but when so many graduates have such a slim chance of securing a job after graduating, who's going to give them a loan if it doesn't look like they'll be able to pay it back?

gingernut125

WileyCoyote wrote: »

People from disadvantaged areas face a distinct obsticle in achieving the necessary points when faced with competition from those whose parents send them to private grind schools, of course they can afford the grind schools since they know they wont have to pay fees.
Check the stats on the schools most likely to feed into the third level system.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/education/third_level_education/applying_to_college/third_level_admissions_scheme_for_students_from_disadvantaged_backgrounds.html

I know some people on my course were on this, and got their degree too

Tom_Cruise

Pumpkinseeds wrote: »

I think that the system needs to be overhauled. There should be a loans system that is repaid, not unlike the system in the UK. Grants should be means tested and should only apply to those from low income backgrounds and to courses that are beneficial to society.

I think its time to stop sending people to university just for the sake of it. There are so many courses available that are quite frankly laughable. The grant system as it stands now seems to be more of a hindrance than a help from what I've been reading.

What courses do you think are laughable? Just out of interest.

snubbleste

MadYaker wrote: »

A loan is a good idea in theory, but when so many graduates have such a slim chance of securing a job after graduating, who's going to give them a loan if it doesn't look like they'll be able to pay it back?

The State. It's in all our interests to have a high wealth of human capital.

Richard Hillman

Laura_lolly87 wrote: »

I paid €2,250 to go back to college this year. It's €2,500 next year, I don't qualify for a grant so have to save the money myself. Hiking the cost up too about €5,000 only makes college available for the very rich.

Im in the same boat myself. I disagree that its only for the very rich as if you have very little money you get to go for free. Its the squeezed middle that it effects the most. The same with every walk of life in Ireland.

TheUsual

MadYaker wrote: »

A loan is a good idea in theory, but when so many graduates have such a slim chance of securing a job after graduating, who's going to give them a loan if it doesn't look like they'll be able to pay it back?

I'm no fan of looking at what the UK does and copying it, but they have a system there for students where you only pay back your loan when you earn over a certain amount a year.
So for lower earning jobs, in theory you would never pay back the loan.
When you start to get on your feet, or the economy picks up then you pays it back.

wolfpawnat

I love how it is usually people who have done their time in "free education" are usually the ones that say to scrap it now they are finished. Many people struggle through college and I rather we had a highly educated work force, the better qualified people are, usually the more they earn, meaning the more tax they pay and more money back into the economy.

College isn't free. Fees are 3,500, rent, food, books, printing money, etc, Yeah there are those who take the piss with their courses and drink excessively, etc but they would do that even if they weren't in college.

hfallada

Like some of the courses are total BS and will contribute nothing to the economy. Like an art degree isn't going to help the exchequer in 10 years.

But not all courses cost the same to run. I read something like medicine costs the state €16,000 per student per year well arts is only like €3,200. Make medicial students pay more for their degree since it's more expensive to run and also they will make more than someone who did an arts degree.

Fees could be higher. But a huge amount of people are on grants and SOME of them its because their parents have under declared their income. Make sure only the disadvantaged get grants and give reduced fees to others on low incomes. It would stop the people taking the ****ty courses for the sake of going to college

Death and Taxes

Ms. Pingui wrote: »

Of course we should have free fees. Why should college be reserved for the wealthy???

By and large it already is!

TheUsual

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Shirley the fairest way would see the user pay?

Don't call me Shirley.

Pilotdude5

wolfpawnat wrote: »

I rather we had a highly educated work force, the better qualified people are, usually the more they earn, meaning the more tax they pay and more money back into the economy.

Only if there's job in their industry. A lot of people appear to think college will entitle them to a job. Look at what's happening to the graduates in China.

I do think the whole 3rd Level system need to be altered here and maybe worldwide TBH. I fell into the trap at 18 of picking a few thing on the CAO just to get a degree. (Flying is not a degree, it doesn't even register on the NVQ.)

I did a good Leaving Cert and off I went but quickly realised my mistake. I wasted a year in fee's and expensive accommodation but at least I got out with minimal financial damage.

Now I'm seeing many friends graduate with a degree in an industry they have no interest in. Some admit their mistake and will seek to rectify it by expensively re-training, the rest are in denial and seem content to tell people they have a degree in something.

The number of Uni courses need to be drastically reduced and the courses eliminated can be two - three year apprenticeships or whatever.(Thats the part I havn't thought through!:o)

Pumpkinseeds

Tom_Cruise wrote: »

What courses do you think are laughable? Just out of interest.

Just had a quick glance at UL and UCD and LIT. So off the top of my head I think Media, Religion, Voice and Dance and Irish heritage studies will do for a start. Something has to change in the system and that change has to benefit the students. It isn't in the best interest of the students if any of them have to drop out as a result of their grant not having been paid etc.

My real issue would be with Fetac grants. There are so many students taking the proverbial on those courses. Not all of them of course but there needs to be a shake up of the system.

mel.b

I attended University in Australia which when I went through had the HECS (higher education contribution scheme). I think it's now called HELP (higher education loan programme) or something like that. There were three fee levels and each subject had a fee classification - subjects related to the arts the lowest and subjects relating to profession degrees the highest. So you in my case where I did some arts subjects like psychology and linguistics but also professional subjects such as human anatomy I was charged $500 per semester for psychology and $1500 for anatomy for example. By the time I finished uni 5 yrs later i had a HECS bill close to $25 000. However the scheme is designed so that you don't pay anything off your HECS bill until you start earning over a certain threshold which was around $35,000 at the time. You would pay off about 4% of the bill, taken directly from your wage. If you earn $40000 you pay 4.5% and so forth. Your debt only increased at the rate of inflation - there was no interest as such. I think mine was paid off after 5yrs of working. You also had the option of paying the fees upfront and getting a significant discount, however that discount has reduced now I believe.

Without the HECS scheme I wouldn't have been able to attend uni and as it was I worked two jobs just to support myself. The current situation in Ireland is that the government is paying to educate people to immigrate and provide nurses, teaches, physios, engineers etc to other countries, which is a great bonus to those countries as they are not having to educate them. With the way the economy is, I can't see how Ireland can continue with the current system. The HECS system may not be perfect, but it allows education to be accessible to everyone and helps the country recoup some of the costs.

Larianne

MadYaker wrote: »

If people from disadvantaged areas aren't going on to third level its because they are either too lazy or inept to get good enough points in the L.C. If your parents/parent are unemployed and you live in council housing you won't pay a red cent for college and you will get a maintenance grant and an accommodation grant and also most colleges have their own funds to help people from disadvantaged backgrounds so you'll most likely get a slice of that pie too. Ireland is a welfare state, all you have to do is qualify for certain criteria and you get a free ride. All you have to do is get the points.

I don't think its a case of being lazy, more a case of "College? I'd never get a chance to go there" or "Sure look at my mam and dad. On the dole.. etc." It's very much the environment they have grown up in that effects whether someone goes to college. People getting slagged for being brainy. Parents don't encourage education. Dole = Free money.

My friend worked as a temp secondary school teacher in a disadvantaged area last year. The kids were asking questions about things like "What would happen if you were caught with X,Y or Z" or about getting in trouble with the law. Never about going to college. She also said that the staff in the school were happy just to teach the kids, not push them academically at all. The school principle seemed to be the worst.

Fast forward another few months and she worked in a school on the south side. Total different experience. All the girls wanted to be doctors or solicitors etc.

In most cases, you're a product of your environment. I applaud anyone from a disadvantaged area going to third level education.

So I think saying a person is lazy or inept is quite unfair.

And just regards saying Arts degrees are a waste of money. I think at the moment, most courses unless they are in IT or Languages, are a waste of money. I'm studying a healthcare course. Will I get a job when I graduate? Nope. No jobs going in the HSE. I'll most likely be headed to Canada or Australia within a year of graduating, like many of my peers. So while I'll have, what some might call a useful degree, it won't be useful in the country I trained in, because I cannot be employed.

snubbleste

mel.b wrote: »

I attended University in Australia which when I went through had the HECS (higher education contribution scheme). I think it's now called HELP (higher education loan programme) or something like that. .......

How is there a deduction in your salary if you leave the country

shruikan2553

Im currently in second year of college and I think something needs to be added to stop the "sure Ill just do this course (usually arts) so I can say I went to college" but if if college cost any more than it did and I didnt get the grant I wouldnt of been able to afford to go. College is too accessible but I dont think money is the best way to reduce numbers.

Herb Powell

Do people not realise that the US and the UK and pretty much every 1st world developed country have this exact problem of "too many going to college"? Of degrees being devalued? It is the same everywhere.

Making people pay (evidently) doesn't solve this. What it DOES do is create a whole new problem-it puts a hell of a lot of people in debt. People still want to go to college, and will take out huge loans/do whatever it takes to go.

I would agree with brummytom-the emphasis really needs to come off having a degree before this problem is solved, because that mentality is just crazy. Charging people more in the hopes of restricting them is obviously easier to do, but it just doesn't work. There's a lot more to it than I've mentioned, and certainly a lot more to it than money.

I think we would do well to keep investing heavily in universities to be honest.

Celly Smunt

Cut all the bolloxology and bureaucracy of the grant system and put in place a loan system like the UK where you don't have to beg a grant.

wolfpawnat

Pilotdude5 wrote: »

Only if there's job in their industry. A lot of people appear to think college will entitle them to a job. Look at what's happening to the graduates in China.

I do think the whole 3rd Level system need to be altered here and maybe worldwide TBH. I fell into the trap at 18 of picking a few thing on the CAO just to get a degree. (Flying is not a degree, it doesn't even register on the NVQ.)

I did a good Leaving Cert and off I went but quickly realised my mistake. I wasted a year in fee's and expensive accommodation but at least I got out with minimal financial damage.

Now I'm seeing many friends graduate with a degree in an industry they have no interest in. Some admit their mistake and will seek to rectify it by expensively re-training, the rest are in denial and seem content to tell people they have a degree in something.

The number of Uni courses need to be drastically reduced and the courses eliminated can be two - three year apprenticeships or whatever.(Thats the part I havn't thought through!:o)

I said myself there are waster courses. Arts is fine, if you do more with it and become a teacher etc. but overall most people do toss all with the degree itself. My partner did it, worked as an archaeologist for a few years and was left unemployed by the bust, though we saw it coming and he went into medicine, paid 10 grand for the privilege, hated it and went into veterinary and has forked out 40 grand so far and at least another 10 more next year. It is only for his inheritance from his father and credit union loans we have done it. Choosing your career as a teenager is not a great idea.

I think there are too many courses in some things, a good example is there are 1,600 nurse qualified every year, we don't need that many qualifying it makes getting work in that sector harder, even worse now with the employment freeze.