Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

College Fees

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    brianthebard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,165 ✭✭✭✭brianthebard


    nesf wrote:
    Should you be entitled to a free PhD course and a Post-Doctoral position also?

    Its hardly free, only the fees are paid for me. And personally I'm obviously going to say yes, cause that's what I want to go for after this year. I don't see why their should be a line drawn, the search for knowledge is something we should encourage in people, not prevent.


  • Options
    #33
    nesf
    Registered Users Posts: 27,645 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    Wicknight wrote:
    What do you mean where it "suddenly" costs money? The whole thing costs money. A primary school student costs far more than a PhD student.

    I think the meaning is fairly obvious. Of course it all costs money but it doesn't directly cost the student anything (if you exclude capitation etc).


  • Options
    #34
    nesf
    Registered Users Posts: 27,645 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    brianthebard wrote:
    Its hardly free, only the fees are paid for me. And personally I'm obviously going to say yes, cause that's what I want to go for after this year. I don't see why their should be a line drawn, the search for knowledge is something we should encourage in people, not prevent.

    Ok, fair enough let me rephrase. At what point should the Government stop automatically paying college fees? I agree with you, I'm roughly speaking in the same boat though I'm presently having to pay my own fees. The thing is that I do feel that there needs to be more discrimination based on merit, not necessarily money. The problem isn't that we have too many smart working class (or whatever) people in third level, it's that we have too many academically poor students in third level and that this reduces the value of degrees for all students. The problem with free fees is that it encourages people who are academically poor to head to college anyway since they don't have to part with four or five grand to just sit the exams on top of their cost of living. A reintroduction of fees plus a solid and fair system of scholarships for people who can't afford it but who do show academic merit would in my opinion improve things but I do admit that I can't see a way to fairly implement said system of scholarships without disenfranchising some people who can't afford fees who would undoubtedly fall through the cracks of any such system.

    Does that make sense? I'm not sure if I'm being very clear.


  • Options
    #35
    coffee_cake
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Politics Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 81,310 CMod ✭✭✭✭coffee_cake


    nesf wrote:
    Ok, fair enough let me rephrase. At what point should the Government stop automatically paying college fees? I agree with you, I'm roughly speaking in the same boat though I'm presently having to pay my own fees. The thing is that I do feel that there needs to be more discrimination based on merit, not necessarily money. The problem isn't that we have too many smart working class (or whatever) people in third level, it's that we have too many academically poor students in third level and that this reduces the value of degrees for all students.

    Does that make sense?

    It's true that maybe some (a lot?) of people go to college just for the hell of it rather than wanting to learn, but I don't think money is the answer. Surely higher LC points requirements and pass %s for lots of courses and so on would be the answer.


  • Options
    #36
    Iktomi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21 ✭Iktomi


    Wicknight wrote:
    No, it means you should be out of pocket to raise the standard level of education in the country to competitive levels.
    I'd rather have a lower number of motivated/driven people who got there on their own steam rather than a large number of people who have been brought up in a belief that they should have everything handed to them.

    That is what seem to me to be be the crux of the problem.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    nesf
    Registered Users Posts: 27,645 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    bluewolf wrote:
    It's true that maybe some (a lot?) of people go to college just for the hell of it rather than wanting to learn, but I don't think money is the answer. Surely higher LC points requirements and pass %s for lots of courses and so on would be the answer.

    I don't know (I edited my above post to give an opinion of the money idea btw apologies for the late edit).

    The problem is that if you introduce a kind of interview system where students are assessed for entrance by course administrators the system is no longer blind and in such a small country this could cause problems.


  • Options
    #38
    brianthebard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,165 ✭✭✭✭brianthebard


    nesf wrote:
    Ok, fair enough let me rephrase. At what point should the Government stop automatically paying college fees? I agree with you, I'm roughly speaking in the same boat though I'm presently having to pay my own fees. The thing is that I do feel that there needs to be more discrimination based on merit, not necessarily money. The problem isn't that we have too many smart working class (or whatever) people in third level, it's that we have too many academically poor students in third level and that this reduces the value of degrees for all students. The problem with free fees is that it encourages people who are academically poor to head to college anyway since they don't have to part with four or five grand to just sit the exams on top of their cost of living. A reintroduction of fees plus a solid and fair system of scholarships for people who can't afford it but who do show academic merit would in my opinion improve things but I do admit that I can't see a way to fairly implement said system of scholarships without disenfranchising some people who can't afford fees who would undoubtedly fall through the cracks of any such system.

    Does that make sense? I'm not sure if I'm being very clear.

    Ok so the problem isn't free fees, its the way its implemented. I can understand that. In germany if you achieve a certain grade you pay less or no fees. This would be an incentive to work hard for people. I've already said (I think) that the system is not without flaws, and it would certainly be a good idea to extend free fees to mature students and others who haven't got them at the minute. The problem with scholarship systems is the scaling, a family who is 7 euro over the limit for yearly earnings is entitled to feel hard done by, but there is nothing that can be done. By attempting to give everyone free fees, we are provided with as fair a playing field as possible. Of course there are other factors in the equation, there always is, and so we will never get a completely fair system. We can only hope to be as fair as possible.


  • Options
    #39
    brianthebard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,165 ✭✭✭✭brianthebard


    Iktomi wrote:
    I'd rather have a lower number of motivated/driven people who got there on their own steam rather than a large number of people who have been brought up in a belief that they should have everything handed to them.

    That is what seem to me to be be the crux of the problem.

    Its a lot more likely for the more wealthy people to believe they should have everything handed to them. Your post is reinforcing the reasons why we should have free fees rather than arguing against it.


  • Options
    #40
    nesf
    Registered Users Posts: 27,645 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    brianthebard wrote:
    Ok so the problem isn't free fees, its the way its implemented. I can understand that. In germany if you achieve a certain grade you pay less or no fees. This would be an incentive to work hard for people. I've already said (I think) that the system is not without flaws, and it would certainly be a good idea to extend free fees to mature students and others who haven't got them at the minute. The problem with scholarship systems is the scaling, a family who is 7 euro over the limit for yearly earnings is entitled to feel hard done by, but there is nothing that can be done. By attempting to give everyone free fees, we are provided with as fair a playing field as possible. Of course there are other factors in the equation, there always is, and so we will never get a completely fair system. We can only hope to be as fair as possible.

    Oh that German system sounds interesting though it would heavily favour upper middle class city families (i.e. the ones who have nearby grind schools that they can afford to send their kids to).

    The big problem is fairness and you are completely correct, scaling is a serious issue in scholarship and grant systems. I'm really just at the point of seeing what the problem is rather than actually having thought of a way to solve it if you know what I mean.


  • Options
    #41
    Iktomi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21 ✭Iktomi


    I totally agree with you that the offspring of the wealthy are likely to waste their good fortune.
    But that doesn't concern me since it's not my money that's been spent. If they wish to finance their children through college and see their money squandered, that is for them to deal with.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    Iktomi wrote:
    rather than a large number of people who have been brought up in a belief that they should have everything handed to them.

    I think you have a rather funny idea of what actually goes on in college

    The college fees paid to the universe don't buy the degree (well some would argue that some of the private colleges that is the case - degree mills).


  • Options
    #43
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    nesf wrote:
    The problem with free fees is that it encourages people who are academically poor to head to college anyway since they don't have to part with four or five grand to just sit the exams on top of their cost of living.

    All university level qualifications have a minimum entrance standard, independent of the points system.

    If you pass that level you are considered fit enough, academically, to start the course.

    If you are too academically poor to meet these requirements you won't get a place in the course in the first place. Fees have nothing to do with it.


  • Options
    #44
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    Iktomi wrote:
    I totally agree with you that the offspring of the wealthy are likely to waste their good fortune.
    But that doesn't concern me since it's not my money that's been spent. If they wish to finance their children through college and see their money squandered, that is for them to deal with.

    Would you feel "squandered" if a 5th year student left secondary school before sitting their leaving cert?


  • Options
    #45
    nesf
    Registered Users Posts: 27,645 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    Wicknight wrote:
    All university level qualifications have a minimum entrance standard, independent of the points system.

    If you pass that level you are considered fit enough, academically, to start the course.

    If you are too academically poor to meet these requirements you won't get a place in the course in the first place. Fees have nothing to do with it.

    And those minimum standards are extremely low.


  • Options
    #46
    Iktomi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21 ✭Iktomi


    Wicknight wrote:
    Would you feel "squandered" if a 5th year student left secondary school before sitting their leaving cert?
    In a nutshell yes I would feel they squandered the opportunity the taxpayer offered them. Although if they left it so they could pursue an apprenticeship I wouldn’t see it as so.


  • Options
    #47
    Blowfish
    Registered Users Posts: 5,112 ✭✭✭Blowfish


    Iktomi wrote:
    I think it’s a fair assumption to assume that the majority of people go to college for the possibility of future financial gain.
    As such it makes sense that they should finance their education themselves since they are the one’s who ultimately profit from the venture.
    You are missing out on the fact that in a way they are paying for themselves, and that they are essentially getting a loan.

    Like you pointed out, a lot go to college for financial gain. This would mean that after college they are earning a better wage than if they hadn't gone at all. If they are earning a better wage, that means that they are paying more taxes. Eventually over the course of their lifetime, the amount of extra taxes due to increased income will easily cover the amount the government paid for their college fees. In fact paying to send someone to college who wouldn't normally have gone otherwise, will more than likely earn the government a profit.


  • Options
    #48
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    nesf wrote:
    And those minimum standards are extremely low.
    Extremely low for what?

    The entry requirements set the level that the person must be up to academically to be able to follow what happens in first year. If they were too low to be able to do the course then the person would not be able to do the course.


  • Options
    #49
    Iktomi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21 ✭Iktomi


    I suspect we're quite close in thinking. Where you look for the return on the investment of educating a person at the end of the course once they start earning; I conversely believe that they should bare the cost of it ahead of time. That way if they fail, drop out and/or leave the country the investment is not lost.

    For example I am in favour if student loans at a preferential rates (although not zero interest) which they must subsequently repay regardless of their successful completion of their course.


  • Options
    #50
    nesf
    Registered Users Posts: 27,645 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    Wicknight wrote:
    Extremely low for what?

    The entry requirements set the level that the person must be up to academically to be able to follow what happens in first year. If they were too low to be able to do the course then the person would not be able to do the course.

    Eh, you've got it backwards. The basic requirements give no guarantee that the person is capable of doing the course and are not set with that in mind nor are the changed to reflect grade inflation within our secondary school system.


  • Options
    #51
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    nesf wrote:
    The basic requirements give no guarantee that the person is capable of doing the course

    Nothing gives a "guarantee" that a person is capable of finishing a university course.

    What the entry requirements do is ensure that the person is academically up to a level so that they will be at the correct starting point. It is set based on what the person will be doing in 1st year.

    For example is a 1st year course requires a certain standard of mathematics to be able follow, then the entry requirements will reflect this. This is because there isn't time in the 1st year to teach the students up to this level if they are not at the standard already. They need to be at it already.

    For example French in Maynooth requires at least a C3 or more in higher level French. Aeronautically Engineering in UL requires a higher level maths and a pass in a science subject.

    The reason for this should be obvious.

    What purpose did you think these entry level requirements served?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    nesf
    Registered Users Posts: 27,645 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    Wicknight wrote:
    What purpose did you think these entry level requirements served?

    They serve as a common sense check to ensure people grasp what the course is about. That does not equate to them being a system where there is justifiable discrimination based on merit to a degree that will ensure that the academic standard remains high which is what I was originally talking about.


  • Options
    #53
    Kevster
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,980 ✭✭✭Kevster


    While at college today [IT Carlow] my views actually changed. I began looking around and noticed that there are an incredible amount of people there studying and yet enjoying themselves at the same time. Many of these - I feel - wouldn't be there were it no for free fees. They deserve the opportunity. However, there is still an incredible amount of money being wasted with the free-fees scheme but, overall, I think it is good.

    Kernel wrote:
    *nods vigourously*

    They get to college on acedemic achievement. Not like mature students, who just get in if they lick arse/pay/are good bull****ters.

    ****in snobs! rolleyes.gif

    Kernel, your post was very unwelcome and was very far from the truth. It also lacked substance and I can tell it came straight from the immaturities that so infest your brain at present. Perhaps you will consider what you have done and will learn from it?... ...oh wait, no, learning isn't your strong point, or so I have inferred.


    Take care,
    Kevin


  • Options
    #54
    InFront
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,698 ✭✭✭InFront


    nesf wrote:
    They serve as a common sense check to ensure people grasp what the course is about. That does not equate to them being a system where there is justifiable discrimination based on merit to a degree that will ensure that the academic standard remains high which is what I was originally talking about.
    This is true. For example in UCC, the minimum grade for Chrmistry or Physics to study medicine is a HC3. Now even if you only got that bare HC3 in your chemistry exam, I think you'd be in major trouble with the course material. It's a common sense guide.

    I think there is a culture in Ireland where if you're not going to college, people ask why. It is expected of most students to do so. This ensures an educated work force for skilled employment, which should mean a higher earning potential. Whether they are going to college to socialise or to learn, a college education will be attractive to employers. Free fees work.

    The only thing I would change would be a promotion of qualifications suitable for the pharma/ industrial and engineering sectors as opposed to say art or literature.


  • Options
    #55
    Kevster
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,980 ✭✭✭Kevster


    That's a real problem I have noticed across many courses, InFront. Over the past 6 years points and other requirements for courses have plumeted. A Computer Science course I began 6 years ago was 415 points but now it is down in the low 200's. Colleges/universities are slashing entry requirements in order to fill places and thus get money from the government.


  • Options
    #56
    InFront
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,698 ✭✭✭InFront


    But surely it's up to the HEA or the Government to decide what places are needed, or who is in control of course numbers?

    I seem to remember that Trinity were accused (about 5 or 6 years ago) of maintaining points artificially high in courses like T.P. to restrict entry and preserve their academic standing. So perhaps it does make a difference to employers.
    Although I must say I have never heard such a thing as an over educated workforce.


  • Options
    #57
    Kevster
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,980 ✭✭✭Kevster


    Did you do TP? My bro got 580 points is his Leaving Certificate and did that course. He subsequently hated it and left after first year to do TCD's Arts degree instead, specialising in Psychology & Philosophy.

    Although I must say I have never heard such a thing as an over educated workforce.

    That's certainly true. Then again, many people that are educated in universities here cannot find any suitable work in the country once they get their degree. Things happen really slow here... ...


  • Options
    #58
    InFront
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,698 ✭✭✭InFront


    No I dont do TP, have heard lots of stories like your brother's though, have met ex TPs in pharmacy, med, vet, maths... seem to know more people who left it than graduated in it:D I think the required grade is a HB1 in Maths, though again I imagine in reality, you'd really need to be A1 standard to be comfortable.
    many people that are educated in universities here cannot find any suitable work in the country once they get their degree. Things happen really slow here
    True, apparently the idea that the Irish economy virtually guarantees employment for science graduates is a bit of a myth too unfortunately, not sure if that is accurate though.


  • Options
    #59
    randylonghorn
    Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 29,509 Mod ✭✭✭✭randylonghorn


    Kevster wrote:
    That's a real problem I have noticed across many courses, InFront. Over the past 6 years points and other requirements for courses have plumeted. A Computer Science course I began 6 years ago was 415 points but now it is down in the low 200's. Colleges/universities are slashing entry requirements in order to fill places and thus get money from the government.
    As a general rule, points for courses are set by simple supply and demand. The fewer places and the more applicants, the higher will be the points required, and vice versa. Basically, the CAO system allocates available places to those who have applied and who have obtained the highest points (assuming they have also met any other minimum requirements for the course) until all places are filled. Whatever number of points the last person to receive an offer in the first round got is seen as the cut-off, and thus you will hear people say "you needed 340 points for such a course this year". These cut-off points are normally not predetermined, however, they are a result of the CAO process itself, though colleges can obviously influence the cut-off points by restricting or expanding the number of places available.

    Some years back third-level colleges were under pressure by government to offer more courses / places in computer science and related disciplines, and there was huge demand from potential students, so points were high. Many colleges responded by expanding in this area, and far more places became available; at the same time, more or less, demand went down, partly because of the fairly spectacular bursting of the dot.com bubble, I suspect, but there were probably other reasons as well.

    As supply increased and demand fell, the number of points required for courses also fell, quite spectacularly in some cases. Colleges are normally happier when the points for their courses go up, as this indicates that more people have sought admission to that particular course through the CAO, and this obviously reflects well on the course and on the college.


  • Options
    #60
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    brianthebard wrote: »
    It also allows me to go to college which would be impossible if I had to pay. I deserve a place here just like anyone else. If people go for reasons other than to learn then the system is imperfect, but guess what that's not unusual.
    Yup, just like the LC, taxes etc. are all imperfect. And the majority of people who go for 'other' reasons are usually from the upper classes.ost people from middle and lower class who go to college know the opportunity they have and that without their degree they are f**ked.
    nesf wrote: »
    Why should college be a birthright? (Am more curious than anything else).
    1. Because how wealthy your parents are should not decide whether you get an education.
    2. There is a screening process called the Leaving Cert.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Bottle_of_Smoke
    Registered Users Posts: 9,770 ✭✭✭Bottle_of_Smoke


    Well there already are fees. About a grand or so afaik. Call it "registration fees" but come on a grand per student is a bit excessive for adminisitration.

    I'd like to see this increased to around 5K. However it should only be repayable on completion of the course and the person in employment earning at least 25K per annum. If you want to take a break from work to travel or whatever the repayments would also go on hold. Like in the UK

    Sure the country benefits from an educated workforce, but the person benefits enough to afford it.

    As I pointed out, I'd only like to see a reintroduction when a proper finance system is in place.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement