Students must now pay to attend their own conferrings. Eh...what?

rebel girl 15 wrote: »

Some of the financial stuff is crazy reading!

Page 4 http://www.ucc.ie/en/hr/salaryscales/Salary%20Scales%202010.pdf

From 2008 to 09, there was a huge increase in some of those consultants salaries, up to €50,000, huge wastage - all of those salaries have come down to 08 levels in the 10 budget - wonder if anyone can explain why there was that huge increase?

tried to find the college financial statements, broken link :rolleyes:

Its like a sale at Debehams - mark it up thre night before and then stick a 50% off sale sticker on it the next day.

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

By the same token, the college should never have built the ORB; it only houses the Arts departments. Why should the Arts minority get the edge? The college should never have built the Medicine, Dentistry or Food Science buildings, 'cause, you know, only a few departments benefit.

In fact, why should the SU have a student hardship fund? I pay a fee towards the SU and I'll be damned if I see a minority benefit from my money!


But anyway, enough words have been said in this thread. I get it. I finally understand where ye're coming from. The priority for ye is not recieving the best possible education, seeing UCC excel and getting the best degree you can at the end. Its just about getting through UCC for free. This short term goal is the biggest priority. Why else would we have people here effectively decrying the building of WGB when it clearly has improved the University? Why else would the students time and time again resist giving money to the college? Because paying nothing is more important to them than what they're getting in return.

With this attitude shackling the educational potentials of this country's third level institutes, all a man can hope for is a chance to move abroad.

Is your real name Dr. Michael Murphy by any chance?

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

By the same token, the college should never have built the ORB; it only houses the Arts departments. Why should the Arts minority get the edge? The college should never have built the Medicine, Dentistry or Food Science buildings, 'cause, you know, only a few departments benefit.

In fact, why should the SU have a student hardship fund? I pay a fee towards the SU and I'll be damned if I see a minority benefit from my money!


But anyway, enough words have been said in this thread. I get it. I finally understand where ye're coming from. The priority for ye is not recieving the best possible education, seeing UCC excel and getting the best degree you can at the end. Its just about getting through UCC for free. This short term goal is the biggest priority. Why else would we have people here effectively decrying the building of WGB when it clearly has improved the University? Why else would the students time and time again resist giving money to the college? Because paying nothing is more important to them than what they're getting in return.

With this attitude shackling the educational potentials of this country's third level institutes, all a man can hope for is a chance to move abroad.

No it doesn't, it also houses Commerce as well. And considering the way the building is always so jammed and that fact that student numbers are only increasing, it was damn well needed. Not entirely sure that's the case with the WGB...its a fantastic building but certainly not worth all the cutbacks now to pay for it and the other debts.

I'd try and argue intelligently, but i just cant see the basis for your argument so I cant argue. You're basically saying we arent paying enough for college, and that you want to pay more.

I think i found something that will keep you happy though, UCC have a web page for heroic students like you that want to pay through the nose for additional student services (even though we're already paying an ever increasing registration fee which is supposed to cover all student services - and yes that includes graduation!) and reduce UCC's debt which you think we're responsible for. Here's the link - you can thank me later

Fluffybums wrote: »

Sorry I haven't read all the post in this thread. I don't know what the gripe is, I graduated about 20 years ago and had to pay to graduate, I think me fee covered one (could have been two guests). I also had to pay for the champagne reception. I graduated from a Scottish Uni. I think my brother had to pay for his ceremony at Man. I could have graduated in absentia for free, but after 4 years........:o

What my gripe (and I think what everyone else's) is about is that a fee is being introduced without any reason been given for it being introduced or any justification for it being introduced.

Interesting what you can find when you start looking

The Universities Act 1997 wrote:

Section 14. (1)
14. (1) A university, in performing its functions shall—
(a) have the right and responsibility to preserve and promote the traditional principles of academic freedom in the conduct of its internal and external affairs, and
(b) be entitled to regulate its affairs in accordance with its independent ethos and traditions and the traditional principles of academic freedom, and in doing so it shall have regard to—….
(ii) the effective and efficient use of resources, and
(iii) its obligations as to public accountability…

Hmm, that is definitely interesting reading!

Eliot, you mentioned a CS module/tutorial that was cut - in 2002 there was recommendation in a review of the CS Department that

"Departments (in particular, the Department of Computer Science) should be told their finance allocation by the beginning of each academic year, and should know when to expect this cash injection. The present situation ─ in which the academic year is half-over before Departments know their annual allocation ─ is inimical to their efficient management and organisation."

Wonder if that was followed through on?

Also that Department were warned

The present environment, in which substantial research funding is available, could be short-lived.

Given that research funding is one of the main ways that the college is funded, I wonder if anything was done to prepare for the fact that this could happen

A weakness of the department was

While recognizing that some academic staff have significant records in publication and/or funding, the overall research output of the Department is low by the standard measures of number of graduate students, quality and number of publications, and research income. Little internal clustering or collaboration between members of the Department is evident. Some staff have an isolationist attitude, and apart from the exceptional few, there does not seem to be general commitment to obtaining outside research funding. There is a possible over-concentration on constraints/AI areas of research, compared with the relatively low attention and funding that these areas attract internationally.

In terms of research, the Department seems somewhat isolated – from other departments in UCC, from other universities, and from industry.

The previous statement I quoted said that there was substantial research funding available, but now it is saying that UCC didn't go after it.

You posted

"I'm happy to shell out a extra few euro's to get a qualification that isn't sub-standard."

Maybe before shelling out those few extra euros you would start asking some questions. Ask if the recommendations here were implemented to help the CS Department become better, are they using the money that is being paid for you to do your college course in an effective and efficient manner?

You thanked a post that stated

The quality of the lectures I have been to in the US and in the UK have been streets ahead of the quality of lectures I received in my own department in UCC

Is the money that is paying for your education been used correctly - from that poster the answer in many departments is no. That comes back to accountability - why are the lecturers not as good? Are the lecturers being held accountable for the standard of teaching. The Report has some interesting items in it - remember a part about little or no continuing professional development for the staff, correct me if I am wrong, but isn't CS a very dynamic areas, always changing, with new improvements

In that report, the building of the WGB was outlined as a priority "single most pressing need for the Computer Science Department is the provision of a new IT building." IMO that would be a building that all of it would be used, not some of it sitting idle - the part being used which would benefit one Department. How bout using the rest of the empty space to benefit the rest of the student body. Or not building the space that was not needed, and saving a couple of million or more.

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

They've got the get the funding somehow. Its the unfortunate reality of life that things cost money.

Bank finance or bonds - Cambridge (recently) and the Ivy League have sold bonds, apparently UCC have an €11 million term loan from Barclays from last year. Make the cuts that have to be made, introduce appropriate justified fees. I wonder where that €11 million has gone, if the college are still €13 million in debt? Is that why the college are in debt to the tune of €13 million, or does the college owe that €11 million on top of the €13?

I was reading back through the thread and you posted

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Which has me thinking, does anyone know what is the SU's plan for remedying the budget deficit and getting more funding for the college so that it can continue to work its way up the international rankings?

Can I ask why you would think that to be an SU job to plan that? The funding of the college would not be within the remit of the SU's job. Of the Irish universities, we are fourth behind Trinity, UCD and DCU

x in the city wrote: »

over 10 years the university of ucc will coup ca 3 million squids from that paltry 65e, if ca 4,000 ish grad every year,...:rolleyes:

as i said, no one is being forced to go and grad, its certainly the least of my worries, ...

fluck it

Apparently, the HEA have told universities that they can raise the registration fee to E1600 next year, plus UCC will charge the additional 150, which I am in now doubt that UCC will do. I'll also want to know what that extra E100 will be used for

Do you know where that E65 is going? "For graduation" is a broad term. How can you be sure that the money is going for that? It is not paltry to many people. I'll pay it if I know where the money is going, if there is a real reason for needing it - I refuse to hand money blindly over. If they can send an email out about the fee, then they can send an email out telling us why it is being introduced.

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Theres nothing more to be gained from this discussion. I've already learned that ye'r willing to pull all kinds of excuses out of the hat to justify getting your degree for as cheap as possible. Playing pass the parcel with responsibility, etc.

In other countries domestic students pay thousands and thousands of euro for their qualification; the amount we pay here is so small in comparison that I find ye'r attempts to be wounded at more fees laughable. But in the culture of entitlement I deserve to get it free, right? How could I possibly be called upon to pay for something I get?!

Playing pass the parcel with responsibility, thats a great one:rolleyes: I am looking for that kind of crap to be stopped and for people to take responsibility for their actions. You and others willing to give the money to cover the screw-ups are helping these people shirk responsibility for how they have wasted money in the past. I don't care how small an amount is. You are putting your head in the sand, ironic that you posted that picture. Its people like you handing over money without question is what has allowed people to waste money and not be held responsible or accountable for it.

I want to see the Irish education system become world class. Throwing money at it is not the answer, we need to see exactly why the system is considered shoddy, to see if current funding is being used properly and getting VfM. See where the system can improve, then if more money has be sought, then do so. At least then it is justified.

You still have not answered any of the questions that I have put to you. Is this the second or third time your post has read that there is nothing more to be gained....... tbh, your ducking and diving around any issue that I have brought up seems like the work of a good politician, not answering any direct question that was asked. I directly commented on a report on your own department, but is it still your attitude to give them more money and not ask if any of those recommendations to help improve the department have been implemented.

Foreign education in which students have to pay thousands of euros worth for education have accountability, years ago those colleges set up systems to make sure that money was not been wasted. As I pointed out, VfM existed in the UK colleges since 1993. They made the fees that the students were paying and any funding they got work for them and not waste money. At least those students know that their fees are being used properly. I have shown you evidence of how your own department was told it could improve to a much higher standard. You'd rather give money and ask questions later or maybe never.

I'm against any fee that is being brought in without justification and in a sneaky manner. If I have to pay more money for my degree, I want to know that the money that has already been paid is being used for its purpose and not being wasted, its not about getting my education for free, because it is far from free. Some of my courses that I need can cost a few hundred euro, and if I don't have them done I cannot graduate. If a fee increase is justified, I have absolutely no problem paying it. If it is going towards something necessary, I have no problem paying it. Its not about getting it for free, but making sure the money is being used properly, and if more has to be paid, I'll have no problem once I know what it is for. You talk about this being laughable, its far from being laughable. You state about the culture of entitlement that we should be getting it for free, once again, you have missed my point. Its not about getting it for free, its about ensuring that wastage does not occur.

You said your father would be out of work soon and your financial situation would become worse - yet you would still blindly hand over money and not ask what it is for. I honestly don't understand your attitude given your circumstance.

If everyone forced to pay this charge would sign a solemn declaration that they will never ever donate any money to UCC for the rest of their lives my guess is it would be withdrawn pretty quickly... just a thought....

I have no problem payign for things if i really have to. But id much prefer to see them fix the financial mess that is UCC and not try and solve the problem by just constantly charging the students. As rebel girl showed there is a huge amount of wastage going on in the college that could prevent things such as this 65 euro charge being introduced.

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Earlier in the thread you denied that the student body were partly responsible for the lack of funding in UCC. Like it or not, if the SU hadn't opposed fee's UCC would have more money now. But you directly rejected any notion that the SU have a responsibly to be constructive and pose alternative solutions. ("Can I ask why you would think that to be an SU job to plan that?").

It is not the SU's job to plan it, yes they should offer solutions, of which there are many. UCC took out an €11 million loan last year with Barclays, where has that money gone? The student body don't run the college, the college authorities do. Bonds are another option, Ivy League colleges and Cambridge are using this system. Money has been wasted, not a little bit of money but a lot. Students now in the college should not be the ones to be paying for previous mistakes.


And you accused me of being ironic.

Getting better value for money should obviously be a goal of the university. But there are two rather large caveats: a) as an effectively Government run institution it naturally tends towards inefficiency and b) cost savings alone will not bring UCC to the levels I would like to see it go. I would like to envisage UCC storming ahead internationally. But if the students aren't going to pay more this just simply isn't going to happen, no matter how many times you declare to the contrary.

Students can contribute, but there are other financial options for the college if they need to raise big amounts of finance. As for storming ahead internationally, if UCC had taken on VfM in 1995 say, as was best practise in the UK since 1993, they would have saved huge amounts of money that would have enabled the college to become better. If UCC is to storm ahead to international levels, then they should be looking at best practise all over world, not a decade and a half later when they are in debt. Read my post regarding the Universities Act, the University is not a fully run Gov run institution. Funding comes from four sources, one of which is state funding. There are many other sources of finance besides turning students upside down and shaking as much money as you can out of them

You know, just because you say "no one knows where this money is going" over and over and over again does not make it true. It's clear the fee is being introduced to tackle the €13 million budget deficit. These allegations that the might be going "straight into someones pocket" are ridiculous.

Read the first post, it is not clear - its being called a Conferring Charge. What is that €65 for? Why is it needed? Can you tell me - no



But you don't want to pay for it.

Read my previous post. I said I was willing to pay for it if we are told what it is for. I have no problem paying more money if it has to be paid, and I know that it is for something.


Because unlike the rest of the posters here - and presumably the majority of students in UCC - I'm not willing to abuse the Governmental system of this country to coerce taxpayers into paying for what I want. I'm a self-interested individual, like the rest, but I'm not so self-interested that I want to force people into giving me services for nothing.

You miss my point again - it is not about getting the service for nothing, its about getting some value for money. Money has been wasted in UCC and no one held accountable. I for one am sick of it happening. It is the same within the Government. The system is being abused, taxpayers are not getting value for money. They are paying through the nose already, and their hand earned money is being wasted. Its not about abusing the system, its about knowing where the money is going.

In this discussion the people arguing with me have continually tried to personalize my position. I've been accused of getting backhanders and being Micheal Murphy from an elected official of the Students Union. All this shows is that people are so far within this culture of "give me what I want" that they can't understand someone who doesn't want to abuse the system.

I don't abuse the system, I work hard in college to get a good degree, I do admit that there are quite a few that go to college and do the fool, not attending lectures etc. I want to see people within the system held accountable for not doing their jobs properly, so that abuse of the system does not occur from that end. There has been huge wastage, and that is not the fault of the students and yet you want them to pay for it

I'll pay the fee if we are given a reason for it. I'll pay any fee that we are given a proper reason for that is introduced in a reasonable way. This fee was brought in from nowhere with no proper reason. In my opinion it is not too much to ask to know where my money and parents hard earned money is going. Do you not want to know what this €65 is for? And please don't tell me is to help the college because it is in debt. I'd also like to ask you if you read the report that I linked to regarding the CS Department

After that, I'll respectfully agree to disagree with you - I personally will be looking forward to the IUQB report in 2013 when I will be out of college and my brothers will be there, but I will be paying for them through the taxes that I will be paying

samf wrote: »

Your argument is comparable to saying workers unions shouldnt fight against pay cuts

No, its equivalent to saying that if workers are fighting pay cuts then they should at least offer an alternative that will remove the necessity for paycuts.

The University wanted more fees to improve funding; the SU rejected that without offering any full alternative (cleaning up mismanagement will never yield enough in return).

samf wrote: »

Hate to shatter your dreams but a 65 euro graduation fee wont suddenly make UCC a top international university.

It bring us a little on the way towards fixing the debt.

samf wrote: »

I was implying that surely if a student was so pro-funding the university without question and so anti-fighting student fee's then they dont sound like a student to me.

As before, you're so far into the culture of "give me what I want" that you cant even imagine someone else wanting otherwise.

samf wrote: »

So if the university mismanages its funds and goes into debt ... you think students are "abusing the system"

Firstly, who else should pay? The University is there for the students, no one else, so unfortunately theres no one to pass the buck along to.

Secondly, and lets be honest, the student body aren't against fees because of the mismanagement. They're against fees because they want to get their degree for as little short term cost as possible, even if this results in the devaluing of their education and creates an unfair system. All these concepts, "mismanagement", "rights" and "the knowledge economy", are just convoluted excuses for the basic desire of human beings to give as little as possible for the things they get. Everything else is just window dressing.

rebel girl 15 wrote: »

You miss my point again - it is not about getting the service for nothing, its about getting some value for money.

Because €1,650 for a full year in a third level institute isn't value for money

rebel girl 15 wrote: »

I don't abuse the system.

All free fees movement abuse the Governments sole right to coerce citizens so as to get other people to pay for what they want.

rebel girl 15 wrote: »

And please don't tell me is to help the college because it is in debt.

Why not? Its beats the hocus-pocus pocketing my money theory by a country mile. And any other theory for that matter.

rebel girl 15 wrote: »

I'd also like to ask you if you read the report that I linked to regarding the CS Department.

As I said before, I'm all for cutting expenses, but that just isn't enough if the college want to substantially improve into the future.

Papa_Lazarou wrote: »

I have no problem payign for things if i really have to. But id much prefer to see them fix the financial mess that is UCC and not try and solve the problem by just constantly charging the students. As rebel girl showed there is a huge amount of wastage going on in the college that could prevent things such as this 65 euro charge being introduced.

look, and this goes to everyone, it's 65 euro. you'll spend more during a day of rag week or 2 nights out. so i don't see why everyone's protesting so vehemently about this.
in principle, ya its bad that we gotta pay, but we have the whole summer(at least) to get 65 euro.
with regards to the accountability, I agree. But you have a problem here, for example I can clearly see the amount of waste money that goes to the fees and grants office as the amount of laughter and chit chat everytime I go there is ridiculous. They're clearly overstaffed but the college can't simply sack them because of the Unions and even the SU wouldn't call for such a way to save money within the college because well...because it's a union too.
Also i do not agree my money goes towards the SU, someone might not agree with their money going to the Societies Guild or the Clubs Exec, but you are forced to pay it, but yet again the SU, representing the students will do nothing about money here.

So basically what I'm trying to say is that the college and the SU are pretty much the same. They force money from you, their only way out of a fiscal problem is to get more money, neither really represents the students and neither is accountable(well at least the university publishes its accounts)

Mario007 wrote: »

They force money from you, their only way out of a fiscal problem is to get more money, neither really represents the students and neither is accountable(well at least the university publishes its accounts)

You hit the nail on the head. That's why nobody wants to pay this(Well except Eliot j/k).

And i don't see where this it's only 65 euro thing is coming from. Maybe its not a huge sum to you but there is a lot of people in UCC that are scraping by with the funds they have and 65 euro is a fair aul chunk to have to pay on top of everything else.