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
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Third-level fees have to come back

  • 28-04-2010 3:47pm
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭


    This post has been deleted.


«134567

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    Seconded, with grants provided to those from low-income families.


  • Registered Users Posts: 725 ✭✭✭rightwingdub


    This post has been deleted.

    They should never have been abolished in 1995, thats what happens when Labour are in government, also third level students might begin to value their courses more and the quality of courses will improve if fees are brought back.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 634 ✭✭✭loldog


    Four billion to be spent on buildings? Seriously? :rolleyes:

    .


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭ei.sdraob


    loldog wrote: »
    Four billion to be spent on buildings? Seriously? :rolleyes:

    .

    We have many fine fields and bogs we could keep the students there :P


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 10,272 ✭✭✭✭Max Power1


    loldog wrote: »
    Four billion to be spent on buildings? Seriously? :rolleyes:

    .
    well it would be a better spend than the countless spent on the "buildings" as a result of NAMA


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,321 ✭✭✭IrishTonyO


    Also agree that fees should be brought back. With either grants or loans available to those who need them, which are paid back as the person starts work etc.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,729 ✭✭✭Pride Fighter


    Third level fees do not have to come back. I've benefited from free fees, I'd never be able to afford a university education without free fees. There is a desperate lack of funding in the third level sector. Re-introducing fees and forcing people from poor backgrounds away from University is not the way to go.


  • Registered Users Posts: 725 ✭✭✭rightwingdub


    There's far too much of an entitlement culture in this country, if adults want to pay for third level education then they should pay for it pure and simple, although I would certainly support a grant system for people from more modest backgrounds.


  • Registered Users Posts: 725 ✭✭✭rightwingdub


    Third level fees do not have to come back. I've benefited from free fees, I'd never be able to afford a university education without free fees. There is a desperate lack of funding in the third level sector. Re-introducing fees and forcing people from poor backgrounds away from University is not the way to go.

    They can work for a few years, save up quite a bit of money and then go to college say when they are 21 or 23, mature students tend to have more appreciation for the courses they are doing than a lot of 17 or 18 year old kids.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,321 ✭✭✭IrishTonyO


    Third level fees do not have to come back. I've benefited from free fees, I'd never be able to afford a university education without free fees. There is a desperate lack of funding in the third level sector. Re-introducing fees and forcing people from poor backgrounds away from University is not the way to go.

    That's why grants or loans should be available to people who need them. I have never been able to understand why the taxpayer has to pay for a solicitors education or any other profession for that matter. If they cannot afford the fees a loan should be made available that would be repaid on a monthly basis as soon as the person starts earning.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,745 ✭✭✭Eliot Rosewater


    Third level fees should be brought back in some form or another. Though a government sponsored loans system would be a step in the right direction, I would also favour a situation where those who can pay up front should have to do so. Remember that those from the poorest backgrounds won't pay anyway: they are covered by council grants.


    As it stands, Irish universities are chronically underfunded. My own, UCC, has a deficit of €13 million. Most of this was incurred in building the new IT centre, which has vastly improved the Departments of Mathematics and Computing, and, as such, the university as a whole.

    Without more funding Irish universities will not be able to improve. At the moment UCC is placed in the high 200's in the Times international university rankings. As a future graduate, this worries me. When I move abroad for a job or for a postgrad, interviewers will have no idea what or where UCC is because Irish people are making no attempt to put it on the international stage, instead preferring to be tight-fisted.

    The choice we have is clear: continue to spuriously demand we get our third level degrees for free or chip in for our own benefit and receive an education that has the potential to be vastly superior.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    Third level fees do not have to come back. I've benefited from free fees, I'd never be able to afford a university education without free fees. There is a desperate lack of funding in the third level sector. Re-introducing fees and forcing people from poor backgrounds away from University is not the way to go.

    I have seen these threads a few times on Irish forums, and I always see this type of post.

    Why do you have such an issue with a system where fees are abolished, universities can raise their standards, and students from low-income families have the fees waived, and get a grant or whatever?

    As far as I see it, the only people who lose out are students from middle-class families, who won't be able to afford their own car and a J1 holiday every summer.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,483 ✭✭✭✭cson


    Fully agree. As a student who has benefited from free fees [though bear in mind there is fees of sorts with the €1500+ 'registration' fee] it irks me to see the blasé attitude some of my peers have/had towards their education. The introduction of fees might see people value their education more as has been mentioned above and may reduce the number of people going to 3rd level because it's the 'done' thing. A student loan system similar to the UK or Australia would be preferable.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,021 ✭✭✭Sulmac


    In a perfect world, we wouldn't have fees. But this isn't a perfect world, and Irish universities are chronically underfunded compared to their international counterparts.

    We have a few options:
    • Raise taxes for everyone to pay for improvements and keep free fees. (like that'll happen)
    • Bring back fees upfront for all.
    • Bring back fees upfront, poorer students get grants,etc.
    • Student contribution after graduation via a loan system.
    • Student contribution after graduation via PRSI.
    • Status-quo.

    The last option there is the least preferable, and we'll pay for it for years if we don't do anything. My own preferred option (and I say this as a first year student) would be a contribution after graduation via PRSI (as FG proposed last year - policy document), rather than loans since I don't like the idea of being saddled with "debt" (yes, I know that paying it back via tax or a loan is basically the same, but I'd rather pay tax than pay off a debt - it's psychological).

    Such a system also removes pressure from the families of students (unless, of course, they want to pay them upfront) and should instil a bit of appreciation among students as to what they're getting.

    I also find it a bit of a joke that with "free fees" we still have the €1,500 "registration fee", which is higher than the fees that students have to pay in some German provinces!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    Sulmac wrote: »
    In a perfect world, we wouldn't have fees. But this isn't a perfect world, and Irish universities are chronically underfunded compared to their international counterparts.

    We have a few options:
    • Raise taxes for everyone to pay for improvements and keep free fees. (like that'll happen)
    • Bring back fees upfront for all.
    • Bring back fees upfront, poorer students get grants,etc.
    • Student contribution after graduation via a loan system.
    • Student contribution after graduation via PRSI.
    • Status-quo.

    The last option there is the least preferable, and we'll pay for it for years if we don't do anything. My own preferred option (and I say this as a first year student) would be a contribution after graduation via PRSI (as FG proposed last year - policy document), rather than loans since I don't like the idea of being saddled with "debt" (yes, I know that paying it back via tax or a loan is basically the same, but I'd rather pay tax than pay off a debt - it's psychological).

    Such a system also removes pressure from the families of students (unless, of course, they want to pay them upfront) and should instil a bit of appreciation among students as to what they're getting.

    I also find it a bit of a joke that with "free fees" we still have the €1,500 "registration fee", which is higher than the fees that students have to pay in some German provinces!

    Under this system, who has the most to lose if their attempt at 3rd level doesn't work out (for whatever reason)?

    a) Student from high-income family
    b) Student from middle-income family
    c) Student from low-income family

    It seems Fine Gaels policy assumes a uniform playing field, or am I missing something?


  • Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 7,439 Mod ✭✭✭✭XxMCRxBabyxX


    As far as I see it, the only people who lose out are students from middle-class families, who won't be able to afford their own car and a J1 holiday every summer.

    You say that, but it's a bit harsh. I'm 18 and a first year who would come from a traditionally middle-class family but right now I'm relying on what little money my self employed dad is able to give me and can't afford things like my own car or J1 holiday. In fact i feel guilty taking my dad's money as it is but its the only income that i can get. I'm not entitled to a grant, due to my dad being self employed, and despite searching for a job ever since I finished the leaving cert i have had no luck in finding one either in my home town, Dublin, or Maynooth where I'm studying.

    In fact very few students can afford the luxuries you claim they have and are going to miss out on!

    Don't generalise about students, we're not all here for the craic and to delay having to live a real life. I am working as hard as I can in college because I am determined to acheive the goals I have set for myself.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 49 John Lynch Ph.D


    Terrible idea.

    And why are people so for the idea of providing free education to students from only low income family's? again after again these students have proven to be the under performers in college, and that is FACT, the basic reality is they come from low income family's for a reason and the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.


    I'm aware this isn't always the case, but it is 90% of the time. So for applications grants would have to be heavily scrutinized and also availible to middle class students aswell.

    However I feel that the approach to third level needs to completely reworked, employers aren't looking for a general piss in the pan Irish college degree because they know they're worth.

    Colleges should be listening to what employers want and provide tuition for those needed course's (Microsoft Certs etc).

    These economically viable course should be free.. for EVERYONE.

    If you want to study renaissance poetry, you can, but you can pay for it and regardless of your background.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,745 ✭✭✭Eliot Rosewater


    Simply taxing the population more, as Pride Fighter has suggested, is only shooting one's self in the foot as investment in the economy will probably go down and there will be less jobs for graduates.

    There are pictures, for example, of the current SU President, Keith O'Brien, protesting outside UCC at the lack of jobs available to graduates. As well as being a prime example of unhealthy government dependency, it was also highly ironic: Mr O'Brien has been instrumental in campaigning for the continuation of the free-fees system, which has resulted in higher taxes for everyone, thus impeding job creation, as I said. You can't have your cake and eat it to, eh?


    Sulmac: there are some problems with loans' systems. Firstly, they will deliver little in the way of investment to universities now, although universities can borrow if they are guaranteed future income. Secondly, I have yet to think of a good way to police the system. What happens to those graduates who leave Ireland, for example?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,639 ✭✭✭PeakOutput


    fees should be introduced but not across the board i do not think

    families udner a certain amount should pay nothing and receive full maintenance grants

    families in the next bracket pay a certain amount and get some grants

    families earning over a ceratin amount pay full fees and full costs

    to be honest 10K a year for a degree does not sound unreasonable to me and it would drastically improve our colleges and universities

    the grant system needs a huge overhaul along with the introduction of fees

    postgrads should be more expensive aswell

    edit; i do also believe that savings made from introducing fees should be ringfenced for improving education and not jsut flittered away into the abyss of our deficit


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,323 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Fees that address cost; not profit.

    Thats where the US has gone wrong, and to be frank, has retarded the population to a woeful shambles.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,639 ✭✭✭PeakOutput


    Overheal wrote: »
    Fees that address cost; not profit.

    Thats where the US has gone wrong, and to be frank, has retarded the population to a woeful shambles.

    fees(and very high ones) also allow you to have some of the best universities in the world. ireland dosnt have one in the top 100 and there is no reason it cant have one in the top 50 that is pumping out some seriously talented graduates


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    You say that, but it's a bit harsh. I'm 18 and a first year who would come from a traditionally middle-class family but right now I'm relying on what little money my self employed dad is able to give me and can't afford things like my own car or J1 holiday. In fact i feel guilty taking my dad's money as it is but its the only income that i can get. I'm not entitled to a grant, due to my dad being self employed, and despite searching for a job ever since I finished the leaving cert i have had no luck in finding one either in my home town, Dublin, or Maynooth where I'm studying.

    In fact very few students can afford the luxuries you claim they have and are going to miss out on!

    Don't generalise about students, we're not all here for the craic and to delay having to live a real life. I am working as hard as I can in college because I am determined to acheive the goals I have set for myself.

    I suppose I am being a little harsh, but I am speaking the truth. I am just completing a masters degree after fives years of university. (I come from a lower-income family, get the grant, fees paid and I worked every year through college, including summers, before you ask.) The majority of my classmates throughout were middle-income and above, drove a car and headed off to the US every summer, and sometimes Europe during mid-term, etc. I teach micro-classes now and the students complain of having trouble getting parking. Further to this, they seem to be disinterested in the subject they are studying, but are just hanging around for the college experience.

    This is the majority that I have experienced over the past five years. If their parents can afford to pay for these luxuries, they can afford to pay fees. If they are not interested in their degree, then I am sure they will think twice about progressing further instead of wasting several thousands on fees, per year. It is to the benefit of our educational system and the standard of graduate we put out there.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,639 ✭✭✭PeakOutput


    also students loans are easy to get

    students use loans all over the world to fund their studies


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    Overheal wrote: »
    Thats where the US has gone wrong

    http://www.arwu.org/ARWU2009.jsp


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,021 ✭✭✭Sulmac


    Under this system, who has the most to lose if their attempt at 3rd level doesn't work out (for whatever reason)?

    a) Student from high-income family
    b) Student from middle-income family
    c) Student from low-income family

    It seems Fine Gaels policy assumes a uniform playing field, or am I missing something?

    I'm not an expert, but I'd imagine that either the person doesn't pay anything (the document just mentions graduates paying) or, more likely, they pay the appropriate amount for their period in third level whenever they are working.

    Let's not forget that if someone drops out and reapplies [at the moment], that they have to pay full fees for their new course. I'd imagine their idea wouldn't allow that (although, as I said, I'm not an expert).
    Sulmac: there are some problems with loans' systems. Firstly, they will deliver little in the way of investment to universities now, although universities can borrow if they are guaranteed future income. Secondly, I have yet to think of a good way to police the system. What happens to those graduates who leave Ireland, for example?

    I agree that the investment is needed now and not four of five years down the line (I'm viewing this as a long-term solution) - though as you said this "guaranteed" income would allow them to barrow now.

    Policing it would be difficult; I wonder how they have dealt with that in Australia, New Zealand and [to an extent] the UK? I'd imagine the idea, though, is to get people to stay inside the country and work, not force them to emigrate abroad to find employment... :(


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,230 ✭✭✭spideog7


    I'm currently working at one of the top rated schools in the US and the tuition fees are in the region of $40,000 a year. For a four year degree that's a $160,000 bill. I know for a fact that there's no way I would have gone to University if I had to pay that much, I simply don't place that much value on the education I've received.

    While I acknowledge that fees would more than likely sort the grain from the chaff as regards people who appreciate their education, the question remains (to continue the metaphor) how much of the grain can we afford to lose and at what cost. In my opinion education should be provided by the state and should be free, I like the Irish system where the government will only pay for your education the first time around. This in turn should provide for a greater return to the state as an educated workforce will generally have more stable employment and higher income thus paying more in tax and indirectly paying for their own education.

    That being said as it stands, unfortunately Ireland can no longer provide employment for many of the graduates and so we have huge emmigration and a major brain-drain. Of my engineering class that graduated last year I think only 30% are working in Ireland while 30% are working overseas. The remainder have either returned to education or gone travelling (due to circumstance rather than desire). So where is the point in subsidising education for foreign countries? Unless we can get our act together and provide employment for the educated people we do have, why spend our money educating more with no return for it.

    I don't agree with paying a tax to repay your loans as I think one should only have to pay for exactly what they've spent. Interest free loans for graduates is the way to go and if I take out a loan from a bank and then leave the country they're still going to want it back and I'll probably receive a summons upon my return, so saying people could easily run away from their loans is plain foolish.

    Another thing we don't have in Ireland that could be a huge benefit if fees return is scholarships, there is little or no recognition for those who put in a lot of work and achieve highly, yet these are the ones who will more than likely create a good name for the University both here and abroad. I think if fees return (which they should as things stand) then this achievement should be rewarded and those students acknowledged.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 151 ✭✭bored and fussy


    This post has been deleted.

    Third level fees were abolished to secure the top earners vote, it did not help one person from the lower/working class as they had free fees already, but in some cases could not afford accodomotion that is what should have been increased.
    The threshold for charging fees should also have been increased.
    What happened was anyone that could afford the fees took their children out of state schools and sent them to fee paying ones, this created and extra advantage for the well off.
    Now when asked to pay third level fees they will not contribute.
    What is most curious is the working class are the most vocal in saying "no third level fees" it doesnt make sense.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    Sulmac wrote: »
    I'm not an expert, but I'd imagine that either the person doesn't pay anything (the document just mentions graduates paying) or, more likely, they pay the appropriate amount for their period in third level whenever they are working.

    Let's not forget that if someone drops out and reapplies [at the moment], that they have to pay full fees for their new course. I'd imagine their idea wouldn't allow that (although, as I said, I'm not an expert).

    But do you think that such a system creates disincentives for a lower-income student, who faces the possibility of huge debts that they may not be able to afford (whether they graduate or not) versus middle/higher income students who are equally aware of such future debts, but are also aware that their parents are available as a safety net, should things not work out. Think about risk.

    Can you see the difference there? Can you understand why this system will create disincentives for certain groups to attend 3rd level? Call them "barriers to entry"?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,502 ✭✭✭chris85


    PeakOutput wrote: »
    fees(and very high ones) also allow you to have some of the best universities in the world. ireland dosnt have one in the top 100 and there is no reason it cant have one in the top 50 that is pumping out some seriously talented graduates

    wrong. trinity is in the top 50 in the world.

    I believe the goverment has upped to reg fee anyways which should be enough. I think free college education has been a basis of bring companies into ireland as we have a very educated workforce.

    The US is so bad for their third level system so lets just rule their system out. Austalia's system is decent.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    chris85 wrote: »
    trinity is in the top 50 in the world

    It depends on what ranking you use. In one prominent ranking system (above), it doesn't make it into the top 200.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,323 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    PeakOutput wrote: »
    also students loans are easy to get

    students use loans all over the world to fund their studies
    And we also have some of the greatest athletes on the planet and are one of the world leaders in the olympic medals; that doesnt mean we aren't ridiculously obese as a nation.

    Elitism is important to some successes but success on a national scale requires a different approach.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,639 ✭✭✭PeakOutput


    chris85 wrote: »
    wrong. trinity is in the top 50 in the world.

    I believe the goverment has upped to reg fee anyways which should be enough. I think free college education has been a basis of bring companies into ireland as we have a very educated workforce.

    The US is so bad for their third level system so lets just rule their system out. Austalia's system is decent.

    both trinity and ucd droped out of the top 100 in the last few years

    maybe there are other rankings out there but i havnt seen them


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,639 ✭✭✭PeakOutput


    Overheal wrote: »
    And we also have some of the greatest athletes on the planet and are one of the world leaders in the olympic medals; that doesnt mean we aren't ridiculously obese as a nation.

    Elitism is important to some successes but success on a national scale requires a different approach.

    but you know what it takes to create the best colleges in the world

    money


    im not saying copy you guys exactly but there should be at least one university in ireland that can compete with top 50 schools and that is going to require money and certain people paying full fees in every college


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    It depends on what ranking you use. In one prominent ranking system (above), it doesn't make it into the top 200.

    Not in top 200:

    http://www.4icu.org/top200/

    Not in top 200:

    http://www.arwu.org/ARWU2009.jsp

    In at 43:

    http://www.usnews.com/articles/education/worlds-best-universities/2010/02/25/worlds-best-universities-top-400

    Not in top 200:

    http://www.webometrics.info/top8000.asp

    In at 43:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/datablog/2009/oct/08/top-100-universities-world

    Hmm, is that the same as above?

    Thats just from the first page of a Google search.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,854 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    there is an interesting report here on some of the problems in the US system. The important qualities of any university system should be affordability and quality. A common complaint in the US system is that there has been an "arms race" approach which has led to a lot of waste


    http://www.centerforcollegeaffordability.org/uploads/Financial_Aid_in_Theory_and_Practice.pdf


    examples of waste


    The University of Illinois spent $6 million on the Irwin Academic Services Center which “helps

    only about 550 of the school's 37,000 students” because it is restricted to athletes. But, “at
    least four other schools have multimillion-dollar tutoring centers just for their athletes” in-

    cluding the $12 million facility at the University of Michigan.
    54


    Princeton built a $136 million, 500-bed dorm ($272,000 per bed, much more than the median


    home costs).
    55 MIT’s Simmons Hall cost $194,000 per bed.56


    “Framingham State College will spend more than $191,000 building a two-car garage and


    stone patio for its state-owned president's house …even as the college's budget faces a poten-
    tial $2 million cut”
    57


    The University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey “spent more than $80,000 in 2005


    to shuttle the head of a volunteer advisory board from her home in Pennsylvania’s Po-
    conos to the school’s Newark campus.”
    58


    “Students now get massages, pedicures and manicures at the University of Wisconsin in Osh-


    kosh” and students at Indiana University of Pennsylvania can play “one of 52 golf courses
    from around the world on the room-sized golf simulators”
    59


    Ohio State University spent $140 million60 “to build what its peers enviously refer to as the


    Taj Mahal, a 657,000-square-foot complex featuring kayaks and canoes, indoor batting cages
    and ropes courses, massages and a climbing wall big enough for 50 students to scale simulta-
    neously”
    61


    The University of California gave 16 employees severance checks, and then rehired them. In


    the most egregious example, one person “left her old job on April 30 and began her new one
    on May 1.” She was given the same salary, but managed to collect a $100,202 severance pay-
    ment anyway. And prior to this she was given “a $44,000 relocation allowance and a low-
    interest $832,500 home loan, for which she was not otherwise entitled.”
    62


    In 2006-2007, 293 employees at private schools made more than $500,000. “[T]he highest-


    paid college employee in the country was Pete Carroll, head football coach at the University of
    Southern California, with $4.4-million in total compensation (pay plus benefits).”63




    Conclusion


    Several key parts of current financial aid practice are ineffective in achieving their primary goals
    (promoting college affordability, access, and equality of opportunity) because aid is often structured
    in such a way that it reinforces undesirable traits within the higher education sector. Specifically,
    financial aid programs fuel an arms race in spending among schools. Programs are structured in
    such a way that governments are essentially subsidizing the inflation of college costs.
    Schools generally cannot compete with each other by demonstrating that they provide a better educa-
    tion than others, because the outputs of school (learning and its consequences in a value added
    sense) are not measured. Since there are not generally accepted measures of outputs, and it is rea-
    sonable to think that high quality inputs will lead to high quality outputs, schools compete on inputs
    instead. Any input that is plausibly thought to affect learning (superstar faculty, world class labora-
    tories, fancy dorms, etc.) becomes the focus of competition, and each school tries to have the best
    inputs. The result has variously been described as the Bowen Rule, the Ehrenberg Cookie Monster,
    or more generally the academic arms race, and it inevitably leads to an explosion in costs. Is it any
    wonder that when we measure schools based on inputs, which are costly, that costs continually rise?
    Perhaps the most important consequence of the resulting explosion in costs has been a reduction in
    college affordability and access. As costs have been ratcheted up, governments have been forced to
    cut back on funding (as a percent of total costs), which is increasingly leaving the financial burden on
    students and their families. In other words, policy makers have designed a convoluted financial aid
    system that inadvertently leads to higher tuition. However, if ineffective practices are terminated or
    altered, and effective practices are expanded, then the system will be able to achieve its goal of mak-
    ing college less of a financial burden.
    Ultimately, the dilemma is how to ensure equality of opportunity (that qualified low-income students
    have the financial aid they need to allow them to attend college), without contributing to the aca-
    demic arms race. The recommendations above are a step in that direction.

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,483 ✭✭✭✭cson


    I think we can all agree that the current system is unsustainable. Thus it becomes a balancing act of how to correct this using measures that will have necessary impact at a minimum of cost. Perhaps a system whereby a sum is payable on acceptance of your CAO and then when you graduate or drop out.

    Personally in me experience a huge problem with the Irish system is not at University level but at Secondary level where the standard of career guidance is absolutely abject.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,745 ✭✭✭Eliot Rosewater


    Overheal wrote: »
    Elitism is important to some successes but success on a national scale requires a different approach.

    With respect Overheal, those kind of throwaway remarks don't help in finding the best solution. It's not about elitism, it's about creating the best universities we possibly can. The Irish system has proven to be unsuccessful in this regard, as illustrated by the various sources Flamed Diving linked to.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,729 ✭✭✭Pride Fighter


    Simply taxing the population more, as Pride Fighter has suggested, is only shooting one's self in the foot as investment in the economy will probably go down and there will be less jobs for graduates.

    I suggested nothing of the sort. I think the private sector can play a role in funding universities and in return the universities can alter their curriculum's to train up skilled employees for said private businesses.
    There are pictures, for example, of the current SU President, Keith O'Brien, protesting outside UCC at the lack of jobs available to graduates. As well as being a prime example of unhealthy government dependency, it was also highly ironic: Mr O'Brien has been instrumental in campaigning for the continuation of the free-fees system, which has resulted in higher taxes for everyone, thus impeding job creation, as I said. You can't have your cake and eat it to, eh?
    As a percentage most of the education budget goes to primary and secondary level sectors. Free fees results in very little in terms of a percentage of income tax citizens pay.

    Sulmac: there are some problems with loans' systems. Firstly, they will deliver little in the way of investment to universities now, although universities can borrow if they are guaranteed future income. Secondly, I have yet to think of a good way to police the system. What happens to those graduates who leave Ireland, for example?

    I agree. That is a huge problem for a loans system and could lead to a brain drain if introduced.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 479 ✭✭Furious-Dave


    I'm with Pride Fight and John Lynch Ph. D on this one. There's no reason why universities can't or shouldn't go to private companies and say 'if you give us funding, we will tailor our courses to suit your industries'. This is why American universities have such huge research departments.

    I am also against students having to work during college in order to have enough money to live. I am now in college for the third time and the primary cause of dropping out that I have seen is having a job along side studying. A lot of employers, certainly in the types of jobs students tend to have; shops, bars etc, couldn't care less about college and will try to increase the number of hours worked by the student. The student will usually have to make a choice eventually and many go with the job.

    Also, another thing I noticed during my time in colleges is some of the people getting grants are the ones with the rich parents. This is a typical 'Fianna Failian' culture, where the ones who give financial support are also the ones who get the benefits, whether they need them or not.

    Finally, if I had not been getting the 'back to education allowance' I simply would not have been able to go back to college.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,848 ✭✭✭?Cee?view


    The Green Party have a lot to answer for on this one.

    They tout "No 3rd level fees" as a great achievement of theirs in the latest Programme for Government.

    At best they were naive (as usual) and supremely arrogant (again as usual) in ignoring the advice of the University Presidents and the Irish University Association. More likely, I fear they were just pandering to their middle-class constituency in another attempt at grabbing some votes.

    I can actually forgive them supporting NAMA, but bankrupting Irish Universities will damage Ireland's future for generations...but hey, what do they care; they've appealed to their clique with their usual agenda driven drivel.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 752 ✭✭✭jayboi


    I would assume that any fees taken from the college would go straight to exchequer and show up as revenue in the books etc. So from this you could argue that any fees gathered are just as likely to go towards funding the budget deficit rather than improving facilities.

    I haven’t seen much effort on part of the colleges to curb their spending either, many of the top people in third level institutions are grossly overpaid IMO.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    I am also against students having to work during college in order to have enough money to live.

    I strongly disagree. This is such a lazy attitude. I worked 27 hours a week, part-time at one stage during college. I felt proud of this because I clearly had a hunger that others didn't. It seems like some people just want their whole lives subsidised. I will only take money when I really need it. But I will always choose to pay my own way, whenever I can.

    I just don't get this kind of "I'm entitled" attitude.

    Sorry if I seem harsh, but it's my opinion.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,848 ✭✭✭?Cee?view


    jayboi wrote: »
    I would assume that any fees taken from the college would go straight to exchequer and show up as revenue in the books etc. So from this you could argue that any fees gathered are just as likely to go towards funding the budget deficit rather than improving facilities.

    What are you getting at here? Fees collected by each College belong to that College. They don't go to the exchequer.
    jayboi wrote: »


    I haven’t seen much effort on part of the colleges to curb their spending either, many of the top people in third level institutions are grossly overpaid IMO.

    Other than UCD, where some extremely high levels of pay have been well publicised, where are other "top people" in Irish Universities grossly overpaid?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,639 ✭✭✭PeakOutput


    jayboi wrote: »
    I would assume that any fees taken from the college would go straight to exchequer and show up as revenue in the books etc. So from this you could argue that any fees gathered are just as likely to go towards funding the budget deficit rather than improving facilities.

    I haven’t seen much effort on part of the colleges to curb their spending either, many of the top people in third level institutions are grossly overpaid IMO.

    i think quite the opposite

    we should be able to offer top salaries to top people in their respective fields

    again i have little time for administrators but researchers and professors dont come cheap


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,323 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    With respect Overheal, those kind of throwaway remarks don't help in finding the best solution. It's not about elitism, it's about creating the best universities we possibly can. The Irish system has proven to be unsuccessful in this regard, as illustrated by the various sources Flamed Diving linked to.
    Elitism is not a slur. Its just used as a slur quite often. Nor is it a throwaway remark :confused: how else do you intend to describe it. Academic Excellence afforded to maybe the top 99.99th percentile through scholarships? And those with the deepest pockets. Thats the American system and with respect, you can't say it isn't Elitist.

    The Irish system fails at the point of cost but in making Third Level Degrees available to the widest platform of students possible while still ensuring nobody gets a free ride (the best courses demand the best grades) it certainly excels.

    All I'm saying is when Fees are re-introduced they should be a reflection of Costs not potential Profits. Frankly, I don't think education works particularly well in the Capitalist mindset.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,639 ✭✭✭PeakOutput


    Overheal wrote: »
    nobody gets a free ride (the best courses demand the best grades) it certainly excels.

    you will find that this isnt the case though we dont have any of the best courses and very few people fail any courses

    indeed i can get a degree failing 4 modules a year for 4 years as long as my average is still a c

    the idea that you can send someone out in the world with a qualification saying they have 4 years education in a subject but they actually only know40% of it is an absolute joke


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 6,376 Mod ✭✭✭✭Macha


    I would just make the point that undergraduates most definitely pay their way.

    Current annual registration fees stand at €1,500 and it does not cost a university that much to put each undergraduate student through his/her course annually. So some of this registration fee effectively supplements post-graduate education.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,639 ✭✭✭PeakOutput


    taconnol wrote: »
    I would just make the point that undergraduates most definitely pay their way.

    Current annual registration fees stand at €1,500 and it does not cost a university that much to put each undergraduate student through his/her course annually. So some of this registration fee effectively supplements post-graduate education.

    wrong

    the goverment subsidises each and every irish undergrad student

    im not as sure about postgrads but i wouldnt be suprised if the goverment was making a substantial contribution to keep those courses cheap as well


  • Advertisement
Advertisement