nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

To those getting shafted by college fees

TheyKnowMyIP

Why not get your education abroad? I am a big believer in the free market, so why put up with increasing fees while the quality of third level education goes down? The amount you invest should be proportional to the actual quality of the education you recieve. Unlike most other nations, irish education appears to operate on the basis of an inverse relationship. This is not opinion, the league tables speak for themselves.

Ireland used to deliver a good education at a reasonable cost a few years back, but this is looking like a dwindling proposition. Some European countries don't even charge fees at all. It's a no brainer imo. Stop pissing people off with your aimless protests and put your money where your mouth is. Like most things in life, money is the ultimate bargaining tool. You can protest till you are blue in the face. These increases are not going away. Vote with your euro - It's better than any protest.

Am I talking sense or just deluded? You can give the finger not by wasting your breath on them, but by completely writing them out of the equation. Saddling undergrads who aren't exactly research oriented with massive loans isn't going to benefit society in the long run, even if the quality returns to a decent level.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

HavingCrack

Jimoslimos wrote: »

For postgraduate courses it should definitely be on people's radar. Looking at a MSc course in the Netherlands (in a higher ranked uni than anything in Ireland I might add) for instance is approx €1700 compared to €7000 here.

What university? With the exception of Delft I can't think of any that are significantly better than Irish ones.

Jimoslimos wrote: »

In fact I think it's something that should be encouraged. I've seen too many students become institutionalised here - same college for degree - masters - PhD - postdoc. People would benefit from experiencing full-time education in a different university/country.

To be fair, that's not a uniquely Irish issue. The term for it is 'academic incest' and it happens everywhere. I would strongly agree that unless you have some outstanding researchers you wish to work with in your current university it's a good idea to move around as much as possible.

HavingCrack

Dudess wrote: »

Loans system is a good option IMO.

I don't really see why people are opposed to a loan system, it seems very fair, everyone starts off and finishes on an equal footing. The only problem I can see is that certain courses become 'demeaned' as the rush for the courses with the best career prospects becomes the be all and end all. In some ways if this meant the end of the 'madey-uppy' courses it can only be a good thing. This hasn't happened in the UK though so I suppose this isn't a guaranteed outcome.

amacachi

TheyKnowMyIP wrote: »

It's essentially a trap designed for the interests of the colleges and employment venues. They won't tell you this, but that is the truth. I always read between the lines, they won't fool me. I mean come on, a degree in ****ing hotel management? What the fuuuu 30 years ago, you just did whateveer you need to do for most jobs. They want to control every aspect of your life these days tbh.

I smell a conspiracy...

Free fees or student loans? Have heard that about both. :pac:

IMO there should be no non-researching teaching posts in anything that wants to be called something better than an IFE. Some of the spending in colleges just makes me want to cry. In Dundalk IT a whole building was bought and renovated for the "creative arts" while the electronics students have to vouch for every resistor that's taken. :pac:

Jimoslimos

For postgraduate courses it should definitely be on people's radar. Looking at a MSc course in the Netherlands (in a higher ranked uni than anything in Ireland I might add) for instance is approx €1700 compared to €7000 here.

In fact I think it's something that should be encouraged. I've seen too many students become institutionalised here - same college for degree - masters - PhD - postdoc. People would benefit from experiencing full-time education in a different university/country.

HavingCrack

TheyKnowMyIP wrote: »

Why not get your education abroad? I am a big believer in the free market, so why put up with increasing fees while the quality of third level education goes down? The amount you invest should be proportional to the actual quality of the education you recieve. Unlike most other nations, irish education appears to operate on the basis of an inverse relationship. This is not opinion, the league tables speak for themselves.

With the exception of the UK and the Ecole Polytechnique and Ecole Normale Superieure in France, ETH Zurich and EPF Lausanne in Switzerland, the two Munich universities, and Heidelberg in Germany, Uppsala in Sweden and Copehagen and throw in Leuven, Delft and one or two others most mainland European universities aren't up to scratch. Unless you're going to one of the above mentioned, Irish universities don't actually do too badly.

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Of course if the Irish education "system" wasnt so embarrassingly shyte when it came to teaching continental languages............

To be fair even if Irish education was good, learning French and German (Spanish and Italian universities are generally a lot ****ter than ours) to a level fluent enough to actually study at university is a challenge. I know lots of French and Spanish who could 'speak' English but were utterly clueless when it came to university level lectures.

UglyBolloxFace wrote: »

Not necessarily. Many courses abroad are done through English, with the Sciences being the main type.

A small number are, generally medical and dentistry. It certainly isn't 'many' though.

amacachi

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

You'd be surprised, fiver for six cans for predrinks, money for the bus into town, cheaplist/freelist into a club then pool in with your friends to a get a taxi home. Its doable when it is literally all you can afford.

I think its a good argument to be fair. They will get more tax out of me then they would have if I didn't go to college.

Nah I'm a cheap bastard, probably not cheap enough to go into a club that charges a quid at the door though. :pac:

There's also the reasonably high risk though that people doing subjects in the professions will just go off abroad where it seems right now there'll be better prospects.

I'm just not a fan of state interference in general. I'm heading back to college next year and if a loan is needed and it's available I won't mind. If they go the "middle ground" and it's a stupid high reg. fee with lower income threshold that can't be deferred and there's no loans available for it, I will be quite annoyed. I did two years of 3+ hours a day commuting while paying back a loan I had to get for a year's fees + the reg. fee. I know it's a pain in the arse but as far as I'm concerned I was lucky for it to even be possible.

TheyKnowMyIP

amacachi wrote: »

Yep, and free fees has contributed massively to that. Also since their introduction there's been no increase in the proportion of students in third level from the bottom of the socio-economic pile, only the middle classes.

It's essentially a trap designed for the interests of the colleges and employment venues. They won't tell you this, but that is the truth. I always read between the lines, they won't fool me. I mean come on, a degree in ****ing hotel management? What the fuuuu

30 years ago, you just did whateveer you need to do for most jobs. They want to control every aspect of your life these days tbh.

I smell a conspiracy...

Wolfe Tone

amacachi wrote: »

You sound like a barrel of laughs. :pac:

I'm familiar with economics, but trying to use the circular flow argument in a country consistently ranked as being one of the most open economies in the world really doesn't help your argument.

You'd be surprised, fiver for six cans for predrinks, money for the bus into town, cheaplist/freelist into a club then pool in with your friends to a get a taxi home. Its doable when it is literally all you can afford.

I think its a good argument to be fair. They will get more tax out of me then they would have if I didn't go to college.

Dudess

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Dudess wrote: »

Oh I do see students out on the piss a lot, but it's probably a minority.
IMO fees should be reintroduced but very rigorously means tested so that the wide spectrum of incomes is taken into account - it's far more layered than high, middle and low - however I know that's easier said than done. I know that's discriminatory but I never understand how some people on high incomes have no problem sending their kids to private school, grinds, tuition centres but recoil at the notion of college fees.
First and second level are a right, but after that, it's optional - not everyone avails of it, and some who do, completely take it for granted.
Third level institutions are haemorrhaging money, and fees are pretty much back, albeit not in name - the registration fee being upped and upped. Fees would make people value it more too - some folks in third level couldn't give a ****, and sneer at it. Fees would ensure more of a likelihood of only people who actually want to be there being there.
I have no problem with public funding paying for some of it, just not practically every last penny.
Loans system is a good option IMO.

You've touched on a big problem. Some people have parents who:

Won't pay for their college
Can't afford to even though their income is above the level

Those young people are effectively fcuked.

Yep, those kinda factors are the ones which would make the means testing thing difficult to work.

TheyKnowMyIP

Domo230 wrote: »

That's been my experience so far. I was told by a recruiter that I was fully qualified, had a great portfolio (computer science stuff) but because I did not have a degree would not be considered.

That was a pretty low day. I am underqualified for these posts but I have a sneaking suspicion that my previous college experience means I am also considered overqualified for many of the minimum wage jobs I am currently searching for. I am young but have an impressive CV. I have a feeling that many do not consider me for certain posts because they think I will leave them as soon as I get the money to return to college (which to be fair is true)

Sometimes it feels like I am trapped by my level of education.

I feel bad for your situation. I don't know what to say. Just keep the head up and consider all options. I have been turned down a number of times myself in the last year, despite having a degree, so don't beat yourself up about that. It's simply a reflection of the times when both good and bad reasons are being used to disqualify someone.

Things will pick up again, you can bet on that. In the meantime, if you have time to kill, you should consider all your options. Employers don't want to hire people in this country at present. It's more than simply not having a degree I am afraid. That is the sad truth. Best of luck whatever you do.

Wolfe Tone

Dudess wrote: »

Oh I do see students out on the piss a lot, but it's probably a minority.
IMO fees should be reintroduced but very rigorously means tested so that the wide spectrum of incomes is taken into account - it's far more layered than high, middle and low - however I know that's easier said than done. I know that's discriminatory but I never understand how some people on high incomes have no problem sending their kids to private school, grinds, tuition centres but recoil at the notion of college fees.
First and second level are a right, but after that, it's optional - not everyone avails of it, and some who do, completely take it for granted.
Third level institutions are haemorrhaging money, and fees are pretty much back, albeit not in name - the registration fee being upped and upped. Fees would make people value it more too - some folks in third level couldn't give a ****, and sneer at it. Fees would ensure more of a likelihood of only people who actually want to be there being there.
I have no problem with public funding paying for some of it, just not practically every last penny.
Loans system is a good option IMO.

You've touched on a big problem. Some people have parents who:

Won't pay for their college
Can't afford to even though their income is above the level

Those young people are effectively fcuked.

amacachi

Dudess wrote: »

Oh I do see students out on the piss a lot, but it's probably a minority.
IMO fees should be reintroduced but very rigorously means tested so that the wide spectrum of incomes is taken into account - it's far more layered than high, middle and low - however I know that's easier said than done. I know that's discriminatory but I never understand how some people on high incomes have no problem sending their kids to private school, grinds, tuition centres but recoil at the notion of college fees.
First and second level are a right, but after that, it's optional - not everyone avails of it, and some who do, completely take it for granted.
Third level institutions are haemorrhaging money, and fees are pretty much back, albeit not in name - the registration fee being upped and upped. Fees would make people value it more too - some folks in third level couldn't give a ****, and sneer at it. Fees would ensure more of a likelihood of only people who actually want to be there being there.
I have no problem with public funding paying for some of it, just not practically every last penny.
Loans system is a good option IMO.

As I said, I bet if there was the prospect of 25k fees for college there'd be a pretty big fall in the uptake for Junior Cert grinds. :pac:

Miss Olenska

Dudess wrote: »

Oh I do see students out on the piss a lot, but it's probably a minority.
IMO fees should be reintroduced but very rigorously means tested so that the wide spectrum of incomes is taken into account - it's far more layered than high, middle and low - however I know that's easier said than done. I know that's discriminatory but I never understand how some people on high incomes have no problem sending their kids to private school, grinds, tuition centres but recoil at the notion of college fees.
First and second level are a right, but after that, it's optional - not everyone avails of it, and some who do, completely take it for granted.
Third level institutions are haemorrhaging money, and fees are pretty much back, albeit not in name - the registration fee being upped and upped. Fees would make people value it more too - some folks in third level couldn't give a ****, and sneer at it. Fees would ensure more of a likelihood of only people who actually want to be there being there.
I have no problem with public funding paying for some of it, just not practically every last penny.
Loans system is a good option IMO.

amacachi

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

When I go out I spend under a tenner.

If the govt help me get educated so I get a well paid job they will benefit with all the extra tax they get which they wouldn't if I spent my life working at a low paid job which I didn't need a degree for.

So you personally, ideally, would benefit because there would be more cash for public services and the like.

You sound like a barrel of laughs. :pac:

I'm familiar with economics, but trying to use the circular flow argument in a country consistently ranked as being one of the most open economies in the world really doesn't help your argument.

Miss Olenska

TheyKnowMyIP wrote: »

Which leads to the expectation that because these degrees are devalued, there is an expectation that any idiot with a pencil can get a degree while overlooking people without any sort of third level education. "Oh, you're so stupid, you don't even have a bog standard would not wipe your arse degree!". Do you see where I am coming from?

Some places would simply bin an application these days on the basis of not having a degree. I've seen it happen myself, and these sure as hell aren't fortune 500 companies.

Standards HAVE dropped. OK, getting a degree takes graft but grade inflation has been demonstrably happening. It was much rarer to get a 2:1 twenty years ago than now, 1:1s even moreso. I got a 2:1, believe me when I say I really really didn't deserve it. 20 years ago, I would have been lucky to scrape a 2:2!

Dudess

Oh I do see students out on the piss a lot, but it's probably a minority.
IMO fees should be reintroduced but very rigorously means tested so that the wide spectrum of incomes is taken into account - it's far more layered than high, middle and low - however I know that's easier said than done. I know that's discriminatory but I never understand how some people on high incomes have no problem sending their kids to private school, grinds, tuition centres but recoil at the notion of college fees.
First and second level are a right, but after that, it's optional - not everyone avails of it, and some who do, completely take it for granted.
Third level institutions are haemorrhaging money, and fees are pretty much back, albeit not in name - the registration fee being upped and upped. Fees would make people value it more too - some folks in third level couldn't give a ****, and sneer at it. Fees would ensure more of a likelihood of only people who actually want to be there being there.
I have no problem with public funding paying for some of it, just not practically every last penny.
Loans system is a good option IMO.

amacachi

TheyKnowMyIP wrote: »

Which leads to the expectation that because these degrees are devalued, there is an expectation that any idiot with a pencil can get a degree while overlooking people without any sort of third level education. "Oh, you're so stupid, you don't even have a bog standard would not wipe your arse degree!". Do you see where I am coming from?

Some places would simply bin an application these days on the basis of not having a degree. I've seen it happen myself, and these sure as hell aren't fortune 500 companies.

Yep, and free fees has contributed massively to that. Also since their introduction there's been no increase in the proportion of students in third level from the bottom of the socio-economic pile, only the middle classes.

Wolfe Tone

amacachi wrote: »

Why should everyone else have to invest in your (or my) education though? If you're dedicated enough then the one night out every two weeks could be sacrificed to cover a 500 or so increase in the reg. fee.

I still can't see the problem with loans. It's up to you if you want to do them or not.

When I go out I spend under a tenner.

If the govt help me get educated so I get a well paid job they will benefit with all the extra tax they get which they wouldn't if I spent my life working at a low paid job which I didn't need a degree for.

So you personally, ideally, would benefit because there would be more cash for public services and the like.

Miss Olenska

gnfnrhead wrote: »

How do you do that anyway? Defer it or something?

Yes, deferring has always been an option. I did my LC in 2001 and deferred my course for a year to make a bit of money and also because I was only just turned 17 so wasn't quite ready for the college experience.

amacachi

gnfnrhead wrote: »

I didnt know you could do that! I'm here thinking if the fee's go up I wont be able to afford next year but if I can do that, I should be able to get enough together to cover it unless it goes up a lot.

How do you do that anyway? Defer it or something?

Different in different places. Obviously ya can defer first year, after that it's sometimes a different process and you'd have to get on to your tutor or whatever. I'd advise getting through it as quick as possible though, taking a year out to save will only save enough for the amount extra introduced during that year. :pac:

TheyKnowMyIP

Miss Olenska wrote: »

And the reason people without letters after their names are now ignored is because degrees are not worth what they once were what with everyone having one now, so they have just become like the LC used to be, a must. Degrees have become devalued.

Which leads to the expectation that because these degrees are devalued, there is an expectation that any idiot with a pencil can get a degree while overlooking people without any sort of third level education. "Oh, you're so stupid, you don't even have a bog standard would not wipe your arse degree!". Do you see where I am coming from?

Some places would simply bin an application these days on the basis of not having a degree. I've seen it happen myself, and these sure as hell aren't fortune 500 companies.

gnfnrhead

starbelgrade wrote: »

That was almost always the reality. When I was in college many students took a year at a time out of their courses earn enough to pay for the next year or two of college.

I'm not saying that's right or wrong, but sometimes you just have to do what has to be done in order to get to where you want to go.

I didnt know you could do that! I'm here thinking if the fee's go up I wont be able to afford next year but if I can do that, I should be able to get enough together to cover it unless it goes up a lot.

How do you do that anyway? Defer it or something?

TheyKnowMyIP

Just to note. My initial propostion is based on the assumption you at least have a mimimum wage or higher job. If you can live abroad in Australia or whatever people are doing these days, why not at least give it a shot? You won't be denied unless you are a child rapist or something. Never EVER lie to immigration.

Miss Olenska

TheyKnowMyIP wrote: »

You can say all you like, but the fact remains that education is used to filter job applicants.

And the reason people without letters after their names are now ignored is because degrees are not worth what they once were what with everyone having one now, so they have just become like the LC used to be, a must. Degrees have become devalued.

amacachi

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

I'll have to do professional exams which are very expensive, god knows were I will get the cash for that. I don't get any grants.

If people really want a knowledge based economy then changing the current format will damage that, people simply wont go. I will end up "paying back" with decades of tax. Education is an investment.

Why should everyone else have to invest in your (or my) education though? If you're dedicated enough then the one night out every two weeks could be sacrificed to cover a 500 or so increase in the reg. fee.

I still can't see the problem with loans. It's up to you if you want to do them or not.

Miss Olenska

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

If people really want a knowledge based economy then changing the current format will damage that, people simply wont go. I will end up "paying back" with decades of tax. Education is an investment.

But you'll be paying back anyway if free fees remain, as do all taxpayers, except you'll be paying for free fees for all rather than paying back your own fees.

I think if free fees remain, the quality of courses should be improved. There are way too many shítty courses out there now.

TheyKnowMyIP

Miss Olenska wrote: »

I'm not a HR drone.

But yes, if you're capable. University isn't for everyone, but people are encouraged to go whether it's for them or not. :rolleyes:

I never said you were, I was simply asserting that the average HR airhead will overlook somebody because they don't have letters after their name. You can say all you like, but the fact remains that education is used to filter job applicants. This is wrong on so many levels. Even for lowly paid positions.

Wolfe Tone

amacachi wrote: »

I assume you'd also be opposed to paying it back later?

I'll have to do professional exams which are very expensive, god knows were I will get the cash for that. I don't get any grants.

If people really want a knowledge based economy then changing the current format will damage that, people simply wont go. I will end up "paying back" with decades of tax. Education is an investment.

TheyKnowMyIP

PseudoFamous wrote: »

Skilled workers pay more tax than unskilled workers in most cases, so it would be payed back, albeit indirectly.

Not to mention they probably own more assets, which are in turn taxed to the hilt. The robin hood principle imo.

Miss Olenska

TheyKnowMyIP wrote: »

Tell that to the HR drone.

I'm not a HR drone.

But yes, if you're capable. University isn't for everyone, but people are encouraged to go whether it's for them or not. :rolleyes: