Rishi Sunak

[bluejon]

I agree with all of this however when around half of all uni graduates regret going to university and 30% don’t go on to highly skilled employment it’s worth asking the question. Although I don’t think that question is “is this degree valuable?” - it should be “is university right for you?”. The only people who can answer that are the prospective students - and if they don’t apply in sufficient numbers for specific courses then they’ll cease to exist.

We should be restructuring secondary school education and stop thinking the only learning a person should aspire to acquire is of an academic nature.

completely agree. there should be much more effort put into technical directions for kids to go down as opposed to just the "you should go to university" angle. one size does not fit all

 

[bluethrunthru]

I’ve already answered that. Depends on the outcome, rather than the subject.

what an absurd answer. So someone takes a degree then after say 5 or 10 years their progress is reviewed - if they are judged in an arbitrary manner not to have had a "good outcome" having gained that degree then it can be judged that a degree course 8 or 13 years ago was a poor quality degree?-

 

[mosssideblue]

Thought Sunak was good today.

Lol

 

[Brewster's millions]

what an absurd answer. So someone takes a degree then after say 5 or 10 years their progress is reviewed - if they are judged in an arbitrary manner not to have had a "good outcome" having gained that degree then it can be judged that a degree course 8 or 13 years ago was a poor quality degree?-

Why would they need to wait 10 years before judging whether a good outcome has been produced by a degree course, particularly if the actual graduates are disappointed in the quality of teaching they’ve received?

Doesn’t work like that in the real world, I’m afraid.

And you still haven’t acknowledged the central issue which Sunak was addressing, namely the burden sub-standard degree courses place on the public finances, and the effectively arbitrary manner in which public expenditure is allocated across tertiary education.

 

[bluethrunthru]

Why would they need to wait 10 years before judging whether a good outcome has been produced by a degree course, particularly if the actual graduates are disappointed in the quality of teaching they’ve received?

Doesn’t work like that in the real world, I’m afraid.

And you still haven’t acknowledged the central issue which Sunak was addressing, namely the burden sub-standard degree courses place on the public finances, and the effectively arbitrary manner in which public expenditure is allocated across tertiary education.

Ok my son got a first as did my daughter - both work in retail? A waste?

 

[Brewster's millions]

Ok my son got a first as did my daughter - both work in retail? A waste?

If people go to University, take out student loans to do so and end up repaying them, then clearly they can do whatever they want in life and it’s nobody’s business what they do.

If however we have a situation where universities continue to offer low quality degree courses that don’t materially improve career prospects, and students end up dissatisfied with the teaching they’ve received, then personally I think that the burden this places on the public finances should be acknowledged.

The figures involved are huge. The stock of outstanding student loans has now passed £200bn, and the figure is projected to hit £460bn in another twenty years’ time. If the default rate on these loans is running at 30/40%, it places an enormous burden on tax payers.

Should we just ignore this cost, or actually try to raise standards so that the default rate declines? Is it fair to expect people who choose not to go to university to pick up the tab for a failure or refusal to tackle continued poor standards across universities?

The argument against tackling the issue appears to be the broader benefit a higher number of graduates offers, even if they do not move into highly paid jobs. But if taxpayers have to eventually pick up the tab for a c40% default rate on a loan book that is heading towards £500bn, then that’s going to impose an enormous burden on the public finances and expenditure in other areas will necessarily be lower as a result.

 

[bluethrunthru]

If people go to University, take out student loans to do so and end up repaying them, then clearly they can do whatever they want in life and it’s nobody’s business what they do.

If however we have a situation where universities continue to offer low quality degree courses that don’t materially improve career prospects, and students end up dissatisfied with the teaching they’ve received, then personally I think that the burden this places on the public finances should be acknowledged.

The figures involved are huge. The stock of outstanding student loans has now passed £200bn, and the figure is projected to hit £460bn in another twenty years’ time. If the default rate on these loans is running at 30/40%, it places an enormous burden on tax payers.

Should we just ignore this cost, or actually try to raise standards so that the default rate declines? Is it fair to expect people who choose not to go to university to pick up the tab for a failure or refusal to tackle continued poor standards across universities?

The argument against tackling the issue appears to be the broader benefit a higher number of graduates offers, even if they do not move into highly paid jobs. But if taxpayers have to eventually pick up the tab for a c40% default rate on a loan book that is heading towards £500bn, then that’s going to impose an enormous burden on the public finances and expenditure in other areas will necessarily be lower as a result.

They went to Uni - you know the results and you know where they are now. Was it a waste of time? Outcomes are there for you.

 

[Brewster's millions]

They went to Uni - you know the results and you know where they are now. Was it a waste of time? Outcomes are there for you.

40% default rate on a £500bn loan book with the public picking up the tab.

Not sustainable.

 

[bluethrunthru]

40% default rate on a £500bn loan book with the public picking up the tab.

Not sustainable.

No answer then? I'll fill in the blanks for the hard of understanding. Son got a first in TV / film and radio production. Started work on programmes like Victoria on ITV and did a couple of radio plays then Covid struck.

Daughter got a first in Musical Theatre and was about to start a great career having offers from theatres and cruise ships the Covid struck.

During hard times you have to use what Uni teaches you and the network you have built up. Both are now in retail management for High Street names on graduate recruitment programmes and doing well for themselves. Can you guess why neither are filling shelves? ( clue is in the name of the programme )

Rishi would have had their courses axed and they would probably be working in the chippy

 

[Brewster's millions]

No answer then? I'll fill in the blanks for the hard of understanding. Son got a first in TV / film and radio production. Started work on programmes like Victoria on ITV and did a couple of radio plays then Covid struck.

Daughter got a first in Musical Theatre and was about to start a great career having offers from theatres and cruise ships the Covid struck.

During hard times you have to use what Uni teaches you and the network you have built up. Both are now in retail management for High Street names on graduate recruitment programmes and doing well for themselves. Can you guess why neither are filling shelves? ( clue is in the name of the programme )

Rishi would have had their courses axed and they would probably be working in the chippy

Why would their courses be axed when both your children are experiencing good outcomes from their degrees? The fact that they are both in graduate jobs and doing well for themselves would positively influence the outcome statistics for their respective degrees.

You seem to be under the impression that their degrees would only be judged to have resulted in positive outcomes if your children ended up working in musical theatre and TV / radio production. That’s a misconception.

The proposed reforms would seek to limit places in degree courses which have a high drop-out rate, and/or have a low proportion of students moving into graduate level jobs (in any industry). This clearly wouldn’t be the case with regard to the courses studied by your children.