It’s time to reconsider free tuition fees, says Aberdeen University chief
September 25, 2024
It’s time to reconsider free tuition fees, says Aberdeen University chief
by RevolutionaryBook01
17 comments
I think it’s time to reconsider how higher eduction works and how many people need to get it straight after school.
I don’t really think the title accurately represents what George Boyne is saying, which you can see in the full interview (i’ve bolded the quotes in particular)
>Free tuition fees for Scottish students should be reconsidered as universities face an “urgent cash crisis”, the principal of Aberdeen University has said.
>Professor George Boyne says a collapse in the number of international students, along with a steady decline in government funding, has plunged Aberdeen into deficit, leading to its annual report this year warning that the university’s future was “in significant doubt.”
>A programme of voluntary redundancies has steadied its finances, but Boyne believes the policy on free tuition should be reviewed as part of a wider funding programme for higher education in Scotland.
>Two other university chiefs — Sir Peter Mathieson, of Edinburgh University, and Sir Paul Grice, of the city’s Queen Margaret University — have urged the government to reconsider the policy, despite Alex Salmond’s pledge when he was first minister that “the rocks would melt with the sun” before free tuition was scrapped.
>**“We’ve gone from crunch to crisis and it is now urgent,” Boyne said in an interview with The Times. “[The funding crisis] has to be addressed in some way, because the only other alternative is for the sector to shrink, and that’s a tragedy.”**
>Boyne’s intervention comes as the latest Sunday Times Good University Guide placed Aberdeen in the top 15 universities in the UK, while a national student survey put it in the top ten for teaching. However, the university is in deficit, despite a voluntary severance and early retirement scheme, along with a cutback on operating costs, introduced in the last academic year.
>**“I’m sorry to say we still have a deficit for 2023-24, and that’s the first time we’ve had a deficit since I’ve been here,” Boyne said. “But we’ve done what we need to do to restore our financial sustainability and stability. Our deficit this year will be significantly smaller. We’ve done enough to reduce costs, we now need to focus on growing revenue again.”**
>Boyne said a fair funding system should take into account the future earning potential of a student. At present English students take out loans that are intended to be paid back as soon as they earn enough, which the principal says needs to be part of the debate in Scotland.
>**“I think [free tuition] is the wrong place to start, although understandably that’s where the political discussion finally goes,” he said.**
>**“We should start with looking at the outcomes we want to achieve — what do we want from higher education as a nation? What is it we want our universities to be achieving for the social, economic and collective good? — and then work backwards from that to how we should fund them in order to be able to achieve those outcomes.**
>**“Somewhere in the middle of those two questions is the issue of who benefits from the activity undertaken by higher education — that’s three groups, society at large, employers and the students themselves.”**
>Visa restrictions introduced by the last Conservative government have led to a drop of about 50 per cent in the number of international postgraduate students — the largest source of revenue for UK universities —and free tuition for Scottish students means universities north of the border are facing greater financial pressure than those in England.
>A report by the consultants London Economics showed public costs of Scottish higher education were now five times those in England, while income was 23 per cent lower.
>Brexit meant that European students, who paid no fees under the Scottish system, were faced with paying up to £20,000 a year, leading to a drop from 3,000 at Aberdeen to “a couple of hundred,” according to Boyne. Meanwhile the Tory ban on foreign students bringing families to Britain had a negative impact on those coming from elsewhere. An inquiry by the Migration Advisory Committee into the UK’s graduate visa scheme was widely interpreted as an attempt to further restrict visas and has discouraged some foreign students from applying this year.
>Boyne is hopeful that the new UK government might revisit the visa issue but doubts any change is imminent. He concedes that the prospect of extra funding from the Scottish government is unlikely, given the current financial pressures, but believes the costs of higher education have to be weighed against the benefits it brings to the nation.
>**He said: “I don’t have the answers to all those questions, but I think it would be useful for the sector and the Scottish government to approach the topic in that way, and frankly, all of us need to stop being so fixated on the fee issue and think about the outcomes and the benefits.”**
Why can’t employers pay a graduate tax rather than the individual? If an employer requires a graduate then why should they not pay for it? That includes the government.
Time to reconsider the Aberdeen University chief
What universities can never rethink is paying their leadership as if they are working for corporations.
George Boyne gets paid £300,000 a year.
Have the universities tried having less avadacdo toast, and less hamas supporting demonstrations?
What they mean is now that all the international students are going elsewhere the uni can’t support itself.
This is what happens when you make education a business.
Similar thing facing England, tuition fee cap hasn’t been indexed to inflation so they get less in real terms every year. The economist had a good article on it last week (basically saying they urgently need to raise the limit). The entire way we fund and pay for higher education is probably going to change massively. Is the amount universities get from the Scottish government indexed or is it similar to down south, less each year for the same expectation?
I’m not saying they should or shouldn’t but there are some things that I think should be considered
Free tuition limits the number of students in full time education to 120,000 ish, that is 20,000-30,000 new students a year, thats not bad its over half of the 17year olds each year. But then it isn’t only 17 year olds trying to go to uni.
I never paid tuition fees, despite this the same amount is taken from my pay as if I had because I took out the student loan like many other students did, it is something almost mandatory for students from a poor background if they can’t stay at home and be supported by their family, so in general it isn’t necessary the poorest free tuition benefits.
There’s edge cases to this such as the people doing coding or finance that moved to London or someone who moved to the US (basically people that left Scotland and are earning a lot of money) they might pay it off quickly so benefit from the smaller but still large loan
I would say the higher repayment threshold benefits Scottish people (especially those from poor backgrounds) more than the free tuition
The unis are using other methods to get more money such as more international students, I had bad experiences and many others did with a certain type of international student who didn’t seem to understand English, increased class sizes and hampered our education. Maybe higher tuition fees for a better education is worth it. Even with higher tuition fees I still expect the unis to take a large amount of international students
The head guy at Strathclyde earns more than the prime minister, is this justified if they are saying they need more funds?
I studied in Edinburgh. Edinburgh University owns over 600 buildings, is competing only with the council itself to be the biggest landlord in the city, and pays its top staff upwards of £400k (and footed the presidents £26,000 bill to move his cats from Hong Kong).
I always knew free education was a privilege that my kids won’t be able to enjoy. I’ve seen pals escape poverty that otherwise wouldn’t have had a chance. I will, however, always firmly believe that if these organisations are short on cash, free tuition is NOT the problem.
I’m at this uni, we teach ourselves more than half the time lol.
A university who is struggling with the lack of (super expensive) foreign uni admissions now thinks actually they’d rather the state secured their future. Imagine that.
“Free tuition” isn’t free we do pay for it via general taxation. If the current fees aren’t high enough I am sure they could negotiate it is with the government.
At the end of the day a university education is useful regardless of how you use it. It gives you much more freedom and agency than what you can get at college. Maybe we should see about elevating college graduates to having the same right as university graduates for things like work permits abroad.
As a Scot living in England please don’t do this. Access to free university education is the ultimate levelling up tool and if you remove it you are condemning thousands and thousands of already disadvantaged youngsters to stay in their place.
It clearly benefits society as they will pay higher taxes than they would have without going to Uni. Some people may take the piss and exploit it but no need to throw the whole thing out when some lower level of reform could fix that if need be.
In England you can get a loan for your fees and a maintenance loan of between about £4k and £13.3k. The average price for self catered uni accomodation is probably about £8k so for a lot of people unless you are getting the max grant or your folks have thousands of pounds they don’t know what to do with you are going to need a job. That’s not necessarily a terrible thing but the reality is a kid working 15 hours a week will earn c£4,500 in a university year but that still leaves them with a huge disadvantage in terms of the hours they can spend studying or having a bit of a life. Chances are by the time you add in a bit of travel time it’s will have a much bigger impact than you think.
Added to that someone fully financed by mum and dad will not have the burden of having over £70k of debt hanging over them after 3 years. This will already have scared off a huge number of working class kids from even applying and it will be a burden for those who do. Don’t kid yourself you don’t need to pay it back. Even if you never repay it in full, as many don’t which just makes it more expensive for those who do and the taxpayers too, you will spend 40 years paying a large chunk of your salary back whilst your debt grows and grows. Don’t quote me on this but I don’t think you start paying more than your interest adds until you are earning £50k.
I know you don’t pay huge amounts back initially but that debt mountain just keeps growing and growin
Oh, here we go…
I think the universality is an issue when over 80% of students at the best Scottish universities are middle class or above, and really should be means tested. Other sectors like FE and apprenticeships are completely starved of funds
17 comments
I think it’s time to reconsider how higher eduction works and how many people need to get it straight after school.
I don’t really think the title accurately represents what George Boyne is saying, which you can see in the full interview (i’ve bolded the quotes in particular)
>Free tuition fees for Scottish students should be reconsidered as universities face an “urgent cash crisis”, the principal of Aberdeen University has said.
>Professor George Boyne says a collapse in the number of international students, along with a steady decline in government funding, has plunged Aberdeen into deficit, leading to its annual report this year warning that the university’s future was “in significant doubt.”
>A programme of voluntary redundancies has steadied its finances, but Boyne believes the policy on free tuition should be reviewed as part of a wider funding programme for higher education in Scotland.
>Two other university chiefs — Sir Peter Mathieson, of Edinburgh University, and Sir Paul Grice, of the city’s Queen Margaret University — have urged the government to reconsider the policy, despite Alex Salmond’s pledge when he was first minister that “the rocks would melt with the sun” before free tuition was scrapped.
>**“We’ve gone from crunch to crisis and it is now urgent,” Boyne said in an interview with The Times. “[The funding crisis] has to be addressed in some way, because the only other alternative is for the sector to shrink, and that’s a tragedy.”**
>Boyne’s intervention comes as the latest Sunday Times Good University Guide placed Aberdeen in the top 15 universities in the UK, while a national student survey put it in the top ten for teaching. However, the university is in deficit, despite a voluntary severance and early retirement scheme, along with a cutback on operating costs, introduced in the last academic year.
>**“I’m sorry to say we still have a deficit for 2023-24, and that’s the first time we’ve had a deficit since I’ve been here,” Boyne said. “But we’ve done what we need to do to restore our financial sustainability and stability. Our deficit this year will be significantly smaller. We’ve done enough to reduce costs, we now need to focus on growing revenue again.”**
>Boyne said a fair funding system should take into account the future earning potential of a student. At present English students take out loans that are intended to be paid back as soon as they earn enough, which the principal says needs to be part of the debate in Scotland.
>**“I think [free tuition] is the wrong place to start, although understandably that’s where the political discussion finally goes,” he said.**
>**“We should start with looking at the outcomes we want to achieve — what do we want from higher education as a nation? What is it we want our universities to be achieving for the social, economic and collective good? — and then work backwards from that to how we should fund them in order to be able to achieve those outcomes.**
>**“Somewhere in the middle of those two questions is the issue of who benefits from the activity undertaken by higher education — that’s three groups, society at large, employers and the students themselves.”**
>Visa restrictions introduced by the last Conservative government have led to a drop of about 50 per cent in the number of international postgraduate students — the largest source of revenue for UK universities —and free tuition for Scottish students means universities north of the border are facing greater financial pressure than those in England.
>A report by the consultants London Economics showed public costs of Scottish higher education were now five times those in England, while income was 23 per cent lower.
>Brexit meant that European students, who paid no fees under the Scottish system, were faced with paying up to £20,000 a year, leading to a drop from 3,000 at Aberdeen to “a couple of hundred,” according to Boyne. Meanwhile the Tory ban on foreign students bringing families to Britain had a negative impact on those coming from elsewhere. An inquiry by the Migration Advisory Committee into the UK’s graduate visa scheme was widely interpreted as an attempt to further restrict visas and has discouraged some foreign students from applying this year.
>Boyne is hopeful that the new UK government might revisit the visa issue but doubts any change is imminent. He concedes that the prospect of extra funding from the Scottish government is unlikely, given the current financial pressures, but believes the costs of higher education have to be weighed against the benefits it brings to the nation.
>**He said: “I don’t have the answers to all those questions, but I think it would be useful for the sector and the Scottish government to approach the topic in that way, and frankly, all of us need to stop being so fixated on the fee issue and think about the outcomes and the benefits.”**
Why can’t employers pay a graduate tax rather than the individual? If an employer requires a graduate then why should they not pay for it? That includes the government.
Time to reconsider the Aberdeen University chief
What universities can never rethink is paying their leadership as if they are working for corporations.
George Boyne gets paid £300,000 a year.
Have the universities tried having less avadacdo toast, and less hamas supporting demonstrations?
What they mean is now that all the international students are going elsewhere the uni can’t support itself.
This is what happens when you make education a business.
Similar thing facing England, tuition fee cap hasn’t been indexed to inflation so they get less in real terms every year. The economist had a good article on it last week (basically saying they urgently need to raise the limit). The entire way we fund and pay for higher education is probably going to change massively. Is the amount universities get from the Scottish government indexed or is it similar to down south, less each year for the same expectation?
I’m not saying they should or shouldn’t but there are some things that I think should be considered
Free tuition limits the number of students in full time education to 120,000 ish, that is 20,000-30,000 new students a year, thats not bad its over half of the 17year olds each year. But then it isn’t only 17 year olds trying to go to uni.
I never paid tuition fees, despite this the same amount is taken from my pay as if I had because I took out the student loan like many other students did, it is something almost mandatory for students from a poor background if they can’t stay at home and be supported by their family, so in general it isn’t necessary the poorest free tuition benefits.
There’s edge cases to this such as the people doing coding or finance that moved to London or someone who moved to the US (basically people that left Scotland and are earning a lot of money) they might pay it off quickly so benefit from the smaller but still large loan
I would say the higher repayment threshold benefits Scottish people (especially those from poor backgrounds) more than the free tuition
The unis are using other methods to get more money such as more international students, I had bad experiences and many others did with a certain type of international student who didn’t seem to understand English, increased class sizes and hampered our education.
Maybe higher tuition fees for a better education is worth it.
Even with higher tuition fees I still expect the unis to take a large amount of international students
The head guy at Strathclyde earns more than the prime minister, is this justified if they are saying they need more funds?
I studied in Edinburgh. Edinburgh University owns over 600 buildings, is competing only with the council itself to be the biggest landlord in the city, and pays its top staff upwards of £400k (and footed the presidents £26,000 bill to move his cats from Hong Kong).
I always knew free education was a privilege that my kids won’t be able to enjoy. I’ve seen pals escape poverty that otherwise wouldn’t have had a chance. I will, however, always firmly believe that if these organisations are short on cash, free tuition is NOT the problem.
I’m at this uni, we teach ourselves more than half the time lol.
A university who is struggling with the lack of (super expensive) foreign uni admissions now thinks actually they’d rather the state secured their future. Imagine that.
“Free tuition” isn’t free we do pay for it via general taxation. If the current fees aren’t high enough I am sure they could negotiate it is with the government.
At the end of the day a university education is useful regardless of how you use it. It gives you much more freedom and agency than what you can get at college. Maybe we should see about elevating college graduates to having the same right as university graduates for things like work permits abroad.
As a Scot living in England please don’t do this. Access to free university education is the ultimate levelling up tool and if you remove it you are condemning thousands and thousands of already disadvantaged youngsters to stay in their place.
It clearly benefits society as they will pay higher taxes than they would have without going to Uni. Some people may take the piss and exploit it but no need to throw the whole thing out when some lower level of reform could fix that if need be.
In England you can get a loan for your fees and a maintenance loan of between about £4k and £13.3k. The average price for self catered uni accomodation is probably about £8k so for a lot of people unless you are getting the max grant or your folks have thousands of pounds they don’t know what to do with you are going to need a job. That’s not necessarily a terrible thing but the reality is a kid working 15 hours a week will earn c£4,500 in a university year but that still leaves them with a huge disadvantage in terms of the hours they can spend studying or having a bit of a life. Chances are by the time you add in a bit of travel time it’s will have a much bigger impact than you think.
Added to that someone fully financed by mum and dad will not have the burden of having over £70k of debt hanging over them after 3 years. This will already have scared off a huge number of working class kids from even applying and it will be a burden for those who do. Don’t kid yourself you don’t need to pay it back. Even if you never repay it in full, as many don’t which just makes it more expensive for those who do and the taxpayers too, you will spend 40 years paying a large chunk of your salary back whilst your debt grows and grows. Don’t quote me on this but I don’t think you start paying more than your interest adds until you are earning £50k.
I know you don’t pay huge amounts back initially but that debt mountain just keeps growing and growin
Oh, here we go…
I think the universality is an issue when over 80% of students at the best Scottish universities are middle class or above, and really should be means tested. Other sectors like FE and apprenticeships are completely starved of funds