Higher fees don't mean fewer working class students - look at the UK for proof
Yet the details in the body of the article indicate that the true title should be something like:
Higher but still capped university fees with generous enough loan support does not put off working class students (or so it seems after 2 years of a new system)
I mean, from the article:
In 2011 the UK's governing Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition announced substantial reforms to higher education funding. Following the recommendations of a review into higher education funding commenced by the prior Labour government, the cap on student fees was almost tripled to £9,000 ($16,400) and public funding significantly reduced.The present cap in Australia:
At present in 2014, Australia’s fee cap ranges between A$6,044 and A$10,085 (£3,358 and £5,603), varying with the type of course studied.The Guardian piece itself says:
Readers should be cautioned against drawing too much inference from the UK experience. Alongside generous income-substitution loans, the UK still maintains a fee cap, charges a progressively indexed interest rate only when graduates are earning an income and writes off any unpaid debt after 30 years. An Office for Fair Access was also created to negotiate equitable student access targets with universities and monitor compliance.And Bruce Chapman in Australia thinks fees at top universities will rapidly go up:
''Fees will go up and they will go up quite significantly,'' Professor Chapman, director of policy impact at the Australian National University, said.
''I expect most universities will increase tuition fees to international student fee levels, which are currently about three times higher. The Group of Eight universities will do that pretty quickly.
'Fees will go up and they will go up quite significantly.': Bruce Chapman. Photo: Glenn Hunt
''Past changes to HECS didn't deter students from entering university, but now that there will be a real rate of interest on the debt we are in uncharted waters.''
Professor Chapman said it was plausible the cost of a bachelor of medical science would rise from $24,000 to $120,000 – the fee for international students at the University of Sydney.
''The idea fees will go down anywhere is frankly fantasy land,'' he said.There are a few things I don't really understand:
* Pyne has been arguing that the scheme will mean lots of new university places (80,000 is bandied about, but it seems to be guesswork) available from the lower level universities for "sub degree" courses which may prepare students for higher degrees. But wait a minute - I thought it was a common view amongst the Right that there is too much emphasis on students doing University for the sake of doing University, and that these students would often be better doing more direct occupational training? Or is there some push on now that we want to fully emulate an American system of high school to college to university? (As if the American system is worth emulating.) Next I expect Pyne to be suggesting Rugby scholarships be introduced.
* If you make medical degrees a lot more expensive, don't you risk doctors wanting to increase their fees? Is this part of the reason that the US health system is so expensive?
* The English (see this earlier link) appear to think the Australia system is a great big experiment that will be very interesting to watch. Yes indeed - and one which the Coalition gave us no forewarning would be suddenly undertaken.
* Why not do it via incrementally increasing the cap and monitoring what happens? This is what the Guardian writer actually suggests:
With the exact consequences of fee deregulation hard to predict, incrementally raising the fee cap could offer a period of evaluation. However, with the full package unlikely to get through the Senate unamended, there is a high chance some of the more dubious changes will be throttled back.
1 comment:
In Around the Traps on friday
Post a Comment