3rd level fees

L

liaconn

Registered User
Messages
531
I believe a gang of 3rd level students broke into the Dept of TRANSPORT today to protest against the reintroduction of fees. If that's the level of intelligence and research they bring to their studies, I'm glad we won't be paying for them for much longer.
 

LOL.

I listened to Alan Dukes on Q&A last night and agreed with everything he said on the matter. That lightweight from Labour was useless.
Maybe I'm getting old but Dukes, Spring, Reynolds, even CJ... they all seem so much more intelligent than the current bunch of politicians we have (in all parties).
 

Agreed, Purple. And way back then, politics was a truly wonderful blood sport, without the blood. (I'm not a supporter of blood sports, btw). These days, it's boringly bland.

They were great times.

"Albert, you'll burst the Party!"

"We all need to tighten our belts!"

"On mature recollection!"

"A cancer on the body politic."

"A flawed pedigree."

"Fianna Fáil will not capitulate to the Media!"

"Thanks a million, Big Fella!"

"Out! Out! Out!"

The Arms Crisis, Charlie Haughey's shirts, Dick Spring's bad back, Michael Noonan's vat on shoes, Seán Doherty's phone taps, Night Hawks, Jim Kemmy's bluff call, Thundering Disgraces, The Club of 22, The Country and Western Wing of Fianna Fáil, The Beef Tribunal, Ansbacher, The Mahon Tribunal, The Flood Tribunal, The Moriarty Tribunal, Liam Lawlor, Ray Burke, The Gregory Deal, Sweetie, Eating From Tins of Dog Food, Michael Lowrey, Army Deafness, GUBU, No Fly Zones, Scrap Saturday, Dingle Regatta, Mná na hÉireann, Cozy Cartels and Best Friend Forever, to mention but a few.

Halcyon days!

And these days all we have is a major economic recession and financial crisis.

Christ, lads, where did it all go wrong?
 
Lex Foutish, post of the week nomination!

Ah the memories (what was wrong with Spring's back though?)
 
MissRibena said:
Lex Foutish, post of the week nomination!

Ah the memories (what was wrong with Spring's back though?)
Click to expand...

Hi MissRibena. Poor Dick genuinely suffered from a bad back and was often in severe discomfort with it. Might be rugby related but I'm not sure.
 
Seriously though, where do people stand on free 3rd level education? I think its a luxury the country just can't afford at the moment. I think people from disadvantaged backgrounds should get financial assistance to go on to college, including a grant for books, accommodation if necessary etc. I think students from middle class backgrounds should have to pay their way.
 
+1
 

Funds should be diverted from 3rd level to primary level as it is there that the real chances to break down educational disadvantage lie - by the time kids come to do the leaving cert class barriers and financial advantage/disadvantage have already firmly determined the path of the majority of children.
 


any hopes we have of dragging this country out of the gutter will depend on having a well educated workforce as we will never be able to compete with poland/india/china etc for cheap manufacturing jobs,
i would love to see money diverted directly into educating our youth from baby infants up...and by directly i do not mean increasing teachers salaries.

we have a terrible misconception in this country that we have a good educational system, languages & Science subjects are poorly taught and it is these skills which will be required in an ever globalising world economy that are required.
 

Keyword though is students. I don't agree with expecting middle class families to pay for their kids college education. A tax on students future earnings over a certain threshold is much fairer with the option to pay up front for the wealthier families.
Free third level education has done nothing to improve access for the disadvantaged or standards. I agree that more resources should be put into primary and secondary level especially in subjects like languages, maths and science subjects. The problem with education is that it is like health. The cost of delivering services is too high. Look at how much senior university staff get paid and yet they are still in the papers moaning about funding levels.
 
3rd level fees are a bad idea. Everyone in this country should have equal access to education and the ability to stay in the education system to the limit of their potential. I'm sure the same arguments as we are getting today were trotted out regarding free second level education several decades ago i.e. that it benefits "middle class" people etc. I think there is absolutely no doubt that free second level education has been a huge success and has allowed a lot more people stay within the education system. I would hope that in 20-30 years time, we will be able to look back and say the same about third level education.

Any system that requires people to pay more, even if deferred to when they graduate, or requires people to go through a complex and rigid means testing system will discourage a lot of people. It will also be open to abuse. Students from disadvantaged backgrounds have to overcome enough barriers without adding more. I've no doubt that the reintroduction of fees will mean a dramatic reduction in the number of students from working class or disadvantaged backgrounds attending third level.

Be careful of vested interests at work. It is very much in the interests of the professional classes to re-introduce third level fees. It will mean a return to the old days whereby, their children have a lot less competition for third level places thus meaning that their particular professions can continue to be dominated by certain families whereby sons/daughters take over from their parents - not that different to politics when you think about it, so you can see why many politicians support fees.
 

But there is no evidence to show that no college fees has led to increased participation in third level education amongst white collar families.
On the other side, there is no evidence that the introduction of a student tax leads to people deciding not to attend college. (places actually increased in Australia after the introduction of the tax)
Evidence from Australia and New Zealand shows that it is possible to implement higher fees without impacting on participation levels amongst poorer families especially when there is a fee deferral system in place such as graduate tax.
Your argument about vested interests is strange. Do you think all these professional people meet up and discuss how they can take over the third level system for the benefit for their kids? Nothing has changed since the abolition of fees. Look at the make up of course like law and medicine and see what schools the students come from. Want to guess how many students from inner city schools are in those courses?
 
The official figures going around say that since the abolition of fees, the rate of participation of children from families of skilled manual workers increased from 32% to 50% and from families of unskilled manual workers from 23% to 33%. Speaks for itself.

I dont think that it is valid to use Australia and NZ as examples as they never had the free education system we have. Its easy to say participation rates have not impacted when you are going from a fee paying situation, which essentially barred those from lower income groups, to student loans.

I dont think professional people have formal meetings to discuss this, but I do know that they often moan about how their son/daughter will not be able to follow in their footsteps because people from lower classes are taking university places as well as the usual moan about letting "riff raff" into colleges.
 

It doesn't actually speak for itself because Ireland saw a larger increase in third level participation from 1985 to 1995 when fees were in place so just because participation has increased since then can't be just put down to no fees.
 
Anyone who pays for private primary & secondary education should have to pay for third level IMO
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register