Well, first of all a big thank you to Dr John Green for the blogs he’s written for us over the last three weeks, they’ve been a great insight. There’s certainly plenty to think about for prospective university applicants, their parents and teachers. The relevance of his reflections for those considering applying to Oxbridge are particularly striking.The reports our users generate are specifically designed to help students make the right decisions about what college and course to apply to at Oxford and Cambridge, but that means more than just the age of the college or the male:female ratio on a course! We have full admissions and historical data on EVERY course and EVERY college at both Oxford and Cambridge for the last 10 years. No other site holds all this data in one place and no one else has collated the data in a way that allows users to make meaningful comparisons and examine trends over time, all tailored to their specific choice of metrics.So, how can all that help you, in light of the anticipated changes that Dr Green has outlined how should you create your reports to bear those changes in mind? One of the most striking messages from the blogs was that every student for every degree, regardless of ability, needs to be prepared to fight for their university place and know its value. Let’s look at these two issues in detail:Restricted funding to universities results in reduced places for students -As Dr Green pointed out the number of students achieving top grades at A level is now close to 5 times the number of places at Oxford and Cambridge universities. The level of competition for places is higher than ever before and it stands to reason that the greatest increase in competition will be for the most popular colleges and courses. But our data has thrown up some interesting revelations. For instance, in 2009 only 22% of applicants for Oxford’s joint Classics and English degree gained a place, whereas nearly double that amount gained places on the Classics and Modern Languages or the stand-alone Classics courses (at 48% and 41% respectively). Similarly less than 30% of maths applicants to Christ's, Downing, Magdalene, Pembroke and Robinson eventually gained a place at Cambridge, whereas over 50% got into St Catharine’s, Corpus Christi or Selwyn (or elsewhere via the pooling system). Have you considered looking at related degrees to your current chosen subject or colleges you’d not thought of before? There are plenty of examples of this variance between related degree subjects and colleges but the data the universities present to applicants makes them difficult to see.Fees of £25,000 per year at Oxford and Cambridge are not out of scope within the next few years -One of the near-inevitabilities that Dr Green highlighted is that all students will be paying more for their university education. At Oxford and Cambridge where small tuition groups and close supervision are the norm it is expected that fees will be even higher than the rising costs across the board. As fees rise so does the level of your investment. Students (and, indeed, their parents!) need to be sure that the money they are investing is going to pay dividends. Obviously, an Oxbridge student will be a diligent student, otherwise they wouldn’t be there in the first place but is that all that goes in to achieving a top-class degree? According to our data, last year 87% of Oxford physics students graduated with a 2:1, whilst only about 77% of engineering students achieved the same level of distinction. As Dr Green pointed out, places on graduate employment schemes are getting tougher too - would the knowledge that the degree you’re thinking about applying for is less likely to result in one of the top tier grades that they look for alter your decision to invest?These are just two examples of the way our data can help inform your application to Oxbridge, there are many, many more - limited only by how you chose to compare the data we hold. The decision of where to go to university and what to study is one of the most important in a young person’s life and we at myOxbridgeChoice think that students deserve to be equipped with all the information to make the best decision possible.
During the last government, Lord Browne was tasked with carrying out a review of how tuition fees should be modified as the cap was lifted – when the £3,000 tuition fee was introduced by the last government, a concession was that it would rise by no more than inflation and that it would be capped for five years. A change of government and the influence of the Liberal Democrats in the coalition means that all bets are off for how the fee system will evolve in the wake of Lord Browne’s review. What are the likely outcomes of the review and how can we expect the government to respond? And what is the likely impact on students and universities?
Lord Browne’s review was supported by all parties and he began his work under the previous government. Until the new coalition came in it was speculated that fees would be raised (and a figure of £7,000 was widely heralded). However, it is also expected that there will be some allowances for differentiation by university - universities have differing teacher to student ratios and styles of tuition - and by course. This fed from ongoing student unrest about the fact that fees are the same for arts courses as, for example, clinical medicine courses though their operating costs are wildly different.
Recently, a surprise intervention from the Vince Cable suggested the abolition of fees altogether and directed Lord Browne to consider a graduate tax, whereby graduates would pay a tax proportional to their earnings throughout their life. It is now seemingly supported by David Willetts and David Cameron and Lord Browne has been directed to consider it seriously, although there is some feeling that this concession to Liberal Democrat policy could diminish after the summer recess. However, what this clearly shows is that there are significant funding gaps and there is no clear and fair way forward to meet that gap.
Running parallel to this, is the possibility of privatisation of universities. It is no secret that the top UK universities have long been examining the implications of freeing themselves from the government constraints of quality assessment regimes and reporting. They have made no secret of the fact that they have also evaluated the cost of doing so - the loss of quality-assessed elements of grant funding and a dependence on government funds channelled through metric based criteria are an unwelcome intrusion on universities’ freedom to mange their own affairs and one which they would gladly be rid of. For the top universities government funding now represents possibly 15% or less of their income - therefore they see the opportunity of being self-funding and independent.
Such a move would change the whole structure of UK higher education and make it similar to the US, creating a “premier league” of exclusive, highly selective universities similar to the Ivy League. Top universities would then be free to charge fees to meet their chosen market. Ivy League universities have sufficient endowment funds to ensure that all applicants, irrespective of income can be admitted - for example 50% of students at Harvard are funded by endowment bursaries. However, the UK is nowhere near having the funds to achieve such support - so if the top universities were to privatise the effect on the socio-economic student profile could be very damaging.
It is, I believe, inevitable that fees will continue to be charged to students (either contemporaneously with their study or as a post-study tax), albeit there will be some loan/deferment system in order to protect fair access. It seems inevitable that those fees will be variable and that students at “better” universities will be charged greater fees – probably akin to levels in the US. Thus fee levels of £25,000 per year at some of the better universities are not out of scope within the next few years.
During the last government, Lord Browne was tasked with carrying out a review of how tuition fees should be modified as the cap was lifted – when the £3,000 tuition fee was introduced by the last government, a concession was that it would rise by no more than inflation and that it would be capped for five years. A change of government and the influence of the Liberal Democrats in the coalition means that all bets are off for how the fee system will evolve in the wake of Lord Browne’s review. What are the likely outcomes of the review and how can we expect the government to respond? And what is the likely impact on students and universities?
Lord Browne’s review was supported by all parties and he began his work under the previous government. Until the new coalition came in it was speculated that fees would be raised (and a figure of £7,000 was widely heralded). However, it is also expected that there will be some allowances for differentiation by university - universities have differing teacher to student ratios and styles of tuition - and by course. This fed from ongoing student unrest about the fact that fees are the same for arts courses as, for example, clinical medicine courses though their operating costs are wildly different.
Recently, a surprise intervention from the Vince Cable suggested the abolition of fees altogether and directed Lord Browne to consider a graduate tax, whereby graduates would pay a tax proportional to their earnings throughout their life. It is now seemingly supported by David Willetts and David Cameron and Lord Browne has been directed to consider it seriously, although there is some feeling that this concession to Liberal Democrat policy could diminish after the summer recess. However, what this clearly shoes is that there are significant funding gaps and there is no clear and fair way forward to meet that gap.
Running parallel to this, is the possibility of privatisation of universities. It is no secret that the top UK universities have long been examining the implications of freeing themselves from the government constraints of quality assessment regimes and reporting. They have made no secret of the fact that they have also evaluated the cost of doing so - the loss of quality-assessed elements of grant funding and a dependence on government funds channelled through metric based criteria are an unwelcome intrusion on universities freedom to mange their own affairs and one which they would gladly be rid of. For the top universities government funding now represents possibly 15% or less of their income - therefore they see the opportunity of being self-funding and independent.
Such a move would change the whole structure of UK higher education and make it similar to the US, creating a “premier league” of exclusive, highly selective universities similar to the Ivy League. Top universities would then be free to charge fees to meet their chosen market. Ivy League universities have sufficient endowment funds to ensure that all applicants, irrespective of income can be admitted - for example 50% of students at Harvard are funded by endowment bursaries. However, the UK is nowhere near having the funds to achieve such support - so if the top universities were to privatise the effect on the socio-economic student profile could be very damaging.
It is, I believe, inevitable that fees will continue to be charged to students (either contemporaneously with their study or as a post-study tax), albeit there will be some loan/deferment system in order to protect fair access. It seems inevitable that those fees will be variable and that students at “better” universities will be charged greater fees – probably akin to levels in the US. Thus fee levels of £25,000 per year at some of the better universities are not out of scope within the next few years.
