In the year 2014-15 over 42,000 attended third level institutions. Numbers going to university have been steadily increasing; between 1980 and 2004 numbers of secondary school leavers going into higher education increased by 20 per cent to 55 per cent.
The benefits of higher education are clear. Yet it must not be seen as the only option for school leavers. Pat O’Mahony, education and research officer at Education and Training Boards Ireland, has pointed to an Irish ‘obsession’ with going to third level education. Careers guidance in schools focuses primarily on completing the CAO process and getting to the university and course of your choice. Little information is given to students about other ’less academic’ options.
But what about these opportunities? In our economy flooded with often over-qualified graduates struggling to gain entry-level employment, and universities continually increasing student numbers, therefore decreasing student to teacher ratios, questions have to be asked about how to tackle these issues.
The philosophy that education should be accessible for all is a convincing one. Yet it should not be seen as the only route and moreover there should be incentives and understanding of what a degree entails. Students who enter into education with some financial costs will think more carefully about whether it is the right option and what exactly they want to study. Although Trinity can take some praise for its ‘low’ drop-out rate of 7 per cent, this is over 200 students not proceeding to second year and the percentage increases to 13 per cent in some universities.
Almost 25 per cent of students in education-related courses do not proceed to second year in Trinity. To be sceptical, it's little wonder people drop out of college if they don't have enough interest and passion for their course.
Richard Branson has been quoted in The Guardian on the economic effects of too many people going to university, such as the shortage of digital skills in the UK. He says, "Ten years ago it felt as though teenagers in Britain were being told that university was the be all and end all, whereas in reality higher education wasn't of use to many of those paying for it."
He notes apprenticeships and direct training from companies as other options to take and suggested the need for more alternatives to be presented to young people when considering their futures: “It’s not a case of trying to make sure everyone heads off to university. For some people that’s fine, but for a great many, including yours truly, it’s just not the right fit.”
Patrick Prendergast has written on exactly this point in the Irish Independent, arguing that Irish students have begun to see apprenticeships and other training options 'at the bottom of the hierarchy of third level education.' The large numbers going to university pull talented individuals away from skills-based training options. "It's time to bring our higher education system back into balance" he writes.
The most common criticism of any fee or loan system is that this could exclude the most financially disadvantaged, or as Lynne Ruane pointed out in a recent article in The Irish Times, that the least well-off will be forced into debt. Yet a well-structured student loans system, such as those in the UK, would offer grants to such people. In the end, the middle classes are those who end up with the most debt. While I do not in any way advocate increasing fees to the levels of that in the UK, a moderate loans based introduction of fees seems a perfectly suitable solution to the problem of declining standards and not enough funding of third level education. This would leave students with substantial amounts of debt.
Yet they would only begin paying this back after they reached a minimum salary of €26,000 and weekly repayments would average at only €25 a week.
In a way, fees can be seen as students buying stock in education. The evidence is clear that graduates earn significantly more than non-graduates. Jobs website Adzuna analysed 1,000,000 vacancies and reported that graduates could earn up to £500,000 more than non-graduates over a lifetime. Making a financial investment and commitment to a university education should not be a deterrent considering the advantages gained, yet it would allow prospective students to give more thought over whether this was the best pathway to take. Another compelling argument put forward by advocates of the introduction of student fees is that if students pay for education, they then value it more.
The example of Germany is often given as a virtuous model of free education with no graduate fees for either German nationals or foreign students. Yet in the global ranking, the highest German university stands at place 60 and generally they do not perform well. The staff to student ratio at the University of Cologne stands at 69 to 1 and in law and economics courses this rises to 100. Seminar groups may contain up to 50 people and pupils end up having to sit on steps in overcrowded lectures.
Johannes Mehler, a German Erasmus student at Trinity says, “there were over 1000 students registered at the biggest lectures” (in his university in Aachen), and often not enough seats for everyone. He notes that the classes at Trinity are more interactive, there is time for discussion. Thus one must weigh up the advantages of providing a high quality university and academic experience enabled by a student loans system, over the supposed delights of universal free third level education.
The other corresponding argument is that Germany, as the economic power house of the EU, has the resources to provide this. Ireland in contrast is still struggling and the education section cannot afford to continue to deliver high class education without extra financial income.
Students who invest in education expect value for their money, which has not been seen in recent years with drains on resources and increased student numbers. Between 2007 and 2011 undergraduate enrolments in universities in Ireland increased by 11.6 per cent while staff numbers decreased by 7 per cent. A solid and affordable loan system would not exclude anyone from education, but rather provide the resources to improve it.
Princeton, often criticised in the same way as Trinity for its unbalanced intake of so-called ‘privileged’ students, has a solid financial aid system. In 2004 they introduced a new scheme to ‘increase socioeconomic diversity’ and in 2001 became the first university to replace loans with grant aids to students who were financially less well off. Around 60 per cent of students now receive some sort of grant.
Grant Golub, a Princeton student says, “I think Princeton is more or less socioeconomically diverse, and financial aid certainly does help increase that to a certain extent.” Yet he does admit that “students from working class and lower middle class families are under-represented... Princeton could do a better job admitting students who are from the lower end of the wealth spectrum.”
What is clear here, however, is that excuses of exclusion on the grounds of financial difficulties cannot be the only consideration when assessing why a university may not be as diverse as some would hope. Many other factors, perhaps most of all, the inspiration of school students from disadvantaged areas on the possibilities open to them, are important in reaching a more diverse college community.
The mission of TAP to ‘work with students, teachers, families, communities and businesses to widen access and participation at third-level of under-represented groups’ is key to inspiring capable pupils about the opportunities available to them.
The discussion and criticism of student fees needs to take into account that not introducing them will adversely impact the quality of higher level education. Fees will allow the standards to improve; they will not discriminate against anyone and will push potential university applicants to consider their options more carefully.
