Kids at College

[fingerbob]

Thankfully we were in a position to be able to pick up the tab for both for fees and keeping themselves without loading themselves with debt.  It costs roughly £10k per year per student for fees, food, rent, heat, light, transport and books, etc.  With means tested loans they would never have been able to afford it and would be leaving college with a major and expensive bank debt.

I'd have to disagree with that. Not with your choice of providing it, but it is definitely possible to support yourself as a student with the maintenance loan and a part time job at weekends without disrupting your education. What I have found for the most part is that those who are being supported by their parents (other than their fees) just have a lot more money to support their social life.

[Gold]

We have had two children at university, one has finished and got a job.

Thankfully we were in a position to be able to pick up the tab for both for fees and keeping themselves without loading themselves with debt.  It costs roughly £10k per year per student for fees, food, rent, heat, light, transport and books, etc.  With means tested loans they would never have been able to afford it and would be leaving college with a major and expensive bank debt.  Myself and Mrs TYP went to QUB in the late 70s and early 80s and had a free education with sufficient grants to keep ourselves and leaving college debt free so it was our aim for our children.

However, I do object to the fees and value for money.  Our eldest did law at QUB and received 6 hours lectures per week for three years and another 2 hours of tutorials every other week.  The quality of the teaching varied from vary good to downright terrible and there was nothing to be done about it.  Courses were taught so badly that they were radically changed the following year for incoming students.  Degree classification isn't based on actual scores achieved over the last two years, if you managed to get high scores in a number of modules and even if your overall score isn't 70 or greater you can be awarded a first. There is a lot of manipulation of scores to hide poor teaching and little support.  It's hard to see value of around £3.5K per year for 7 hours per week of tuition.  Most of the books had to be bought because of availability.  Anyway with a law degree from QUB getting a job should be a cert, Not.  The jobs in law have been decimated by the recession with many firms laying off qualified solicitors.  To get into the law society institute you must have a Master to give you a training contract and these are in very short supply.  We have moved back to the bad old days where qualifications are not a factor.  Contracts are now being given out to the children of family and friends.  Top qualified law graduates are being beaten to places in the institute by less qualified in the know.  Our law graduate got a job in the call centre for a local bank but has now moved on to accountancy with one of the big four firms.

Our other child is doing medicine at QUB and we are definitely getting value for money.  Same £3.5K per year but getting top teaching for at least 24 hours per week with brilliant facilities.  Hopefully there will be a job at the end even with a class size of 200+ in QUB.

£9K+ per year for tuition at UK colleges is a rip off.  Imagine sending your child to QUB from UK or RoI and finding that you are paying £9K for less than 200 hours of tuition per year for law and many other degrees, around £45 per hour!

Still, every parent wants the best for their children and to give them every opportunity.

The main issue is that a university qualification is still considered to be worthwhile for too many people.  As any employer will tell you, a university degree guarantees nothing, it won't mean you are getting someone with initiative, gumption and sometimes even numerate or literate and certainly not trained for the job.

We need to have a greater emphasis on training in our education system.  We need to adopt the German approach to technical education and apprenticeships.  It has been too handy for governments to educate for public service and financial services but this won't build a sustainable economy.

Your kids are lucky.

I'm saddled with debt for the rest of my life i reckon.

If had chance i wouldnt do it again. I'd of left school and went straight into work in a bank or something and worked my way up best i could--ceiling of earning potential may not be as high as it is for me now but i'd not have  a mountain of debt that i can never see paid off.

As for university, i went to both and i too found the help from lecturers to be little more than non-existant (although to be fair i never asked for too much and got a 2.1 out of the lecture notes and textbooks cramming in the days prior to exams).

The expense for the contact time and standard of teaching was a joke.   

[Milltown Row2]

If my kids are in a position to go to college then I'm sure Mrs Milltown will try and support them, her mum and dad even give her an allowance when at QUB (what da fcuk) Could just picture my dads face if i went to college and asked him for a wage while there!!

Its difficult for kids now heading to college and trying to get a job here afterwards. I never went, was useless at school only liked History and PE both of which would get ya fcuk all so it was the trades for me.

Thing is we have a lot of lads coming to where I teach, they have left school with good enough grades to stay on but have went the trades route knowing that their education will continue for free and they will be well paid by the firms that takes them on.

They will finish with a level 3 qualification and move on to get a HNC and a HND. They can follow that up with a degree should they wish. All the while getting paid and great experience in their job

[trileacman]

College is only really worth it if you go for a good solid degree, i.e. the hard ones to get into. I had a great experience at college, generally well taught, challenging and good job prospects if I'd have kept it up. I didn't go to UU either Ahjayusref. Some jobs realistically do not offer a good chance of employment. Game design for example or ones doing journalism with no flair for the written word. Also from what I hear the engineering courses seem to be just piss, taught irrelevant information which leaves graduates poorly prepared for the working world.

If my kids are in a position to go to college then I'm sure Mrs Milltown will try and support them, her mum and dad even give her an allowance when at QUB (what da fcuk) Could just picture my dads face if i went to college and asked him for a wage while there!!

Its difficult for kids now heading to college and trying to get a job here afterwards. I never went, was useless at school only liked History and PE both of which would get ya fcuk all so it was the trades for me.

Thing is we have a lot of lads coming to where I teach, they have left school with good enough grades to stay on but have went the trades route knowing that their education will continue for free and they will be well paid by the firms that takes them on.

They will finish with a level 3 qualification and move on to get a HNC and a HND. They can follow that up with a degree should they wish. All the while getting paid and great experience in there job

Post of the thread, most success stories I have heard very few start with a college education. Sean Quinn had no degree and look at the empire he built up. Another fella I know left school at 16, went to Omagh tech. He knows trades in shares in London and can sometimes be investing up to 10million a week. Think of all the successful businesses around you at home, I'd say very few started with or now employ a high degree of college graduates.

So why do many people go to college??
For the craic, the drink and the sex. It's that simple.

[Ulick]

Lecturers are indeed responsible for compiling their own assessment results, which at UU are then moderated internally prior to an internal preliminary exam board and which are then moderated by an external examiner prior to a formal Board of Examiners (the external examiner may only moderate a sample of the student work but will usually look at a cross section of high/medium/low standard work and will also usually look at all borderline work to check if it should be marked up or down). The external examiner will attend the Board of Examiners which are chaired by an independent person as well as having representation from the university's exam's department. I very much doubt you will find anything in the minutes which states that staff don't believe most of the marks - I think you'd find the exact opposite in fact. I think you'd also find that the vast majority of external examiners will be very confident in any marks and classifications awarded when they submit their reports.

At a Board of Examiners some border-line classifications can be questioned, discussed and subsequently may be marked up. Where this happens it will usually have been discussed at the preliminary exam board and the request to review the classification will have been presented to the external examiner who will review the student's work and will be able to make an informed decision on what classification the student should receive. This is by no means doctoring the broadsheets (not spreadsheets) to improve staff performance - the indepentant chair, external examiner and exams department representative make sure of that.

Lecturers are not judged on their teaching? Ever heard of the National Student Survey? This is taking a step further next year with the Key Information Set as well (http://www.guardian.co.uk/higher-education-network/blog/2011/aug/12/key-information-set-student-information). I think you'll find that plenty of lecturers are not hitting expected targets and are still not changing the broadsheets.

One thing that stands out to me as a negative practice in the HE sector is the use of postgraduate students being used as lab demonstrators for Year 1 students. I've heard the term "buying out" teaching on numerous occasions - this is where an academic staff member will use their research budget to employ a postgrad student to teach for them which allows the academic to concentrate on research activities - I think there is something very wrong with that - in particular if the post grad is not suitably qualified in the area of study in question or has no interest in the area.

Okay TYP, lets take a look at what you are saying.

are then moderated internally prior to an internal preliminary exam board and which are then moderated by an external examiner prior to a formal Board of Examiners

Firstly, in the vast majority of cases only exam scripts are moderated (both internally and externally) but very very few modules nowadays have an assessment based 100% on an exam with many having no exam at all or as little as 20%. Therefore, no moderation. 

the external examiner may only moderate a sample of the student work but will usually look at a cross section of high/medium/low standard work and will also usually look at all borderline work to check if it should be marked up or down

Okay, lets assume for a minute that an external examiner is minded to moderate work. They take a cross-sample of high/medium/low, borderlines and fails - given there are four borderlines that's probably about 10 or 12 scripts they should look at for each module. If your average School undergraduate programme has 35 modules (excluding those from collaborative programmes such as Foundation Degrees) that's at least 350 scripts an external would have to look at. An external examiner gets paid £3k or £4k plus expenses to come across for a day to do all of this. At least half of that day will be taken up with the actual Exam Board meeting, then there will be chats with staff, students, education committee, breakfast, lunch, coffee breaks. So that will leave him/her about 2 hours (being generous) to look at 350 scripts. That works about at about 30 seconds per script. Now the external won't necessarily know anything about these modules, so he'll have to read module descriptions, read sample answers, scores from previous years. This then leaves him even less time to look at scripts. Then there is coursework? External examiners don't moderate student work, end off. They get paid very well to come over and sit through a few meetings and agree with whatever they are told. There is no incentive on their part to rock the boat, it's a cushy number.

Board of Examiners which are chaired by an independent person as well as having representation from the university's exam's department.

This is a new one on me. This is definitely not the case in QUB or any of the southern universities I had experience off. They are normally chaired by a member of Faculty staff as part of normal admin duties and will be rotated every few years. In one university, I'll not name, I've experienced a chair of the Board who could barely speak English never mind being au fait with rules and regulations.

I very much doubt you will find anything in the minutes which states that staff don't believe most of the marks - I think you'd find the exact opposite in fact.

True, any arguments and disagreements will be aired at the internal meetings, not minuted, in preparation for the formal Exam Board rubber stamp.

I think you'd also find that the vast majority of external examiners will be very confident in any marks and classifications awarded when they submit their reports.

Yes, as I said above, they'll not want to rock the boat of a cushy number. Externals are usually appointed through word of mouth. A external who proves 'difficult', will find it hard to get another one once their term ends.

At a Board of Examiners some border-line classifications can be questioned, discussed and subsequently may be marked up. Where this happens it will usually have been discussed at the preliminary exam board and the request to review the classification will have been presented to the external examiner who will review the student's work and will be able to make an informed decision on what classification the student should receive.

Again as I said, the external will agree with whatever is recommended by the Board. All contentious issues will be worked out beforehand and the external won't necessary know. For example, let's say a modules marks make a jump from 20% of students making 1st or 2.1 to 80% making those grades, the external won't necessarily know this until the information is volunteered to him, which is very unlikely given pressure to hit recommended targets.   

This is by no means doctoring the broadsheets (not spreadsheets) to improve staff performance - the indepentant chair, external examiner and exams department representative make sure of that.

Not my experience but my point is that spreadsheets will be "massaged" long before they get anywhere near an Exam Board, so even if a university had the safeguards you outline, they could (and do) slip through without any of these people knowing.   

Lecturers are not judged on their teaching? Ever heard of the National Student Survey?

The NSS has no bearing on a lecturers job appraisal process. The NSS will gather information on particular courses not particular modules and even then they are open to manipulation. A lecturer is judged primarily on his research output and the extent to which he is contributing to the aims of the School/Faculty/University. Teaching is only a very small part of it and so long as they are meeting university expectations in terms of percentages of 1st and 2.1 no one will give a stuff. Regarding the NSS, the results are dubious for a few reasons. Firstly, the very low number of students who take part. Secondly many departments have "drives" to get students to complete them so they'll encourage particular students to take the survey and I know of at least two university departments who offer "incentives" in the form of iPad competitions, free lunches etc... if they take the time to complete them.

One thing that stands out to me as a negative practice in the HE sector is the use of postgraduate students being used as lab demonstrators for Year 1 students.

Hehe, they should think themselves lucky to get a postgrad, may departments will use final year students (they're cheaper).

[JimStynes]

I think Gs man was joking lads. He went to Jtown himself sure...

[TacadoirArdMhacha]

We have had two children at university, one has finished and got a job.

Thankfully we were in a position to be able to pick up the tab for both for fees and keeping themselves without loading themselves with debt.  It costs roughly £10k per year per student for fees, food, rent, heat, light, transport and books, etc.  With means tested loans they would never have been able to afford it and would be leaving college with a major and expensive bank debt.  Myself and Mrs TYP went to QUB in the late 70s and early 80s and had a free education with sufficient grants to keep ourselves and leaving college debt free so it was our aim for our children.

However, I do object to the fees and value for money.  Our eldest did law at QUB and received 6 hours lectures per week for three years and another 2 hours of tutorials every other week.  The quality of the teaching varied from vary good to downright terrible and there was nothing to be done about it.  Courses were taught so badly that they were radically changed the following year for incoming students.  Degree classification isn't based on actual scores achieved over the last two years, if you managed to get high scores in a number of modules and even if your overall score isn't 70 or greater you can be awarded a first. There is a lot of manipulation of scores to hide poor teaching and little support.  It's hard to see value of around £3.5K per year for 7 hours per week of tuition.  Most of the books had to be bought because of availability.  Anyway with a law degree from QUB getting a job should be a cert, Not.  The jobs in law have been decimated by the recession with many firms laying off qualified solicitors.  To get into the law society institute you must have a Master to give you a training contract and these are in very short supply.  We have moved back to the bad old days where qualifications are not a factor.  Contracts are now being given out to the children of family and friends.  Top qualified law graduates are being beaten to places in the institute by less qualified in the know.  Our law graduate got a job in the call centre for a local bank but has now moved on to accountancy with one of the big four firms.

Our other child is doing medicine at QUB and we are definitely getting value for money.  Same £3.5K per year but getting top teaching for at least 24 hours per week with brilliant facilities.  Hopefully there will be a job at the end even with a class size of 200+ in QUB.

£9K+ per year for tuition at UK colleges is a rip off.  Imagine sending your child to QUB from UK or RoI and finding that you are paying £9K for less than 200 hours of tuition per year for law and many other degrees, around £45 per hour!

Still, every parent wants the best for their children and to give them every opportunity.

The main issue is that a university qualification is still considered to be worthwhile for too many people.  As any employer will tell you, a university degree guarantees nothing, it won't mean you are getting someone with initiative, gumption and sometimes even numerate or literate and certainly not trained for the job.

We need to have a greater emphasis on training in our education system.  We need to adopt the German approach to technical education and apprenticeships.  It has been too handy for governments to educate for public service and financial services but this won't build a sustainable economy.

The bit in bold is sadly true and is utterly disgraceful, serving to undermine the entire principle of the Institute.

[Big Puff]

people should stop looking down they're noses about people who went to U U

[trileacman]

people should stop looking down they're noses about people who went to U U

I deduce by your punctuation you "studied" there and I can tell by your spelling you didn't finish. 

[dodgy umpire]

One of my lecturers (accountancy at Queens) had to be removed from our course half way through term because she was so poor that students complained

[The Gs Man]

Coleraine? Obviously his A'Level results weren't the best.....

Thanks for that mate. He picked Coleraine because he's doing Irish and the course there is much better than Queens. He got an A and 2 Bs by the way. Does that meet with your approval

As I said earlier on in the thread, I was only joking.  Not a very funny joke, but a joke all the same...

[Don Johnson]

people should stop looking down they're noses about people who went to U U

I deduce by your punctuation you "studied" there and I can tell by your spelling you didn't finish. 

[gallsman]

We have had two children at university, one has finished and got a job.

Thankfully we were in a position to be able to pick up the tab for both for fees and keeping themselves without loading themselves with debt.  It costs roughly £10k per year per student for fees, food, rent, heat, light, transport and books, etc.  With means tested loans they would never have been able to afford it and would be leaving college with a major and expensive bank debt.  Myself and Mrs TYP went to QUB in the late 70s and early 80s and had a free education with sufficient grants to keep ourselves and leaving college debt free so it was our aim for our children.

However, I do object to the fees and value for money.  Our eldest did law at QUB and received 6 hours lectures per week for three years and another 2 hours of tutorials every other week.  The quality of the teaching varied from vary good to downright terrible and there was nothing to be done about it.  Courses were taught so badly that they were radically changed the following year for incoming students.  Degree classification isn't based on actual scores achieved over the last two years, if you managed to get high scores in a number of modules and even if your overall score isn't 70 or greater you can be awarded a first. There is a lot of manipulation of scores to hide poor teaching and little support.  It's hard to see value of around £3.5K per year for 7 hours per week of tuition.  Most of the books had to be bought because of availability.  Anyway with a law degree from QUB getting a job should be a cert, Not.  The jobs in law have been decimated by the recession with many firms laying off qualified solicitors.  To get into the law society institute you must have a Master to give you a training contract and these are in very short supply.  We have moved back to the bad old days where qualifications are not a factor.  Contracts are now being given out to the children of family and friends.  Top qualified law graduates are being beaten to places in the institute by less qualified in the know.  Our law graduate got a job in the call centre for a local bank but has now moved on to accountancy with one of the big four firms.

Our other child is doing medicine at QUB and we are definitely getting value for money.  Same £3.5K per year but getting top teaching for at least 24 hours per week with brilliant facilities.  Hopefully there will be a job at the end even with a class size of 200+ in QUB.

£9K+ per year for tuition at UK colleges is a rip off.  Imagine sending your child to QUB from UK or RoI and finding that you are paying £9K for less than 200 hours of tuition per year for law and many other degrees, around £45 per hour!

Still, every parent wants the best for their children and to give them every opportunity.

The main issue is that a university qualification is still considered to be worthwhile for too many people.  As any employer will tell you, a university degree guarantees nothing, it won't mean you are getting someone with initiative, gumption and sometimes even numerate or literate and certainly not trained for the job.

We need to have a greater emphasis on training in our education system.  We need to adopt the German approach to technical education and apprenticeships.  It has been too handy for governments to educate for public service and financial services but this won't build a sustainable economy.

The bit in bold is sadly true and is utterly disgraceful, serving to undermine the entire principle of the Institute.

I went to Rathmore in Belfast. I've no statistics but I believe it would be one of the biggest feeder schools to both QUB and UUJ for Law. I know many, many people who worked their absolute holes off all the way through college, often a Masters as well and are shit out of luck because the family don't know anyone to give them a training contract. One of my friends was in Law with a guy 170th on the waiting list (50 odd places I believe) for the Institute and got in because his da took him on at his firm. This is an absolute disgrace and an outrage and something the Law Society needs to look at very, very thoroughly.

[Milltown Row2]

So it begs the question, why take on so many people in the colleges when there is clearly no f**king work?? Baffles me no end

[tintin25]

Went to Coleraine myself...lethal craic!  Coleraine, along with Magee, will always be looked upon as the lesser of the UU campuses, but it shouldn't be!  My siblings all went there and we all got good grades...was just our first choice for our specific degrees.

Tend to find that people who went to Belfast hung around with the same people, whilst Coleraine gives you the opportunity to meet more.  Also has the best nighclub in the North, bar none!

Also got the chance to play football, the same opportunity wouldn't have been afforded in UUJ or Queens.

All in all, good times in UUC!