As an example of those costs going to 3rd level, the provost of Trinity is paid €190,000 annually salary.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/trinity-ordered-to-slash-salary-of-provost-2557075.html

Now if only we could find ways to fund 3rd level education…

It’s hardly surprising that most of the third level budget is spent on salaries – what do universities do only teach and do research!

Thats not true I’m from crumlin it went from 3 people from my year 1993 going to college to most of my nephews class of 35 going to college this year in the same school that would not have happened if not for free fees.

That’s all very fine Patricia, but what use is it for people from less advantaged backgrounds to go to a university that has no standing in the world because it is forced to pay its academics a wage that is below that of the better universities? Surely you are not so naive to think that in the 21st century, academics are going to teach for the love of it?

Patricia I have no doubt what you’re saying is true but you’re school maybe an exception. The statistics show those from the lowest socio economic groups are still far less likely to go third level (especially universities). There was an interesting article in the Irish Times last year which addressed the issue http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/education/2010/1109/1224282950460.html

Nick, it is totally unfair to argue that league tables have that much affect on things like employment of people in decent jobs, if that were the case, by your logic, people in America who attend non listed techs would be unable to get a job, as would people in Irish ITs… the fact of the matter is courses which are not relevant should be ditched other courses sponsored to some extent or universities set out on their own… if our colleges are degrading, it could just be internal factors like bad management, poor staff training, etc, because I am sure UCC have had similar cuts and yet climbed the league…

‘free fees has had little effect in encouraging those from disadvantaged backgrounds from going on to third level’ – that is just factually wrong, Dermot

Since free fees were introduced there has been a substantial increase in both the numbers and proportions of people from lower socioeconomic backgrounds going to third level.

First off,
‘The proportion of school leavers progressing to full-time third-level education has risen from an estimated 44 per cent in 1998 to 54 per cent in 2003 (Fitzpatrick Associates and O’Connell, 2005)’
and…
‘The number of full-time students in third level increased from 86,624 to 115,696 from the period 1994 to 2000, and reaching 136,719 by 2006 (data provided by the Department of Education and Science).’

‘According to studies by the Higher Education Authority (HEA) between 1980 and 1992 [prior to the introduction of free fees], the children of all but three social groups out of 11 improved their participation rate in college. The three social groups were the Lower Professional, Salaried Employees, Intermediate Non-Manual workers – all low-to-middle-income PAYE workers. The participation rate of children from the three social groups concerned not only did not improve but worsened from the years 1986 to 1992.

… Then, free fees were introduced for the 1995-6 academic year….

‘According to the study of entrants in 1998 by the HEA ‘Who went to College in 1998′, that trend was reversed and their participation increased further in the years that followed.

According to the HEA in its most recent study of all entrants to third level ‘Who Went to College in 2004′ groups that increased participation rates between 1998 and 2004 included “the Skilled Manual Group almost doubling to a range of 50-60% compared to 32% in 1998. The Semi and Unskilled Socio-Economic Group has improved from 23% to between 33-40% over the same period (Table 3.8).”

(Who Went to College in 2004? A National Survey of New Entrants to Higher Education
By Philip O’Connell (ESRI), David Clancy (Fitzpatrick Associates) and Selina McCoy (ESRI). Published by The Higher Education Authority.)

see: http://www.irisheconomy.ie/index.php/2010/05/23/kevin-denny-the-effect-of-abolishing-university-fees/

@fleetingwhim

Kevin Denny’s paper which you give the link to, states that free fees did not benefit people from lower socio economic backgrounds. That’s exactly what I said! Why are you saying that my statement is factually incorrect if you are linking to an article which emphasises the point that I made?

Why use the term “free fees”? There’s either free tuition or paid tuition. Fees are a cost. The reality is there are fees. They’re called registration fees, but they are already quite high and only part of the costs of going to 3rd level. Student loans would, in fact, provide ready funding to 3rd level institutions, so long as the funding of the loans doesn’t come from the State. The main drawback with the Australian graduate tax (apart from the risk of mass emigration) is that current levels of state funding will have continue until the tax begins to yield sufficient returns…

Free fees have not benefited the less well-off at all, but a means-tested system, although imperfect, will ensure funding for those who need it, while receiving funding from those who can afford it. ?The former president of DCU suggested the Harvard system, or something similar, and I would agree.

You say free fees have not benefited the less well off at all. I beg to differ. I AM the less well off. Free fees mean I can go to college, study, get a qualification and please God a good job. Without free fees I would more than likely end up languishing on the dole for a good portion of my life, being called one of those spongers who isn’t interested, when I am more than interested but the lack of free fees would have been a big barrier for me. Means testing might work to some degree, but there are serious flaws in the means testing that is out there now, such as for grants. Anyone under 23 years old is considered dependent on their parents income, even if they have not lived at home for several years. They are expected to give details of said income, and may lose out on grants because of it. I hardly consider this a fair system and believe it is preventing some who would otherwise attend college from doing so. I think you have a very strange view if you think that Nobody has benefited from the Free fees.

So you say free fees have not benefited the less well off at all. I beg to differ. I AM the less well off. Free fees mean I can go to college, study, get a qualification and please God a good job. Without free fees I would more than likely end up languishing on the dole for a good portion of my life, being called one of those spongers who isn’t interested, when I am more than interested but the lack of free fees would have been a big barrier for me. Means testing might work to some degree, but there are serious flaws in the means testing that is out there now, such as for grants. Anyone under 23 years old is considered dependent on their parents income, even if they have not lived at home for several years. They are expected to give details of said income, and may lose out on grants because of it. I hardly consider this a fair system and believe it is preventing some who would otherwise attend college from doing so. I think you have a very strange view if you think that Nobody has benefited from the Free fees.

Helen, at no point did I say that [N]obody has benefited from free fees. Perhaps I should have stated that they have not benefited the less well-off as a properly assessed means-tested system would.

As for the “old” grant system, it worked for me, inconvenient as it was to apply. Flaws in the grant system (including the living away issue you flagged) do not mean we should scrap it. It means there are flaws that need fixing.

Apart from that, fees are sadly and simply a necessary means of funding third level.

Helen, read my post to Patricia above. A university is only of use to a student if it has standing in the global rankings. As it is, companies are complaining that the standard of math and science in Irish schools is inadequate for the ‘knowledge economy’.
Professors in universities complain that many of the students coming in to college are not capable of analytic thinking and are incapable of writing an essay in standard English.
If we now cut funding to the universities but continue to insist that they take all comers, regardless of educational standard or economic level, you destroy the university. What use is it then to you when you graduate, if your CV states that you graduated from a college that is regarded as sub-standard?
WE ARE LIVING IN A BANKRUPT STATE. Something has to give.

@David. I do agree. There are flaws that need fixing. I am not saying that a means tested fees scheme is the completely wrong thing to do – I certainly feel that if you have the money to pay the fees, then you should pay them. Why should the Government have to pay for everybody, just for these people to complain about Government spending. But what worries me is that things the Government control have a habit of breaking down (such as the Back to School Clothing and Footwear the Government took over this year!) and causing the less well off to suffer. This needs to be addressed first and foremost before we can look into alternative funding for colleges.

@Nick. I completely agree that the standard of the three R’s in this country is generally appaling. The level of competency in basic English language, and simple mathematical equations is a farce (and I am not going to pretend to be perfect. My maths could be 100 times better, and thanks to years of txt spk I am having to re-learn some spelling, grammar and punctuation I learned years ago). Children should be taught well from a young age, and we should have to prove certain competancy before going on to third level, but this is down to a lack of resources and educational supports at Junior and Secondary levels. Means testing or otherwise is not going to change English and Math levels in colleges.

I do however agree, what is the point of trudging through 4 years of college for a degree that most employers are going to consider worthless, because they see the college as worthless.

I think the Government shouldn’t just jump into introducing fees though and damn the consequences. This area should be looked into properly to set the best system in place to support all of Irelands future college hopefulls.

What happens in families like mine. My dad has to pay registration fees for me, my sister and brother. He doesnt make massive amounts as his business is being undercut by a state company. This is very unfair as a person with 1 student is treated the same as a gaurdian of 3.

Registration fees at the current level are the worst of all worlds., and make a nonsense out of the notion of free fees.

Yea but I think from your post you live at home with your parents, I don’t. How am I meant to go full time to college and work to put a roof over my head and pay fees?

Couldnt agree with you more! Payed my way through college for 4 years and at one stage I was surviving on â

They actually rarely do!!

Probably due to rounding down/up of figures. There are a multitude of options. If each option has an additional 0.4% or some other figure below 0.5% (currently it shows 24.13% rounded to 2 decimal places for No, but that is only displayed as 24%, rounded to zero decimal places) I would be pretty confident it would actually add up. Though fair play to you for bothering to add up the figures on the pie chart. What possessed you? :)

Good luck to you & to your brother with your future studies.
I always worked fulltime and studied part time whether as a hospital trained nurse (Ireland) or university studies (Australia). I believe when you have to put in a bigger effort to get there, just to even make it to university after working all day, you work harder and the results you get speak for themself.
I studied in uni here in Oz by the HECS (Higher Education Contribution System) system which back then was v ery fair, you could pay up front and get 25% discount on fees or defer them and when your income reached a certain level each year the money was deducted each fortnight from your pay via tax system, so it was pretty painless.
Today, HECS fees are in the thousands of dollars back when I studied they were in the hundreds of dollars, per subject.
HECS could work in Ireland but only if graduates get jobs when they qualify, otherwise how does the government get the money for fees back??

If you didn’t complete the course you should be able to resume the grant after you complete the year you dropped out of.

@jchizle- I know, but I can’t get the second year grant until I get into first year, which is my current financial battle!

Liam, I can see your point. But, using emotive and illogical comments like “I never knew my education could be restricted because my parents worked hard out of love for me.” doesn’t help the argument. Your education is being restricted because the government doesn’t have the money to subsidise every 350 point student in the country. (No, I’m not suggesting you are one.) There are only two ways go go: 1. restrict entry to the highest point earners to lessen the amount of people going to college, or 2. Charge enough to make the universities self-financing.
The first disadvantages those who don’t get to go to an academically strong school, the second disadvantages those who don’t have the money, regardless of academic prowess. You can talk about a middle way; means tested subsidies, etc., but when all comes to all, one of these two bitter pils will have to be swallowed. Because having (highly paid) peer-respected acadamics is the only way to have universities that are worth going to.

Maintenance grant was cut last year (lowered parents income cut off rates) and now they pushed the distance cut off rates further out for this year.

The fact simply is that families with a tradition of sending their children to college, like my own, will not be able to. Money usually saved to spend on higher education has been spent on other things, like the mortgage. Essentially, the shambolic flip-flops of the various education ministers over the last three years has left us with a false sense of security, and to what avail?

Aengus: Students are not to blame for falling rankings and lower budgets. That would be an absurd assertion. The attested fact that students are failing miserably in numeracy and literacy is a fact of life due in great part to poor teaching practices, lack of in service (re-)training, parental non-involvement in children’s early skills, and the evisceration of disciplinary code in schools.
Lower budgets are due to the country’s fiscal bankruptcly.
If an academic is to be attracted to Ireland, an academic backwater in the real world, s/he had better be offered something to make it worthwhile. If not money what would you suggest?
Enlarging class sizes has no effect on the quality of what? The Hauptman and Nolan paper naturally supports the government position. Like they’re going to diss their paymasters? Get real.

Aengus… class sizes in Irish universities are already at a ridiculous level. I did Arts in UCD for my undergrad and for one of my subjects there were over 700 people in the class in first year. In fact, there were lectures where students had to sit on the steps of theatre L because there weren’t enough seats for them. We can’t keep increasing class sizes.