Insecure, pressurised, over-taxed and debt-ridden - The Ipod Generation
Disclaimer: I shall be focusing on the English education system, and the subsequent local authorities. All images belong to their respective copyright owners.
The above title is taken from The Telegraph, according to its report: “Young people are facing a bleak financial future in which the state will take almost 50p in every £1 they earn, a report claims today.”
It goes onto state; “Making ends meet: the average student is expected to leave university owing nearly £15,000”.
So how did Generation Y: People in the workforce who were born in 1981 or later, end up in this situation?
Student Debt: How higher education turned into commodity.
It is necessary to understand the beginnings of the education system in England and its progression to the present day, notably the shift in economic and social policy in England to see how the current framework manifested.
Between 1600-1100, two schools emerged: Grammar and Song schools.
The ‘Grammar’ schools bore no resemblance to the structure of language, rather these were preparatory in reading and writing Latin.
Schools of song, were merely where Monks and Priests were educated to sing in Cathedral choirs.
From 1100-1500, there was a real progression in education in England (even if it was slanted with a religious angle)
In the 12th century cathedral schools increased in their numbers, and by the 13th century universities began to emerge.
In 1226 in the city of Cambridge, as there were numerous scholars, whom were represented by an official called a chancellor, arranged regular courses of study, and so the University of Cambridge began.
Other universities followed suit; University College which was established in 1249, Balliol in 1260 and Merton in 1264.
During this time, the grip of the church on education was being loosened, as changes begun to take place in school curriculum, as the concept of a more liberal education with the intention of preparation for specialised study in Law, Medicine, and theology.
Within this period the roles of teachers began to be formalised and they were now licensed, rather than appointed. University degrees were licences to teach.
Two of these independent (now referred to as public) schools were: Eton and Winchester.
Winchester college was founded in 1382 by William of Wykeham, Bishop of Winchester, together with New College in the University of Oxford.
Eton college was founded by Henry VI in 1441, and has overseen eighteen prime ministers, Royal families from Asia and Africa have sent their sons there, and Prince William and Harry of Britain’s own Monarchy. Aswell as the socialist George Orwell (Eric Blair).
By the end of the 15th century; in addition to song and grammar schools, newly established independent schools were created. These were separate to the church, and were accessible to those that were able to pay fees.
For the labouring poor education was denied to the majority as only the elite were able to pay fees, and with Eton’s fees as of 2009-10 - £28,851, it would seem this will remain for the meantime.
Ask me my three main priorities for government, and I tell you: education, education, education. - Tony Blair (1997)
As for the current system in Britain, this began in roughly in the second half of the 19th century. It was in 1870 that the Education Act was passed, which allowed for two systems: voluntary denominational schools and non denominational state schools, much like their grammar and public counter parts in that respect. By 1891 with the passing of the Education act, elementary education was in effect free.
There were numerous obstacles in the formation of a national system of free compulsory education.
Of which these included:
- The higher classes of society had no interest in advocating the cultural development of the working classes. On the contrary, the effects of the revolutionary spirit in Europe reinforced conservative attitudes that were certainly not conducive to advocating the development of the critical faculties of the people as a whole. It should be noted, that this attitude was reserved for the lower classes, not those of middle or upper.
- Neither did the vast majority of the working class have any real interest in education, my reasoning behind this was due to several factors: economic, social et al. Child labour was common practice in this period and working-class families were very reluctant to give up the earnings of their children for the benefit of education. The employment of children continued to increase even after 1850. With 2.9 million children in poverty under a Labour government in 2009, it would seem that even in the 21st century the shackles of Britain’s past are still in place.
- The idea of secular education had never been popular during the century. Education had almost exclusively been under the control of the established church. Furthermore, we should not forget the conflict between secular and religious thought that characterised the century, especially the latter half. Given the cultural and religious climate of the century it became obvious that any non denominational system of education would be well nigh impossible. It was only in the 20th century, with the rise of indifference towards religious teaching, that general non denominational schooling became possible.
“Religious schools, however, tend to divide society because, as a result of them, pupils become segregated by denomination or religion. The sectarianism, perhaps unwittingly accepted or encouraged at home, and reinforced at school often leads children to develop a circle of friends predominantly-even if subconsciously-chosen on religious grounds. This sets a pattern which can carry on throughout life and be transmitted to offspring, perpetuating the problem.” - National Secular Society (2002)
University Challenge
In the 20th century ‘red brick universities’ which were universities founded in the major industrial towns in England which achieved university status before World War I. They were predominately focused on sciences/engineering.
Following the end of World War II the Local Education Authorities paid student fees and provided non-mature students with a maintenance grant. Under the Education Act 1962 a national Mandatory Award of student maintenance grant was established, payable by the LEAs to students on most full-time courses.
In 1963, the Robbins Report recommended expansion of the British university system. The universities established after this report are often known as the ‘Plate Glass’ universities.
Taken for granted
In 1944, the Education Act introduces equality of access and educational opportunity for all. Local authorities were empowered “to grant scholarships, bursaries and other allowances…for the purpose of enabling pupils over compulsory school age to take advantage without hardship to themselves or their parents of any educational facilities available to them”
In 1960, the Anderson Committee was set up to consider a system of grants for students. The Committee report stated: “the country is…committed…to a large expansion in the places available in higher education, and it is the function of the awards system to ensure that those qualified to take advantage of these costly facilities are not deterred from doing so”.
The Robbins Committee on higher education stated in 1963: “That courses of higher education should be made available to all those who are qualified by ability and attainment to pursue them, and who wish to do so”.
“Courses of higher education should be available to all those who value them so highly they are prepared to commit resources to them”.
By 1984, the minimum maintenance grant halved to £205. Student Travel Costs Reimbursement abolished (with the exception of Scotland).
As 1985 arrived, the minimum maintenance grant abolished, leaving a ‘fees only’ minimum award. Cabinet Ministers reject student loans as an option for student financial support.
Not content with abolishing the grant, in 1986 Students lost their entitlement to Supplementary Benefit and Unemployment Benefit during Christmas and Easter vacations. The Government also withdrew Housing Benefit for students in halls of residence.
In 1988, Government announce its intention to introduce student loans in White Paper ‘Top-Up Loans for Students’, much to the dismay and anger, the NUS were against this move by the Government (which was Conservative) and condemned decreasing resources to students.
By 1989, the Banks had announced they were pulling out of the loans scheme.
As the university population rose during the 1980s, as those from a working class background had their fees and maintenance paid for them.
By the early 90s, a New system of student financial support came into operation:
- Student Loans introduced to ‘top up’ awards
- All full-time students become ineligible to claim Unemployment Benefit throughout the duration of their course of study
- The vast majority of full-time students become disentitled to Income Support and Housing Benefit
As Oct 1990 approached, the NUS met with the Student Loans Company to express reservations concerning repayment schedule and method of collection.
Faced with the loss of Social Security benefits two students successfully took the Government to court in 1995, over the matter of their intercalation. To amend this embarrassing expose over the erosion of amenities for students the Government decides to introduce regulations, that ensure that if a student is on holiday (for example the summer holidays) that they are not eligible to claim benefits.
The Further and Higher Education Acts in 1992 made changes in the funding and administration in higher education within the United Kingdom. The most apparent of these changes was to allow thirty-five polytechnics to become universities.
Consequently in 1993, the Government announced grants to be cut progressively by 10% each year over 3 years from 1994/95 to 1996/97 and loan to be increased to compensate, but the operative difference being a loan must be paid back.
Following an investigation into the future of universities, the July 1997 report of the National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education,chaired by the then Sir Ronald Dearing recommended the ending of universal free higher education, and that students should pay £1,000 towards the cost of their tuition fees, which would be recovered in the form of a graduate tax, however in New Labour’s manifesto of 1997 they state: “The improvement and expansion needed cannot be funded out of general taxation. Our proposals for funding have been made to the Dearing Committee, in line with successful policies abroad”, yet the Evening Standard in 1997 published a list of 50 questions to Tony Blair, weeks before polling began, and in it he states: “Labour has no plans to introduce tuition fees for higher education”.
In 1999,The Secretary of State for Education and Employment, David Blunkett, says ‘top-up’ or differential fees are not on the agenda and outlawed by the Teaching and Higher Education Act.
New labour’s 2001 manifesto goes onto state on page 20: “We will not introduce top-up fees and have legislated to prevent them.”
The irony being in an interview given with a legal magazine, Cherie Blair stated: “The truth is, if I hadn’t had the funding from the state to go to university I would have worked in a shop.”
At the time of the Dearing report, fees were still paid by the government, student grants of up to £1,755 (£2,160 in London) were linked to family income, and a subsidised student loan of £1,685 (£2,085 in London) was available. Instead of following Dearing’s suggestions the Government decided to replace the grant-based system with the newly formed loan scheme, introduced for students starting in 1998. From 1999, the grant was abolished altogether.
Subsequently, top up fees were raised in 2006 to £3,175, and according to vice chancellors report, as of 2009 they look to increase tuition fees to a whopping £6,500 a year.
This means that far fewer applicants from working class or under privileged backgrounds will attend University, irrespective of the fact that they’re capable, they simply cannot afford to. This is the reality of New Labour’s education.
Sources:
http://www.know-britain.com/general/education_in_england_2.html
http://www.dg.dial.pipex.com/history/text01.shtml
http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/faithschools.html
http://www.cam.ac.uk/univ/history/records.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Etonians#Old_Etonians
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution_of_1848
http://www.winchestercollege.co.uk/
http://www.etoncollege.com/PrimeMinisters.aspx
http://www.guardian.co.uk/gall/0„973821,00.htmlhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/gall/0„973821,00.html
http://www.know-britain.com/general/education_in_england_1.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universities_in_the_United_Kingdom#Funding_history
http://qotd.me/q2007-05-13.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3017042.stm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/may/07/economy-child-poverty-target
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polytechnic_%28United_Kingdom%29
http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=104836§ioncode=26
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/mortarboard/2009/feb/25/universitiesnew-administration
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Further_and_Higher_Education_Act_1992
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_glass_universities
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuition
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-up_fees
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2004/ukpga_20040008_en_5
http://www.channel4.com/fc/quote.jsp?id=73
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-up_fees#Introduction_of_top-up_fees
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6360629.stm
http://hrcouncil.ca/hr-toolkit/HRToolkitGlossary.cfm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4372216.stm
http://www.insolvencyhelpline.co.uk/students/student-financial-support.php
http://www.dg.dial.pipex.com/history/text05.shtml
http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=157931§ioncode=26
http://www.madeinatlantis.com/smartshopping/loans_versus_grants.htm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2005/nov/08/cherieblair.highereducation
