2013-05-19T20:19:06-04:00 Settit Beyene http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/author/index.php?author=settit-beyene Copyright 2008, HuffingtonPost.com, Inc. HuffingtonPost Blogger Feed for Settit Beyene Good old fashioned elbow grease. tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1944770 2012-10-08T19:00:00-04:00 2012-10-08T08:55:54-04:00

Settit Beyene http://www.huffingtonpost.com/settit-beyene/
Professor Sir Robert Burgess, chair of the Burgess Implementation Steering Group for the HEAR, praises it as a "sophisticated approach to recording the skills and knowledge students gain during their time in higher education." However, the HEAR will not make a discernible difference to graduates when applying for jobs and is an exorbitant waste of money, attempting to 'update' the student experience just for the sake of it.

Advocates of the HEAR scoff at the final degree classification awarded to students on a flimsy bit of paper, barren of all the extracurricular activities they participated in, void of the details of all the societies they have run; fodder for the recycling bin. Proposed instead, is a school-style report, chronicling each extracurricular success and non-academic activity embraced by the student during their tenure at university and deemed appropriate by the awarding university.

The HEAR can be a boon for students who do not achieve the hallowed 2.1 classification, the yardstick many employers use to weed out applicants. Although, this is contingent on how pervasive the HEAR becomes in the job application process. If employers maintain their current classification filter against graduates who have not achieved a 2.1, then the HEAR is rendered less useful. Much less useful, considering the HEAR's primary aim is to combat the "damaging obsession with 'first' and 'upper second' degree classifications," exhibited by 76% of employers.

If the HEAR is intended to boost the prospects of those who do not get the grades, employers will have to cooperate and be willing to consider applications from a wider range of students who may bring other skills to the table, demonstrated in their HEAR. Although, of course, many graduates with a 2.1 or first class degree will also have a similar repertoire of impressive skills and activities, negating the benefits of the HEAR for those who are automatically filtered out of the job application process.

Another question that has to be raised is, which activities will universities deem worthy of publishing on the HEAR? Whilst no one is questioning the eligibility of society positions and volunteering stints, what of the student who takes on a part-time job, to the detriment of extracurricular activities? Students who have to supplement their student loan may end up with a sparser record and ostensibly less to show for their time at university.

Additionally, in order for universities to validate activities, they have to have been completed within the Student Union and activities completed outside of the student bubble and in the local community will go unrecognised. The HEAR may also disadvantage students with more contact hours, who may not be able to make as high a level commitment- does mere participation in a society grant recognition or will more and more students be forced to compete for a handful of society positions?

The Burgess Group is overestimating the value of the HEAR in graduate employability, believing that it will "significantly enhance [...] employability." Students already run societies, volunteer for organisations and participate in a plethora of other activities that contribute to their employability. They don't need a written record to prove it and they will certainly get a chance to inform prospective employers about their achievements whilst filling out long-winded graduate job application forms and during interviews.

The HEAR committee fallaciously believe they are providing better value for money, but are implementing a costly e-record that will drain resources. Initial running costs are estimated to be between £25,000 and £80,000 a year, per institution, funds that could be used to improve the quality of the student experience, not just document it. I have just graduated from university without the HEAR and found that a lack of written record of my extracurricular successes has not nullified the scope of my achievements, nor has it proved a hindrance in the job market.

Rather than trying to make students look more employable, universities could take action to further the prospects of their graduates in a tangible, lasting way. Providing a written record of achievement is all well and good, but will not in any way improve a graduate's journey through the job market.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1442074 2012-04-21T12:15:36-04:00 2012-04-23T04:49:16-04:00

Settit Beyene http://www.huffingtonpost.com/settit-beyene/ year.

NCH has been denigrated for the fact that 'only' one fifth of its intake are state schooled, a statistic that comes as no surprise when the total cost of tuition fees accrue to an exorbitant £54,000. Living costs in London approximate to £7,675 per year, meaning that the entire 'university' experience at NCH would accumulate to £77,025. The college is not able to bestow degrees and NCH students are enrolled on University of London international programmes and thus are not eligible for student loans.

As a previous state school student, I definitely didn't (and still don't) have £77,025 lying about (I might have the £25 though). Many have blasted NCH for not widening access to state school students, but would state school students even want to attend this college? A quick perusal of its website reveals that while the college does offer a tempting package (sadly no mention of Fresher's Week) its domestic and international credentials have yet to be established.

For some there has always been an inveterate bias against newer universities. However, with17 UK institutions in the top 1% of universities worldwide it would be remiss of students to overlook the prestige associated with some of Britain's best educational establishments. Especially when it has been alleged that NCH courses teach the same syllabus as those of the University of London, but charge double the fees.

The brightest students from state school backgrounds will always have the chance to study at many world-class institutions for half the price and what with the rise of tuition fees, many universities are making concerted efforts to improve the academic and social experience. Current universities will also have more experience in the higher education business and can offer unparalleled careers advice, societies, facilities and opportunities that NCH may find hard to emulate.

The college has currently made 91 offers to students, with 66% going to privately-educated students. Grayling, the founder of this college, has attempted to justify the cost of tuition arguing that "The fee is not arbitrary - put it in context of the fact that top American universities charge in the region of $50,000 a year."

In 2012-2013, "top American" university Harvard is charging $38,480 (£23,866) in tuition and costs to the student are scaled according to financial ability; 81% of Harvard's students are on some sort of financial aid compared to 30% of those who will be studying at NCH. The comparison is not one Grayling should have made. Additionally, Harvard and many other top-notch British universities will undoubtedly have better facilities on offer whilst NCH students will have to share resources allocated to University of London students, such as their libraries and other facilities.

NCH would be hard pushed to justify their fees, which are only £5,000 short of Harvard's. Terry Eagleton, Britain's most influential literary theorist, adds "Grayling and his friends are taking advantage of a crumbling university system to rake off money from the rich. As such, they are betraying all those academics that have been fighting the cuts for the sake of their students."

Eminent professors such as Richard Dawkins, Linda Colley and Christopher Ricks will be teaching at NCH, no doubt tempted by a salary that public sector universities could only dream of paying out. Eagleton criticises NCH's advertisement of its "star" professors, arguing that "it's hard to imagine these guys rolling in at 9am and teaching for 12 to 15 hours a week, which is what you do in the real Oxbridge. Prospective students should talk to these professors' travel agents and insist on obtaining photocopies of their diaries."

NCH has offered full scholarships to 8% of its incoming cohort, with a further 22% paying £7,200, "a net fee lower than most other UK universities," they boast. However, these partial scholarships will do little to assuage the financial burden on students, as even with discounted fees, £21,600 in living costs will still need to be paid upfront over the duration of the degree. All discounts are cross-subsidised, meaning that financial reductions derive directly from the fees pool; wealthier students will be offsetting tuition costs for others.

Many academics rightly pronounce the establishment of NCH as a betrayal of the principles of British higher education and it will only perpetuate what has been lauded as the gentrification of humanities degrees. With many students questioning the value of a degree in light of trebled university fees and a dire job market, NCH has become a gateway institution and will accelerate the privatisation of higher education.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1420038 2012-04-12T19:00:00-04:00 2012-06-12T05:12:01-04:00

Settit Beyene http://www.huffingtonpost.com/settit-beyene/
Family holidays further afield will bear the brunt of these exorbitant charges with a family holiday to the USA or Australia eliciting APD charges of £260-£368 respectively. Flying to either of these two destinations also equals a grand total of eight charges and taxes. EasyJet and Ryanair, amongst other travel airlines, have joined forces against this unfair charge (oh the irony) arguing against gloomy ramifications for jobs and the economy.

According to the Office of Budget Responsibility (OBR) the government can hope to accrue £2.8 billion from this tax in 2012/2013, but travel companies and incoming tourism will take a dip, especially during the Olympics. Tourists to our fair island will also be forced to pay extortionate tube prices of up to £8.40/$13.43/€10.07 per day for unlimited tube travel. This in addition to the 'pasty tax,' Congestion Charge and other egregious charges imposed on Londoners and tourists will continue to proliferate London's image as one of the most expensive cities in the world. Now we can't even go abroad without facing heavy charges.

In a time of austerity, where bankers' bonuses and MP's expenses are being scrutinised and disparaged, this unreasonable "tax on tourism" is exploitative and does not bode well for the future of the travel industry. The Holiday Money Report illustrates that cheap fares and transparent costs will be integral in getting us abroad, evidenced by the increasing popularity of budget package holidays.

Britain already pays the highest amount of aviation duty in Europe. The Treasury attempted to justify the tax arguing that "unlike some other European countries, the UK does not levy VAT on domestic flights and aviation fuel is not taxed." Even so, I'd be willing to hazard a guess that the majority of British holiday-makers will not be flying from Edinburgh to Skegness (or anywhere else in the UK). The Telegraph estimates that British travellers face taxes up to 30 times higher than those paid by the rest of Europe and Craig Richmond, chief executive of Peel Airports, wryly notes that "our European competitors will undoubtedly be celebrating this news."

Embarking on a gap year in 2012/2013 means I and countless other itchy-footed Brits will have to deal with increased APD on flights, opaque booking costs and 'administration' fees (EasyJet, Ryanair, I'm looking at you). Despite what Madonna said in the '80s, this year, holidays will not be a time to celebrate.]]>