The present university system is hardly an effective way of delivering education - Yorkshire Post Letters

The great expansion in higher education made it a practical and moral necessity to replace grants by loans. Many of us would value education for its own sake for all who wish it, but the present university system is hardly an effective or affordable way of providing this. In reality, the point of a degree is generally to allow access to a more satisfying and higher paid job.

Graduates used to earn substantially more than non-graduates. The error in the argument for expansion was to assume that more people with degrees would mean more people with high salaries. It was equally likely to mean higher qualification requirements for the same job.

The actual virtue of offering more university places was to let potential students decide for themselves whether to make the substantial investment of a degree course, rather than it being largely a matter of the selection process accepting or rejecting them.

Unfortunately, the prevailing notion of ‘fairness’ led to former students being excused repayment of their loan if they remain low earners. If the course proves a bad investment, someone else is likely to pick up the bill. This increases the risk of choices being made which are in the interests of neither the student nor the taxpayer.

This suggests setting a much lower threshold salary for repayments to start and raising or removing the write-off point. Decisions would then be made in the full expectation of needing to repay the loan. Graduate couples would be less likely to follow a ‘two for the price of one’ strategy, with one partner deliberately remaining below the threshold.

The harshness of this approach could be offset to some extent by reducing the interest rate charged to that of inflation. The required rate of repayment would then need to rise sufficiently with salary that student loans are not kept on unnecessarily as a substitute for part of a more expensive mortgage.

There are also reforms which could be made that would reduce the pressure to undertake unnecessary or unrewarding higher education. One would be to protect non-graduates from unreasonable discrimination in employment and promotion. A degree is too expensive to be used simply as a demonstration of pre-existing ability. To be set as a requirement it should add some capability which is important to the job role.

Those embarking on a multi-year degree course should be given the option of a recognised qualification at the end of each year. Students changing their mind, or realising that their final class of degree is unlikely to be as hoped, should be able to get off the treadmill with something to show for their efforts and expenditure to date.

Finally, we need to look at university funding to ensure that UK students are not being asked to subsidise the national research effort.