With much talk about reintroducing student grants in the UK, this article discusses the pros and cons of such an action.
What does it mean for the taxpayer? What does it mean for the student? Have your say...
Since student grants were abolished, there has always been talk of them being reintroduced.
There are those who feel there is a growing gap between the middle classes & the working classes in regard to university education.
Bringing back these grants would hopefully attract more students from working class backgrounds.
Unfortunately, at the moment, for many the university fees are just unattainable, especially for those whose families have a history of debt problems.
Through no fault of their own, they are being denied a good education.
There is also an argument that these grants are the best way to tackle to growing gap between the number of expanding places in universities and the number of student applicants.
Even for those who can afford the fees, or at least get accepted for student loans, the mounting debt at the end of their courses is a big reason why many are choosing to go straight into employment from school or college.
For those who do enroll at universities, the start to their working life usually consists of a minimum debt of £10,000.
What kind of a start is that, we may ask? Then there are those who do not want to see student grants reintroduced.
Many of these are taxpayers who feel their hard-earned money shouldn't be going to fund students' bar-bills.
Some feel that providing grants encourages those who would otherwise have not enrolled, to enjoy 4 years of partying and heavy drinking, with little regard for the degree at the end.
By forcing students to pay out of their own pocket, they are bound to have more motivation and dedication.
Perhaps the answer lies in-between.
The most intriguing solution I have heard is one where the grant is based on the degree being obtained.
Much more refinement is needed, but we can say for certain that the current set-up just isn't working.