Simon Jenkins (Our universities must now declare their independence, 30 March) says "no one has defined the proper balance of financial responsibility for higher education between government, universities, parents and students". But scholars have established that the benefits from student education accrue roughly equally to the graduate and society. So half of the costs of tuition should be met by students and/or their families, and half by the state.
Income-contingent loans should be available to help poorer students who cannot meet the fee upfront. In this way, individuals contribute to the costs of their education in proportion to the benefits they receive. And the state is able to keep a lid on universities' costs, which – in what is essentially a positional market, where both students and institutions compete for status rather than quality of education – can otherwise spiral out of control, as can clearly be seen in American higher education and, to a lesser extent, with our public schools. Unfortunately, the coalition government has used the fiscal crisis to smuggle in a voucher system for funding teaching which will almost certainly increase the cost of student education to the taxpayer without any compensating benefits in quality, equity or efficiency. From being one of the best regarded systems internationally, Britain, or at least England, will soon have one of the worst.
Professor of higher education policy, Liverpool Hope University
• Simon Jenkins makes a good point in his colourful article on university fees. Students receiving bursaries will have free education because their parents have a low income; they will have no loan to pay back. Students whose parents have a good income will be required to borrow a very large sum and, depending on circumstances, pay back the loan for most of their working lives at what will equate to a 9% income tax. My children are cursed by having me as a father: I am well paid, but very mean. I will never lend them a penny. So they will have to take the full fee loan, and later pay an additional 9% tax for 25 years. Their friends from low-income families will never have to pay this university tax.
The bursaries for students from poor families will be paid for from the money paid in by other students. The figure Simon Jenkins gives is that £1,000 of the £9,000 fee will be assigned for this purpose. So my children, as well as paying an additional tax because I am mean, will also have to pay for the education of students from low-income families.
Iain McLay
Loughton, Essex
• The University and College Union is not surprised that nearly every higher education institution that has so far announced its tuition fees has opted for the full £9,000 or something very close (Editorial, 28 March). As you highlight, this could lead to a £1bn shortfall as the government has to initially stump up the cost of all these higher fees through the loans system. In response, we expect to see two outcomes. First, there could be a hasty relaxation on the rules enabling private providers to offer cheaper degrees. David Willetts has already indicated that he favours "for-profit" institutions, but experience in America shows they need to be subject to heavy regulation, or standards can be compromised. Second, we could see a slashing of student numbers that could spell the end of the opportunity to take a degree for tens of thousands of young people.
Sally Hunt
General secretary, UCU
• Why would a university set a fee of £6,000 and pass up the potential of even one pound of additional income? When selling many high-value goods there are numerous guides for the typical market price that the goods might command. A simple economic choice is possible: sell cheap by seeking a price near the bottom of the range, or ask a price near the upper bound but with the expectation that, through negotiation, a slightly reduced price will be the result – but in all likelihood well above the lowest price in the market. If this holds true in the real world, eg secondhand cars, why would we not expect universities to adopt the same tactic when offered a maximum price to sell their goods?
Queen's University Belfast