Active Entries
- 1: i've been up and down
- 2: answer to all answers i can find
- 3: who loves you pretty baby?
- 4: water, water everywhere, and all the boards did shrink
- 5: nothing i can see but you
- 6: ain't no lie baby bye bye bye
- 7: why we lift our voice
- 8: busy doing nothing, working the whole day through
- 9: gulped, swallowed or chewed, still worth a King’s ransom
- 10: where everyone is nicer
Style Credit
- Style: Over The Hills for Bannering by
- Resources: OpenClipart
Expand Cut Tags
No cut tags
no subject
Date: 2009-01-30 12:31 am (UTC)And, where a university is collegiate - ie Oxford and Cambridge - you tend to mention which college you were at rather than or as well as which university. The colleges are all constituent parts of the university, but are also run individually, with idiosyncrasies of their own. (Mine, for instance, was women-only, and had no chapel.) A bit as though the colleges are states and the university is the national government, possibly? But most universities are not collegiate.
I don't think there's much difference in cost to the students, generally, as the universities almost all charge the maximum in tuition fees that the government allows. Though the cost of living in London is higher than in, say, Norwich, which may be important to some. And I believe it's a bit more expensive to go to Oxford or Cambridge, too. But there isn't a significant differential in fees, the way I think there is in the US.
Student loans (for tuition and for living on) are available to families below a certain income level (which I can't remember), and are a reasonable deal, being at a very generous interest rate. It still seems wrong to me, though, since my generation was actually paid to *go* to university, with tuition being free and a grant towards living expenses made by the student's home local council.