Jump to content
minifrenchie

10% tuition cut at Ontario law schools?

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, clevermoose said:

If you are under 24 you will likely get less as it is now based on your parent's income until you are 6 years out of HS (up from 4). Since you likely earn less as a law student than your parents this could have a large impact on your funding. Especially if they make more than 50k a year. When I ran the calculator back in December I was predicted to receive 13,000, that has fallen to 7,000 now. #ThanksDougFord

does this mean that students with a family income of 140K + don't receive any funding? Or does that only apply to undergraduate degrees

Edited by Mandy555

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, BlockedQuebecois said:

I'm all for law students getting fewer grants. I've always found the idea of giving professionals, many of whom will be making >6 figures within a few years of graduation, free government money to be a distasteful. There are people who could actually use government handouts – 1st year associates on Bay aren't one of them. 

If this were the case it would not only defer low-income individuals from pursuing professional programs like law and medicine, there would be a number of other policy implications as well. Higher accrued debt for anyone not making a 6 figure salary out of school would lead to being completely (if not already) priced out of the housing market (once again lining the pockets of landlords and housing corporations). 

All education funds are a societal investment, even the MBA students who may spin out new businesses and/or a high paying job themselves drive up the tax base. More education is also generally correlated with better health outcomes. Why limit grants to generally lower-cost non-professional programs; grants should be income-based regardless of the program. 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Mandy555 said:

does this mean that students with a family income of 140K + don't receive any funding? Or does that only apply to undergraduate degrees

You would get a loan of around 7k but no grants. Depends on how much more than 140k your parents make.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, BlockedQuebecois said:

I don't have an actual opinion on the funding level of OSAP, but in principle, yes. 

Glad we sort of agree then, unfortunately this plan does not balance out the cuts to grants with correlated increases to loans. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, SciLaw said:

If this were the case it would not only defer low-income individuals from pursuing professional programs like law and medicine, there would be a number of other policy implications as well. Higher accrued debt for anyone not making a 6 figure salary out of school would lead to being completely (if not already) priced out of the housing market (once again lining the pockets of landlords and housing corporations). 

All education funds are a societal investment, even the MBA students who may spin out new businesses and/or a high paying job themselves drive up the tax base. More education is also generally correlated with better health outcomes. Why limit grants to generally lower-cost non-professional programs; grants should be income-based regardless of the program. 

 

Again, you're using a sledgehammer on a finishing nail for these problems. If you want to encourage low- and middle-income members of society to purchase housing, you can use different grant structures to do so in a more targeted fashion, and without giving handouts to the top 10% of Candian income earners.

I'm not arguing that grants should be limited to lower-cost non-professional programs. I'm arguing that grants should be tailored to affect the changes we want, and I'm arguing that giving Bay Street lawyers, even the indebted ones, government handouts is not the type of societal change we want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reverting back to the old model will also deter mature students from returning to school (less funding), and all previous income prior to their first year of studies will significantly limit grants (even if the entirety of their previous income was spent on debt, children, etc.).

The other thing that's being lost here are changes to tuition tax credits. When OSAP was revamped to provide more in up front grants ('16/'17), they eliminated tuition tax credits. Now reverting back to the old funding model, there has been no mention of reintroducing these credits. So under the radar, the Ford government didn't just go back a few years to a previous funding model, they found a way to reduce education funding to levels well below the the 2015 model. 

These credits were very helpful to repay education debt upon entering the workforce. Now you will have less upfront funding, less means to pay the debt down, and less time to pay it back in (no more grace period for payments and provincial interest). Next thing you know Ontario will try and charge prime +8% of their portion of student loans (maybe even with a corporate tax cut for all private lenders just because). You shouldn't be gauging students, especially lower income students in an effort to balance the budget. 

All while increasing their own spending limits, lining the pockets of developers, and getting rid of revenue generating programs like the cap and trade that generally redistributed corporate income and credit revenues into social programs. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, BlockedQuebecois said:

Again, you're using a sledgehammer on a finishing nail for these problems. If you want to encourage low- and middle-income members of society to purchase housing, you can use different grant structures to do so in a more targeted fashion, and without giving handouts to the top 10% of Candian income earners.

I'm not arguing that grants should be limited to lower-cost non-professional programs. I'm arguing that grants should be tailored to affect the changes we want, and I'm arguing that giving Bay Street lawyers, even the indebted ones, government handouts is not the type of societal change we want.

Fair point - I agree more with this. The problem is government policy never seems to be developed in a truly tailored and thoughtful fashion. Too many overbroad polices and policy failures in general to count. 

Edited by SciLaw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BlockedQuebecois said:

I really doubt program quality drops in an appreciable way due to a 10% cut in tuition. 

I don't know why that would be doubtful. Western gets about $400 million from tuition fees every year. How would a $40 million cut to their annual budget not affect programming? 😶

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ericontario said:

I don't know why that would be doubtful. Western gets about $400 million from tuition fees every year. How would a $40 million cut to their annual budget not affect programming? 😶

Was Western's programming appreciably worse in 2016, when their funding from tuition fees was 40 million less than it currently is? I wasn't aware that Western has undergone such a marked increase in programming quality over the past two years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BlockedQuebecois said:

Was Western's programming appreciably worse in 2016, when their funding from tuition fees was 40 million less than it currently is? I wasn't aware that Western has undergone such a marked increase in programming quality over the past two years. 

A $40 million drop from current levels is kind of a different situation isn't it? What do you think will be cut if not class offerings, TA numbers, etc.? I doubt the senior admins will all just cut their own pay and find office supply efficiencies to do without the extra money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ericontario said:

A $40 million drop from current levels is kind of a different situation isn't it? What do you think will be cut if not class offerings, TA numbers, etc.? I doubt the senior admins will all just cut their own pay and find office supply efficiencies to do without the extra money.

1

No, they'll likely run a deficit for a few years, stop increasing their endowment each year, and finally increase their international student tuition rates to be in line with the rest of the universities in the province. 

They managed to operate the university just fine two years ago with $40 million less, three years ago with $70 million less, and four years ago with $90 million less. Somehow I think that they will manage to survive this.

Unless your contention is that Western's programming four years ago was actually appreciably worse, I don't think you have a leg to stand on here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, ericontario said:

A $40 million drop from current levels is kind of a different situation isn't it? What do you think will be cut if not class offerings, TA numbers, etc.? I doubt the senior admins will all just cut their own pay and find office supply efficiencies to do without the extra money.

Well, it's on them to figure it out. 

A 10% cut will be very useful for law students. We're looking at $2k - $4k in reimbursements (depending on your school) in addition to opt-outs for some incidental fees. 

Hopefully we get an answer soon. But it does look like we will be eligible based on the fact that news release says all "[OSAP] funding-eligible programs" will get the cut.

https://news.ontario.ca/maesd/en/2019/01/government-for-the-people-to-lower-student-tuition-burden-by-10-per-cent.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, pzabbythesecond said:

I mean, you'll just get a bunch of snarky and angsty professors who didn't get their annual raise on their 200 000+ salary.

This is pretty ridiculous.  A significant majority of law professors in Ontario are not making $200,000 per year.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, ProfReader said:

This is pretty ridiculous.  A significant majority of law professors in Ontario are not making $200,000 per year.  

150k? It's not that ridiculous. It was mostly said tongue in cheek, but no - of all people affected by this shit by Dougie, I have the least amount of sympathy for law profs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The availability of credit (or osap loans/grants) is directly related to the demand raising up the tuition of law school. The 10% discount off the "sticker price" benefits all students.  I am a fan even though it won't impact my situation other than having less money to move between osap and the school.

Freezing tuition = great

Optional save the zebra student fees = wonderful

Seeing @pzabbythesecond freakout because it was doug fords idea = priceless

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, upgrayedd said:

The availability of credit (or osap loans/grants) is directly related to the demand raising up the tuition of law school. The 10% discount off the "sticker price" benefits all students.  I am a fan even though it won't impact my situation other than having less money to move between osap and the school.

Freezing tuition = great

Optional save the zebra student fees = wonderful

Seeing @pzabbythesecond freakout because it was doug fords idea = priceless

As sad as I am that my province is going to shit because of Dougie, I'm happy because Ontario is more likely to kick him to the dumpster next time.

Edited by pzabbythesecond

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, upgrayedd said:

The availability of credit (or osap loans/grants) is directly related to the demand raising up the tuition of law school. The 10% discount off the "sticker price" benefits all students.  I am a fan even though it won't impact my situation other than having less money to move between osap and the school.

Freezing tuition = great

Optional save the zebra student fees = wonderful

Seeing @pzabbythesecond freakout because it was doug fords idea = priceless

This is the issue though - a 10% cut benefits all (including those who are very well off and can absolutely afford the tuition), while reducing grant money for low- to mid-income students. Rich kids save $, the lower-middle class gets less $. Equal but not equality. I knew individuals whose parents were happy to send them to university because tuition of $6,000 was much cheaper than their private school tuition of $20,000. You're telling me they need a 10% reduction? Laughable. 

If you're concerned about tuition prices, why not simply freeze increases for a few years so they decrease relative to inflation? This would also give schools time to adjust. Maybe leave low and middle income grant funding alone. Better outcomes, smarter policy.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, pzabbythesecond said:

As sad as I am that my province is going to shit because of Dougie, I'm happy because Ontario is more likely to kick him to the dumpster next time.

Don't think so

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, pzabbythesecond said:

150k? It's not that ridiculous. It was mostly said tongue in cheek, but no - of all people affected by this shit by Dougie, I have the least amount of sympathy for law profs.

I'm not suggesting that they are deserving of sympathy, but I also haven't heard any of them whining about this policy and how it will affect their salaries, so I'm not sure why it was relevant at all.  In fact, it is very unlikely to affect salaries and would be much more likely to result in a hiring freeze over new faculty members.  And yes, of course, it might've been tongue in cheek, but I didn't think that kind of snarky misinformation was necessary.  As for whether $150 is an accurate estimate, that would probably be the average for a school like Western or Ottawa (with Queen's and Osgoode a bit higher and UofT close to your $200,000 estimate, but Windsor and Lakehead lower).  But there is pretty significant variation between schools and within schools and the sunshine list is available for anyone who wishes to look it up.   

Edited by ProfReader
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, ProfReader said:

I'm not suggesting that they are deserving of sympathy, but I also haven't heard any of them whining about this policy and how it will affect their salaries, so I'm not sure why it was relevant at all.  In fact, it is very unlikely to affect salaries and would be much more likely to result in a hiring freeze over new faculty members.  And yes, of course, it might've been tongue in cheek, but I didn't think that kind of snarky misinformation was necessary.  As for whether $150 is an accurate estimate, that would probably be the average for a school like Western or Ottawa (with Queen's and Osgoode a bit higher and UofT close to your $200,000 estimate, but Windsor and Lakehead lower).  But there is pretty significant variation between schools and within schools and the sunshine list is available for anyone who wishes to look it up.   

Exactly. 

We're going to end up with even more practitioner-taught courses. I know these courses can be useful and there are surely some practitioners who are good teachers, but... the quality is often lower. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • I think you're thinking a little too much. As long as its easy to read and concise, you're good. My friend spelled a firm's name wrong and they still ended up offering him a position. If they want you, they want you. 
    • Nathan Fox LR Encyclopedia (helped me a lot with LR) LSAT Trainer by Mike Kim 
    • When I was studying for the LSAT 1.5 years ago, I took the Kaplan course (in Edmonton) and to be honest, I think it was a waste of my time and money. I've always been the type of student to want structure and need to be held accountable, which is one of the reasons I took the Kaplan course. However, I feel as though I was more productive studying on my own.  Some of the resources I used at Nathan Fox LR Encyclopedia, the LSAT Trainer and 7Sage (for logical games). I purchased tests online and timed myself, again and again. I read one passage of RC before bed every single night and focused my daytime studying on LR and LG.    I have a buddy who did the Oxford Seminars (in Edmonton too), and he didn't like it. I think it really depends on your studying habits and preferences. I was unable to enjoy the Kaplan class because I felt as though I already had a foundation of the basics, which is why going through it in class wasn't helpful. To each their own. Based off of my personal experience, I wouldn't spend that much money on a course when I could spend a couple hundred on books/tests and learn myself just as well.   
    • Thank you for that introduction. This whole discussion is stupid. It's not even stupid in an interesting way, where one person is inviting correction so obviously that it's fun to slap them down. It's just low-grade stupidity that infuses everything said here, and indicts everyone participating in it. I feel stupider myself, as I type this. @OP - Calm the hell down. Seriously. Some anxiety is normal, but anxiety to the point that you're hanging on every ridiculous and unsupportable thing that anyone else has ever said to you about grades is just sad. Every practicing lawyer has had a client like you - someone who asks twelve other people about whatever thing is going on with their legal situation and then needs to have a conversation about whatever that person has just told them, whether it's ignorant, informed, sane, or complete nonsense. Anxiety that drives you to do this isn't healthy. Get basic information, apply common sense, and stop there. In this case, that would lead to the conclusion that no one can offer you any certainty regarding the outcome of job applications you haven't made yet, so just apply to jobs you want and hope for the best. What the hell else could there possibly be? @Everyone Else - Stupid 1Ls are gonna be stupid 1Ls. It's fine to have at least a bit of fun critiquing their anxiety, but there's no need to dig back into every life choice they've made to get to this point. At some point it's just done. @OP Again - Some of the superfluous observations here may be worth thinking about all the same. Your need to over-complicate decision-making isn't doing you any favors. Do as well as you can in your classes, seek the jobs you're interested in, etc. Do your best, see where that gets you, and reevaluate as needed. It isn't necessarily easy. You're in competition with some very talented people at this point. But it is uncomplicated. Stop looking for secrets, codes, and patterns that aren't there. Now everyone go to bed.
    • https://www.ualberta.ca/law/about/news/main-news/2019/may/looking-back   hey all, 0L here admitted to uAlberta for the fall, super excited to start!  I've read on here a lot of mixed reviews about the outgoing dean and the both positive and negative impacts on the program over the last half decade.  I found the above link and it seems like the faculty is on the way up.  Obviously this being an official publication on the website of course it's going to paint a rosy picture.  Could anyone speak to the general attitude among the student body about how the program is faring and if you've noticed any material changes to the quality of the program?  Also any tips about the first few weeks of moving to Edmonton and starting law school would be greatly appreciated! 
×
×
  • Create New...