There’s a lot of hard selling going on in the UK about getting a degree. Whether it’s universities, government entities, teachers or companies, there’s a new unsaid (and sometimes barefacedly stated) norm that if you want to compete you’ve got to graduate to get ahead.
Overall participation in higher education increased from 3.4% in 1950, to 8.4% in 1970,19.3% in 1990 and 33% in 2000. This reflects changes to education since the 1970s, which have led to it becoming more common for people to undertake higher education and less common for people to have no qualifications.
If the data is anything to go on, individuals with bachelor’s degrees not only make one to two million pounds over the course of their careers, they also accrue a multitude of non-monetary benefits including living longer, having a healthier lifestyle, raising healthier children and having more professional mobility.
I’m not here to endorse or undermine the trajectory of this trend (which began to spike under Tony Blair), I’m more interested in investigating what impact this burgeoning expectation is having on students. Whilst in 1970/71, there were approximately 621,000 graduates, and in 2007/08 there were 2.5 million, by 2017 there were 14 million graduates in the UK, a figure which continues to go up.
Not only is an undergraduate degree now devalued (owing to a crowded market), this trend is compounding disadvantage for those who are not breaking through. In an increasingly competitive global market for professional opportunities (with grade point average seemingly dictating life success from a younger and younger age), is it any wonder we are seeing a rise in the presentation of anxiety, depression and other mental health conditions in younger populations?
Whilst economic advantage is often seen as a compelling advantage for gaining a degree, this correlation does not drill into the specificities of course selection and university choice. These factors –degree designation and institution– have more specific implications for economic outcomes than simply entering higher education. Ergo, premium degrees lead to premium graduate jobs (if metrics being measured are simply those of annual earnings). Let’s also not discount the fact that many apprenticeships do not require a degree to enroll in, and provide higher earnings than graduates with multiple degree certifications.
Whilst for those graduates with advantages the repayment of student loans is still manageable, and the investment worthwhile. Many graduates are saddled with debt they could spend a lifetime paying off. Student loan interest rates for 2023-24 are the highest in a decade. At 5.50%, current students may have a harder time paying off their student loan debts within the recommended timeline.
These present trends are forcing students to make degree choices based on employability, rather than interest or aptitude. This means education is seen as an investment, and the decision of what students spend time on is based on what is shown (or believed, rather) to have a return on investment in the marketplace. This results in the end of learning for learning’s sake.
Here’s the hard truth, far less research has gone into monitoring graduate career satisfaction. Professional satisfaction and level of skill does not necessarily go hand in hand with high remuneration (Museum Curators, Cancer Researchers, Social Workers); and neither does trailblazing your way to Vice President of an Investment Bank lead to wellbeing, or a sense of personal reward. Sometimes personal development and professional development are at odds. There’s always a balance between making a living and making a life.
In light of a languishing economic climate (with multi-varied factors at play in the future of employability in the age of AI), perhaps we ought to focus more on outcomes of young people at an individual level of satisfaction, rather than continuing to be preoccupied with meeting targets. When given fuller information about their options, students are more likely than not to choose something that’s a better fit.