What is a degree for?

This blog was kindly authored by Paul D. Sweeney, former Chief Strategy Officer at Unite Group, current author and strategic advisor.

Before deciding whether university is worth the price, it would help to know what is being sold. ‘What is a degree for?’ ought to be a straightforward question – British universities have had several centuries to consider it – yet the answer changes depending on whether you ask a student, a parent, an employer or the university.

A degree is expected to provide knowledge, unlock professions, signal ability to employers, create a network, establish independence, deliver a social life, allow time for exploration and confer status. Somewhere in the package, the student is also expected to become an adult. The prospectus is suitably vague about how this metamorphosis is delivered.

Universities put one price on this bundle and call it ‘the university experience’. Student and parent can support the same purchase while imagining different products: independence and three interesting years for one; professional access and improved earnings for the other. Both can leave the open day delighted, each believing the other has agreed to the same thing.

I avoided the question when I applied to study Engineering. I was good at Maths and Science, Engineering sounded respectable and the adults approved. The admissions process established that I could obtain a place, but nobody established whether I wanted the education. I left after a year. For a while I regarded leaving as failure; in retrospect, it was my first informed decision about the degree.

The numbers are not as helpful as they first seem

The Institute for Fiscal Studies’ 2026 analysis estimated that university increased lifetime pre-tax earnings by around 20 per cent on average after adjusting for attainment and background. After taxes, student loans and study costs, however, it estimated that a quarter of graduates could be financially worse off than if they had not attended.

The 2026 HEPI and Advance HE Student Academic Experience Survey surveyed more than 10,000 full-time undergraduates. 45 per cent rated their course as good or very good value, with teaching quality the strongest driver. University remains valuable on average while leaving ample room for disappointment. An average is useful evidence, but not a prediction for the applicant at the kitchen table with five browser tabs open.

Different purchases need different evidence

Different benefits need different evidence. Professional access needs current accreditation and every recognised route into the work. Learning needs scrutiny of curriculum, teaching and assessment; an employment signal needs evidence from employers; a network needs repeated useful contact, not an alumni logo. Many universities already publish information about teaching, assessment, placements and outcomes. The weakness is inconsistent presentation and a loose connection between claim and evidence. A course-level percentage based on 12 respondents moves by more than eight percentage points when one answer changes. A decimal point would not make it more reliable.

The decision before the application

Schools and colleges should create a decision stage before applicants rank institutions. In it a student and their parent/carer would be supported to each record what university is expected to provide; which benefits are essential; what evidence would show that a course delivers them; and the strongest realistic alternative. They should answer separately before comparing notes.

The aim is not to force agreement but to expose assumptions. If the student is buying independence while the parent believes they are financing professional access, it is useful to discover this before accommodation deposits are due. Two written answers may reveal more than another family tour of a photogenic library.

The comparison must use credible alternatives. ‘I could always get an apprenticeship’ is no more a plan than ‘I will go to a good university’. A real alternative has names, dates, entry requirements, costs and a next step. Compare the degree with the best available option, not imaginary unemployment.

Schools and colleges could run this at the start of guidance, before course search hardens into a shortlist. UCAS could reinforce the sequence in its advice and online journey: test the route first, then search for courses. Universities could answer a common set of questions course by course: what students learn, the amount of direct teaching, the assessment mix, who teaches, placement participation and graduate outcomes. The evidence should show the year, cohort and sample size. That would be more useful than another generic claim and photograph of the library.

The exercise could produce three honest answers: yes, no and not yet. ‘Not yet’ is legitimate when delay is used to test a subject, experience work, improve a qualification or resolve a health or financial constraint. A seventeen-year-old need not know what they want to do for the rest of their life. The application process rewards a clean story about future ambition, even when reverse-engineered from the course choice. Uncertainty is not the problem. Spending three years and a substantial amount of money to avoid investigating it might be.

Universities should welcome this scrutiny. An applicant who knows why a course beats the alternatives is more likely to arrive with realistic expectations and reasons that belong to them. If the comparison leads elsewhere, it may prevent an expensive mismatch. We can ask whether university is worth it only after the applicant has established what they expect it to be worth.