University has always been sold as a gateway: to knowledge, credentials, networks and—eventually—a job. But in 2026, the pitch is under pressure from every direction. Tuition costs keep rising in many countries, entry-level roles are more competitive, and career paths that once looked linear now resemble branching decision trees. At the same time, technology is changing what employers ask for, how quickly skills become outdated, and whether a degree is the best signal of potential.
That tension is exactly what readers are bringing to a live Ask an Expert Q&A with Isabel Berwick, editor of the Financial Times’ Working It section. The question—“is university worth it?”—sounds simple, but it rarely is. In practice, “worth it” depends on far more than whether a degree leads to employment. It’s about timing, debt, subject choice, local labour markets, personal circumstances, and the kind of learning you actually do while you’re there.
In this discussion, the most useful answers are unlikely to be universal. Instead, they tend to cluster around a set of practical frameworks: how to estimate the financial return without pretending the future is predictable; how to evaluate degrees as both education and a platform; and how to think about alternatives—apprenticeships, bootcamps, work-based routes, and self-directed upskilling—without treating them as second-best.
Below is an in-depth look at the issues at the heart of the live conversation, and the questions readers should ask before committing time and money to a degree.
A degree as an investment: the part people calculate, and the part they miss
Most people start by calculating the obvious: tuition fees, living costs, interest on loans, and the opportunity cost of not earning during study. Then they compare that to expected earnings after graduation. This is the classic “return on investment” approach—and it can be helpful, especially when you have reliable data for your country and field.
But the problem is that the most important variables are often the hardest to quantify.
First, there’s the risk of mismatch. A degree can be “worth it” on average, yet still fail to pay off for a specific student if their course doesn’t translate into employable skills, if they graduate into a weak hiring market, or if they don’t build relevant experience during the degree. Two graduates with the same qualification can end up with very different outcomes depending on internships, networking, portfolio quality, and how effectively they position their learning.
Second, there’s the question of time. University is not just a cost; it’s a delay. If you could earn immediately through paid work or training, the comparison isn’t only between salaries—it’s between trajectories. Sometimes the “best” option is the one that gets you into the labour market earlier, even if the starting salary is lower, because it allows you to accumulate experience sooner.
Third, there’s the value of optionality. A degree can open doors that aren’t purely financial: eligibility for certain professions, access to postgraduate study, credibility with employers, and the ability to pivot later. That optionality matters most when you’re uncertain about your long-term direction.
The live Q&A format is particularly suited to this nuance because it invites real-world perspectives rather than generic advice. Readers can ask about their own constraints—debt levels, family responsibilities, geographic mobility, and career goals—and get answers that reflect how these factors interact.
The “average graduate” problem: why outcomes vary so much
When people ask whether university is worth it, they often want a yes-or-no answer. But the evidence in most countries points to a more complicated reality: degrees can be highly valuable, moderately valuable, or disappointing depending on the field and the individual.
Some subjects have clearer labour-market pathways. Medicine, law, teaching, engineering and certain regulated professions often require specific qualifications. In those cases, university isn’t merely an investment—it’s frequently a prerequisite.
Other degrees can still lead to strong careers, but the link between the qualification and the job is less direct. Employers may care less about the title on the diploma and more about demonstrable skills: writing, analysis, coding ability, project management, communication, or domain knowledge. For these degrees, the “worth it” question becomes less about the credential itself and more about what you build around it.
This is where the conversation tends to turn toward strategy. Students who treat university as a platform—using it to develop skills, gain experience, and build a track record—often capture more value than those who treat it as a passive route to a qualification.
What does “value” look like in practice?
Value isn’t only salary. It can include:
1) Employability and job stability
Some degrees provide access to roles with clearer demand. Others may lead to more volatile early-career markets.
2) Skill transferability
A degree that teaches broadly applicable skills—critical thinking, quantitative reasoning, research methods, communication—can remain valuable even as job titles evolve.
3) Network effects
University can create professional connections that last beyond graduation. But networks don’t happen automatically; they’re built through clubs, internships, placements, group projects, and industry events.
4) Credibility with employers
For some hiring processes, a degree functions as a filter. Even when employers say they value skills over credentials, credentials still influence who gets shortlisted.
5) Pathways to further training
Postgraduate study, professional certifications, and specialist training can be easier to access with a degree.
The key point is that “worth it” is multi-dimensional. A degree might not deliver the highest immediate earnings, but still be worth it if it improves long-term prospects, enables a career change, or provides access to a profession you genuinely want.
Debt and the psychology of risk: why financing matters as much as tuition
One of the most overlooked aspects of the university debate is how debt changes decision-making. Even when graduates earn enough to repay loans, the psychological burden of debt can affect choices: whether someone takes a lower-paying job to gain experience, whether they move to a different city, or whether they pursue further study.
In the live Q&A, readers often ask variations of the same question: “What if I’m not sure I’ll get a good job?” The honest answer is that no one can guarantee outcomes. But students can reduce risk by improving the probability that their degree translates into employable capability.
That means asking: What internships are available? How strong are placement outcomes? Are there employer partnerships? Does the course include practical projects? Are there career services that actually connect students to opportunities, or is it mostly generic CV workshops?
It also means being realistic about the financial plan. If debt is high, students may need to be more intentional about choosing a course with clear career pathways, or about building experience early enough that they can compete effectively for internships and graduate roles.
Alternatives to university: not a binary choice
A common misconception is that the options are either “go to university” or “don’t.” In reality, many people combine routes: they start with work-based training, then return to study; they take apprenticeships and later pursue degrees; they use short courses to build skills and then decide whether a longer qualification is necessary.
Apprenticeships and work-based programmes can offer a compelling blend of income and experience. They also teach workplace norms and allow learners to build a portfolio of achievements while earning. However, the quality varies widely, and not all apprenticeships lead to roles with strong progression.
Bootcamps and short technical courses can accelerate skill acquisition, especially in areas like software development, data analytics, design, and digital marketing. But they can also create a false sense of completion if learners don’t build depth, projects, or credibility with employers. In many fields, employers still want evidence: a portfolio, measurable outcomes, and the ability to work in teams.
Self-directed learning can work, but it requires discipline and a way to validate skills. Without structured feedback, learners may struggle to identify gaps.
So the “worth it” question becomes: what combination of learning and experience gives you the best chance of reaching your target role within your constraints?
The unique take: university as a “skills and signalling system,” not just education
A useful way to frame the decision is to treat university as two systems operating at once.
The first is the skills system: the curriculum, the projects, the research, the practice, and the feedback you receive. This is where students can actively shape outcomes by choosing modules that build relevant capabilities, seeking mentorship, and using group work to demonstrate leadership and collaboration.
The second is the signalling system: the credential, the institution brand, and the social proof that comes with completing a degree. Signalling matters because hiring is uncertain. Employers use credentials to reduce risk when they can’t directly observe competence.
The problem arises when students assume the signalling system will compensate for weak skills development. It often won’t. Conversely, students who build strong skills can sometimes overcome weaker signalling—especially in fields where portfolios and experience carry weight.
This framing also explains why the same degree can produce different results across individuals. Two students may attend the same university, but one treats it as a skills-building project and the other treats it as a waiting room for graduation. The credential is the same; the value created is not.
How to decide: a checklist that goes beyond “will I get a job?”
If you’re weighing university, the most actionable approach is to gather information that reduces uncertainty. Consider:
1) Career alignment
What roles are graduates actually getting? Are those roles aligned with what you want to do?
2) Course structure
Does the programme include placements, internships, lab work, industry projects, or dissertation topics connected to real problems?
3) Evidence of outcomes
Look for graduate employment statistics, but also read the fine print: time-to-employment, sector distribution, and whether outcomes differ by demographic groups.
4) Skills you will leave with
Can you list the competencies you’ll have at graduation? If you can’t, that’s a warning sign.
5) Your plan for experience
Where will you