University Degree Remains Valuable for Young Britons, Claims Former Minister
David Willetts defends higher education against criticisms, citing significant lifetime earning advantages for graduates.
A university degree continues to offer significant advantages for the UK’s young population, according to David Willetts, a former Conservative minister, despite ongoing debates over the costs and debts associated with higher education.
Willetts, who played a pivotal role in establishing the current system of fees and loans for higher education in England, addressed criticisms from within his own party and beyond, which argue that university education may not always yield a beneficial return on investment.
In a research paper published by the policy institute at King’s College London, Lord Willetts asserts that the financial 'graduate premium' justifies the pursuit of a university education.
He cites data indicating that, after accounting for student loan repayments, a bachelor's degree can increase lifetime earnings by an average of £280,000 for men and £190,000 for women compared to individuals without a degree.
By the age of 31, graduates earn approximately 37% more than their non-graduate peers who hold two or more A-levels, according to his findings.
This earning advantage, part of what is referred to as the graduate premium, tends to grow as graduates advance into middle age, surpassing the earnings increase seen from job-specific vocational qualifications.
The previous Conservative government, under then Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, had been critical of university education, arguing that young people were unfairly burdened by debt and misled into believing university would guarantee lucrative careers.
In this context, the outstanding amount of student loans in England reached £236 billion, with average debts for graduates nearing £48,470.
Willetts criticized these viewpoints, describing them as 'virtue signaling' by a 'graduate edu-sceptic' faction, potentially deterring disadvantaged youth who might benefit most from university education.
He emphasized the importance of not dissuading these students from attending university, citing evidence of its potential to improve living standards and life chances.
Despite a decline in the graduate premium since the financial crisis of 2008, Willetts maintains that graduates still face a higher earnings cap compared to non-graduates.
Additionally, he points out non-financial benefits, such as better physical and mental health, enjoyed by graduates.
Addressing his former colleagues in the Conservative party, Willetts argued against adopting a negative perspective towards higher education, pointing out that governments do not typically question the value of other educational stages.
In his view, the approach to universities should remain consistent with that towards primary and secondary education.
As the universities minister, Willetts advocated for transparency in graduate earnings by university course, a transparency that was leveraged by the last government to target so-called 'Mickey Mouse degrees.' While he supports prospective students having access to data on potential career paths post-graduation, Willetts opposes government interventions in university course offerings, asserting that universities should retain autonomy free from centralized management.
Willetts, who played a pivotal role in establishing the current system of fees and loans for higher education in England, addressed criticisms from within his own party and beyond, which argue that university education may not always yield a beneficial return on investment.
In a research paper published by the policy institute at King’s College London, Lord Willetts asserts that the financial 'graduate premium' justifies the pursuit of a university education.
He cites data indicating that, after accounting for student loan repayments, a bachelor's degree can increase lifetime earnings by an average of £280,000 for men and £190,000 for women compared to individuals without a degree.
By the age of 31, graduates earn approximately 37% more than their non-graduate peers who hold two or more A-levels, according to his findings.
This earning advantage, part of what is referred to as the graduate premium, tends to grow as graduates advance into middle age, surpassing the earnings increase seen from job-specific vocational qualifications.
The previous Conservative government, under then Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, had been critical of university education, arguing that young people were unfairly burdened by debt and misled into believing university would guarantee lucrative careers.
In this context, the outstanding amount of student loans in England reached £236 billion, with average debts for graduates nearing £48,470.
Willetts criticized these viewpoints, describing them as 'virtue signaling' by a 'graduate edu-sceptic' faction, potentially deterring disadvantaged youth who might benefit most from university education.
He emphasized the importance of not dissuading these students from attending university, citing evidence of its potential to improve living standards and life chances.
Despite a decline in the graduate premium since the financial crisis of 2008, Willetts maintains that graduates still face a higher earnings cap compared to non-graduates.
Additionally, he points out non-financial benefits, such as better physical and mental health, enjoyed by graduates.
Addressing his former colleagues in the Conservative party, Willetts argued against adopting a negative perspective towards higher education, pointing out that governments do not typically question the value of other educational stages.
In his view, the approach to universities should remain consistent with that towards primary and secondary education.
As the universities minister, Willetts advocated for transparency in graduate earnings by university course, a transparency that was leveraged by the last government to target so-called 'Mickey Mouse degrees.' While he supports prospective students having access to data on potential career paths post-graduation, Willetts opposes government interventions in university course offerings, asserting that universities should retain autonomy free from centralized management.
