91茄子

Nearly half of UK public say university participation is too high

YouGov survey finds big differences in support for universities across different political parties

Published on
October 17, 2025
Last updated
October 17, 2025
Source: iStock/Photo Italia LLC

Almost half of the UK public think too many people go to university, according to a new poll.

YouGov asked voters for their views after prime minister Keir Starmer recently scrapped the 50 per cent higher education participation target, saying it was not “right for our times”,?in favour of a new target encompassing apprenticeships as well.

Results show?that 45 per cent of respondents agree that too many young people go to university. Around a quarter (23 per cent) said the current number is about right, and 10 per cent said not enough people go to university.

This varied quite significantly between parties – with 61 per cent of Reform voters, 60 per cent of Tory voters and 55 per cent of Liberal Democrat voters saying too many people go to university.

91茄子

ADVERTISEMENT

In comparison, 38 per cent of Labour and Green voters say the same. Green voters were also four times more likely than Reform voters to say that not enough people attend higher education.

Almost half (46 per cent) of the 4,000 participants in the survey say an apprenticeship is better preparation for the future than university – compared?with only?6 per cent who say it was the other way around. A further 43 per cent say both are equally good preparation.

91茄子

ADVERTISEMENT

Graduates had a better view of higher education than non-graduates but still?only 10 per cent of them thought universities were the better option.

YouGov said these figures, which were taken from a poll in October, are largely the same as when it polled this topic previously in 2022.

Recent political debates on higher education have often centred around whether a university degree helps students get better prospects, and criticism of “Mickey Mouse degrees” which leave them in debt.

According to the survey, the British public have clear views on what types of courses benefit graduates.?Only 22 per cent said performing arts degrees would leave them better off.

91茄子

ADVERTISEMENT

In comparison, 86 per cent say medicine would benefit them in the long term and 83 per cent say the same about law.

This ties in with other findings in the poll, which suggested that the public view future employment as the biggest reason to go to university.

Over a third (35 per cent) say the main point of a degree was to get a good job afterwards. This was compared?with 25 per cent who say it was to gain expertise in a specific subject, 16 per cent to offer opportunities for personal growth and self-discovery and 13 per cent to gain wider critical thinking.

patrick.jack@timeshighereducation.com

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please
or
to read this article.

Related articles

Reader's comments (8)

I guess that's much as we would expect
The way we increase graduate (skilled) employment is to increase the supply of graduates... Economist: What??
The point of Uni has always for most Ss been to get a career/job, right back to the Middle Ages and creation of the U - as covered by the historians of the U (Rashdall, Cobban) whom we cite in our tiny “Universities and Colleges: A Very Short Introduction”.Of course some Ss are there for the intellectual joy of the academic journey (or at least tell their professors that!) and those are the ones who end up with a job/career in academe. All Ss mature and pick-up life-skills, but they would do much of that by moving through the years 18-22 whatever they were doing (short of being left behind as a NEET).
Well David/Paul, I am not sure about this. I expect that is what most Ss would say. The problem with these surveys is defined by that phrase "would say". Most, as far as I know, tend to go because now that is what the age group tends to do and as the majority go, then not to go is to take on the mantle of failure for many at a rather early stage in life. I think that's why many get so stressed and anxious about the whole thing. Now , of course, one might argue that they are all going to University because that's what they do to get a job ultimately, but the process is much more nuanced than that, and the imperative that they all need to go to get a decent job is a part of the thinking. I don't honestly think that comparisons with the medieval period, however historically illuminated and interesting they might prove to be, have much traction or merit in elucidating the mindset and comntemporary life choices of largely young people in the mid 2020s.
I imagine most graduates these days would probably agree. The whole sector has been allowed to balloon and be overtaken by the professional services, HR and a managerial academic class that in the scheme of things just makes life for teaching and research academics burdensome.
The 50% target for participation in Higher Education was never practical. How can one teach academic subjects to such a broad ability range? Inevitably many students would struggle whilst others would not feel challenged enough. The new target that includes apprenticeships is far more sensible and recognises that young people have a broad range of interests and abilities. Academic and vocational studies should be given equal status.
new
Yes it's all very sensible and rational. But how many of our students who attend university or those who wish and aspire to go, whether they are suitable or not, would actually want to take the apprenticeship route, even if it were in their best interests? I suspect that the distinction we face is between those students who believe that they should go to University (because their peers are all going) and those who do not wish to go but don't much wish to do anything much instead and will take a job on the minimum wage or, increasingly, opt for benefits and PIP. I somehow can not seen all those students who opt for largely Arts and Humanities subject (which they perceive as generally easier) are suddenly now deciding to do apprenticeships instead with their labour intensive and skill training element. We are told that students go to University to achieve employment. Well, that maybe how they rationalize it, but research on the adolescence age group (neurological, psychological, and social) points to the over-riding imperative of peers group pressure and conformity in decsion-making for young people. Of course, they will not rationalize that way ('I am going because my mates are all going and I don't want to be excluded'), but that's the main reason. Now, unless the apprenticeship option becomes the route that the student's peer group espouses (not very likely) then it won't make any difference what targets govt sets will it? To make these policies work we would need substantial social engineering and cultural changes, not least with the contemporary understanding of the "work ethic" and the mental health agenda. These surveys really are of very limited value for policy makers and need to be backed up with real social policy research.
It's all pie in the sky isn't it? Costs balloon but provision gets worse and no policy seems to have much traction in improving things

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT