Rethinking education: Is a university degree still the only path to career success?

Is a university degree still the best route to a career?

For generations, the conventional wisdom was clear: excel in school, attend university, earn a degree, and secure employment. While this pathway remains essential for doctors, engineers, lawyers, and teachers, an important question has emerged: should a university degree be considered a fundamental requirement for everyone?

The global employment landscape reveals troubling signs. Youth unemployment currently stands at 13.4 percent worldwide, affecting approximately 67 million people aged 15 to 24. Even more concerning, 257 million young people—representing 20 percent of the global youth population—find themselves outside employment, education, or training entirely.

The challenge extends beyond unemployment. In the United States, recent college graduates aged 22 to 27 face a 42 percent underemployment rate, meaning more than two in five degree holders work in positions that do not require their qualifications. Meanwhile, data from the Cengage Group shows that 33 percent of 2025 graduates remain unemployed despite active job searching, while 48 percent report feeling unprepared to even apply for entry-level positions in their fields.

The disconnect between education and employment has become increasingly apparent. A 2026 Gallup-Lumina Foundation survey found that nearly 70 percent of employers believe recent college graduates require moderate to extensive additional training to perform effectively in their roles. This gap suggests that academic qualifications alone may not translate directly into workplace readiness.

The fundamental question employers ask

Modern education systems have inadvertently created a structure where degrees sometimes become destinations rather than pathways. Young people invest three to four years, sometimes longer, earning qualifications, then face a workplace reality where employers pose a straightforward question: What can you actually do?

When graduates struggle to provide clear answers, frustration and disappointment follow. The problem is not excessive study—it is insufficient opportunities to apply learned knowledge in practical contexts.

A 2025 study by Quinnipiac University, AACSB, and Deloitte revealed a fundamental misalignment between employer needs and educational priorities. Employers rank job-specific technical abilities as their top concern, while educators place these skills last, instead emphasizing soft skills like critical thinking and problem-solving.

The value of practical learning

What should students possess upon leaving school? Certainly knowledge and solid academic foundations remain important. However, they should also have opportunities to develop practical, applicable skills.

This concept is not novel. Educators, employers, policymakers, and business leaders have discussed employability, practical learning, entrepreneurship, and evolving workplace needs extensively. The challenge lies not in generating ideas but in implementing them effectively.

Schools and universities cannot address this alone. Employers must participate actively in these conversations. Businesses understand workplace expectations, common difficulties new hires encounter, and skills employees wish they had acquired earlier. This experience should inform educational design.

The international dimension adds complexity. Young people increasingly study and work across borders, yet qualification recognition varies between countries. International examining bodies need stronger collaboration to ensure qualifications and skills gain consistent recognition globally.

Balancing academic and practical education

The solution does not require choosing between academic and practical education—both remain necessary. The question centers on whether every student needs identical balance.

Consider allowing students two years to develop genuine practical skills. A student interested in finance could learn bookkeeping, prepare accounts, understand cash flow, and manage budgets. Those drawn to engineering could learn machine operation, tool safety, assembly processes, and problem diagnosis. Others might explore hospitality, interior design, photography, graphic design, digital media, fashion, or automotive skills.

Entrepreneurship could involve taking concepts from initial ideas to market realization—identifying needs, calculating costs, developing products, marketing them, and completing first sales. Technology education should move beyond discussion to hands-on building of useful applications.

The principle is straightforward: less talking about skills, more doing them. Let students handle accounts, use tools, design and build solutions, and solve problems. Allow them to make mistakes and try again. Assess them on demonstrated capabilities.

Government initiatives and policy responses

The UAE has taken concrete steps through Cabinet Resolution No. 1 of 2018, establishing a National Qualifications Framework that mandates quality assurance, accreditation requirements, and standardized qualification levels for technical, vocational, and higher education providers. This framework, managed by the National Qualifications Center, provides regulatory structure for expanding practical education pathways. The UAE TVET market, valued at approximately USD 14 million, serves growing demand across construction, healthcare, hospitality, and technology sectors, supported by national strategies including UAE Vision 2030 and Centennial Plan 2071.

India's National Education Policy 2020 established ambitious targets, aiming for at least 50 percent of students to gain vocational education knowledge, with entrepreneurship and employability skills instruction beginning from Grade 6. The CBSE board has responded by offering over 30 vocational subjects at senior secondary level, including Banking, IT Application, Tourism and Travel, Bakery and Confectionery, and Electrical Technology, with skill modules available from Class 6 onward.

Learning from past innovations

These contemporary initiatives echo earlier educational approaches. Socially Useful Productive Work, introduced into Indian curricula in 1978 by the Ministry of Education following recommendations from the Kothari Commission and Ishwar Bhai Patel Committee, promoted Gandhian values and practical education through hands-on learning.

Reflecting on teaching experiences at Bishop's school in the 1980s, one recalls SUPW with particular fondness. The program included cycle repair, carpentry, and cooking. Most memorable was an instructor who brought an old car to school. Students gathered around it, learning about engines, identifying components, and understanding repair processes.

They were not simply reading about engines in textbooks. They stood beside actual cars, examined real engines, and worked with their hands. Not every student found this engaging, but some discovered natural aptitude. This revealed an important insight: children possess different abilities and interests. Some excel academically, while others demonstrate talent for making, repairing, building, or solving practical problems.

The work was assessed, with marks appearing on examination records. Looking back, this practical education approach may have been underestimated in its value and foresight.

A path forward

Young people leaving school should be able to say: I have qualifications—and I can do this. That combination represents the goal worth pursuing.

Children need opportunities to make and do, not simply read and write. Universities should offer one route to fulfilling careers, not the only route.

The memory of that old car at Bishop's remains vivid: students gathered around the engine, learning each component's function, understanding operation, and discovering repair methods. Some may have forgotten the lessons. Others may have gained something more valuable: they could disassemble an engine, locate faults, fix them, and restore functionality.

The larger question today is not whether we understand what needs changing. Many already do. The question is whether we are prepared to implement those changes.

To educators, policymakers, business leaders, and employers shaping young people's futures—and to world leaders shaping the systems within which they will live and work—the question stands: Are we preparing young people simply to earn qualifications, or are we preparing them to actually apply those qualifications effectively?

Michael Guzder is Executive Vice-President, Education at GEMS