Development of higher education between 'false trials', real questions

Paris, Oct 18 (The Conversation) Education is getting longer, and young people’s educational attainment is rising. But does this really translate into increased skills? And to what extent does this investment

add value to the job market? We shed light on a debate that calls for a rethink of the links between education and employment.

In an article entitled “The false trial of higher education that is too long”, published by The Conversation, the economist Guillaume Allegre returns to the often ideological discourses and the more serious analyses which critically question the development of higher education.

This development has been particularly marked since the beginning of the 21st century ( 2.16 million students, including 1.397 million at university, in 2000, compared to 2.96 million, including 1.6 million at university, in 2023 ), accompanied, over the long term, by massive consequences on entry into life.

In 1986, at the age of 21, around 20 per cent of young people were still in school; this is the case for almost half of them in 2021.

However, for Guillaume Allegre, “in terms of duration, young people are not studying more than before”, and the increase in the number of graduates is explained by the reduction in repeating years.

Diplomas, but what “human capital”? ——————————————- Young people would therefore achieve higher levels of qualification due to school careers less disrupted by repeating. The decline in repeating – in itself positive given the widely demonstrated ineffectiveness of this practice – was the result of a proactive policy.

It was easier to move up to the next class, but no one would dare say that this was because the pupils or students were (quite simply) better… In primary school, we observe a decline in the level of pupils, if we refer to the information notes from the Department of Evaluation, Planning and Performance (DEPP) of the Ministry of National Education, from 2008 to 2020.

In higher education, where there are no standardised measures of what students know, some researchers, noting that “the rules for validating teaching through grade compensation have never been so beneficial in obtaining degrees”, suggest instead “a new tolerance, willingly or unwillingly, of the fragility of students’ academic abilities”.

We can therefore fear that these young people who have repeated fewer years and who study for longer do not, despite a higher level of formal education, have proportionally greater achievements.

Certainly, more young people who go further, fewer young people who are stuck in place by repeating a year, this represents, on average, an increase in their achievements, but at the same level of qualification, they know less, which reflects a decrease in the effectiveness of the school.

There is therefore a gap between the diploma and the “human capital” that it is supposed to certify, which should question economists in their a priori favour for the raising of the level of education.

We can see that while France has as many, if not more, higher education graduates than most of its neighbouring countries, their level of literacy skills – the ability to master writing – is not always much higher than that of less qualified people in other countries.

For example, the level of Dutch people with a secondary school diploma is very close to that of French higher education graduates, according to assessments by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).

However, for Guillaume Allegre, as long as the diploma remains profitable, it is “individually useful”. It is indeed useful for placement: the relative profitability of a diploma, compared to the immediately lower diploma, is incontestable.

So, where does this leitmotif of young people who complain about the situation they find themselves in after their studies come from, along the lines of “With a master’s degree, you have nothing left”? Quite simply because they also consider the “absolute” return on the diploma, the position it allows them to obtain, and there, the downgrading is real and uncontested among economists, compared to what the diploma allowed them to obtain in the not so distant past, in the time of their parents, in particular.

Training to enter into life… ——————————– Beyond this quest for economic return, we must ask ourselves what these students have learned, beyond the often specialised academic knowledge delivered by university lecturer-researchers (this is less true of professionalised courses), in other words, what we learn from attending higher education for a long time and exclusively.

Some studies show that the quest for ever-higher qualifications fosters attitudes among students that can prove dysfunctional when it comes to entering the workforce. Upon entering the job market, they sometimes realise that their qualifications will not necessarily be appreciated in a world where the value of knowledge for knowledge’s sake is not common.

Trained, at least in general university courses, in knowledge whose practical applications are rarely identified, they discover that professional life, in fact, minimises the value of theoretical knowledge in favour of what it allows them to achieve. A real retraining is sometimes necessary to quickly unlearn what it took them a long time to learn.

By contrast, when they combine studies and employment, three-quarters of students believe that paid work during their studies provides skills and networks (even two-thirds when it is unskilled work). According to the Observatory of Student Life, a minority (18 per cent) believe that their work has a negative impact on their studies, with 30 per cent believing it to be a source of stress; but more than 60 per cent believe that this is not the case…

Overall, the surveys conclude that while paid work does not improve academic performance, it does not cause significant disadvantages below a weekly threshold of fifteen to twenty hours. Moreover, it may actually promote professional integration.

Combining training and employment —————————————— We may therefore wonder whether the training of young adults should not strive to combine studies and professional experience as often as possible. In France, the model of the preparatory class student, entirely absorbed by his studies, dominates, and in the background, the conviction that the best our country can offer young people is to remain in school as long as possible.

Guillaume Allegre’s proposal, developed in a 2010 Terra Nova report, is inspired by “study grant” schemes that exist in some northern countries to promote young people’s independence. But let’s remember that these countries select students at the entrance to higher education, and are therefore less exposed than we are to the risk of seeing students end up in traps with no prospects.

Above all, combining work and studies is much less common in our country than in many of our neighbouring countries—Denmark, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, or Germany. One could easily imagine “student jobs” tailored to their schedules, as exists on many American campuses. Students would gain a diversity of experiences—possibly as formative as what they learn in a university setting—and financial independence.

What about the country? Without getting into the controversy over the theme of “the French don’t work enough,” it should be remembered, based in particular on note 110 of the Economic Analysis Council, published in March 2025, “Objective “full employment,” that it is not the annual working hours of workers that distinguishes France, but the low employment rates of both seniors and young people.

While the issue of “senior” work is the subject of much discussion, that of young people’s work, particularly young people who are still studying, is proving to be one of the most taboo: the “right to study” cannot be discussed… knowing that we are talking in this case about the right to full-time study.

If we focus on the training of young adults, promoting the combination of studies and employment would undoubtedly be an interesting avenue, while also being “profitable” in economic terms, which has no reason to be neglected.

Without obviously “putting higher education on trial”, it is necessary to reflect on the training that we must offer these young people who now constitute the majority of the rising generations. (The Conversation) SKS SKS