Degree Qualification: Global Data and Trends

1What a Qualification Is and Why It Matters

A qualification is a formal record that a person has completed a defined course of learning and met a set standard of knowledge or skill. It is usually issued as a certificate, diploma or degree by an education provider, and it describes what the holder is expected to know and be able to do. In plain words, a qualification is a way of showing to others, in a standard form, that a particular body of learning has been finished and checked. Qualifications exist at many levels, from basic school-leaving certificates to advanced doctoral degrees, and each level signals a different depth and length of study.

Qualifications matter because they give employers, schools and governments a shared language for comparing what people have learned. Without a standard record, a hiring manager would have to test every applicant on every skill, and a college would have to test every applicant's school history from scratch. A qualification compresses that information into a single credential. It can also help a learner plan the next step, since many qualifications are designed to build on one another in a sequence, with each level assuming some of the learning from the level below.

The value of a qualification depends heavily on context. In one job market, a certificate in a specific technical field may be more useful than a general degree, while in another, a broad bachelor's degree may open many doors. Qualifications also differ in how much hands-on practice, theory, examination or project work they include, and that balance affects how well a holder can perform certain tasks. Learners should therefore read a qualification's description carefully rather than assuming that a higher title always means a better fit for their goals.

Global participation in higher education has grown considerably over recent decades. UNESCO reports that global higher education enrolment reached 264 million students, about 2.5 times the level at the turn of the century, and the global gross enrolment ratio rose from 19 percent to 43 percent ⁶. This growth means that a larger share of young people in many countries now pursue some form of post-school qualification, which in turn makes it more important for learners to understand what different credentials represent. The chart below shows how global participation has changed over time.

Consider a hypothetical example. A young person finishes secondary school and is unsure whether to take a two-year technical course, a three-year bachelor program or a short vocational certificate. Each option leads to a different kind of qualification with a different length, cost and focus. The learner might compare course descriptions, ask current workers in the field which credentials they hold, and check whether the qualification fits the job they hope to do. This kind of careful comparison is often more useful than simply choosing the highest level available.

Another hypothetical example involves an adult who left school early and now wants to return to study while working. Many systems offer qualifications at intermediate levels that can be completed in parts, which allows a learner to earn a credential, pause, and continue later. For such a learner, the existence of a clear ladder of levels can make a long-term plan feel more achievable, because each completed step is a recognizable milestone that can be shown to employers or to a later program.

The ladder of qualifications is a way of picturing these steps. Lower rungs typically represent foundational learning, middle rungs represent specialized or intermediate study, and upper rungs represent advanced and research-oriented study. Moving up the ladder usually requires more time and more demonstrated skill, but it does not guarantee a particular outcome. The diagram that follows this section illustrates the general shape of such a ladder and how the rungs relate to one another.

Finally, it is worth remembering the limits of any single measure. Participation counts and completion totals show scale and direction, but they do not show the quality of teaching, the fit between a course and a learner's needs, or the experience of individual students. A qualification is one piece of information about a person, and it is most useful when read together with other evidence such as experience, portfolios and specific skills demonstrated in practice.

2Levels of Qualification Around the World

Qualification levels organize credentials on a scale that reflects the depth and complexity of learning. Most national systems place basic schooling at the lower end, followed by upper secondary or post-secondary non-tertiary programs, then tertiary programs such as short-cycle diplomas, bachelor's degrees, master's degrees and doctorates. The exact names and structures differ from country to country, but the broad logic is similar: each level builds on the one below and typically assumes more independent study, more specialized knowledge and more responsibility for one's own learning.

Data on the highest level of education adults have reached gives a useful picture of how these levels are distributed. Across the OECD average, among adults aged 25 to 64 in the latest year, 18 percent had less than upper secondary education, 39 percent had completed upper secondary or post-secondary non-tertiary education, and 43 percent had a tertiary qualification ¹. The tertiary group is made up of 7 percent short-cycle tertiary, 20 percent bachelor's or equivalent, 14 percent master's or equivalent and 1 percent doctoral or equivalent ¹. The chart below shows this distribution of highest attainment.

These figures describe the OECD average, which combines many countries with different histories and economies. They should not be read as the picture in any single country, and they do not describe the rest of the world, where levels of attainment can be quite different. The OECD figures are most useful for seeing how a typical member country is structured rather than for drawing conclusions about any particular place.

Short-cycle tertiary qualifications are shorter, more practical programs that sit within the tertiary level. They often prepare learners for specific technical or professional roles and can be a route into further study. Bachelor's or equivalent qualifications are the most common tertiary credential in many systems and usually take about three to four years of full-time study, depending on the country. Master's and doctoral qualifications are more specialized and generally require demonstrated independent work, such as a dissertation or research project.

The second chart that follows this section breaks tertiary qualifications into these types, helping readers see which kinds of credentials make up the tertiary group. The relative size of each type can tell a learner something about the typical pathways in a system. For example, a large share of short-cycle programs can suggest that a system offers many practical routes, while a large share of bachelor's programs can suggest a stronger focus on general academic study.

Consider a hypothetical example of a learner in a country where short-cycle programs are widely available. This learner might choose a two-year practical course that leads to a skilled technical role and later decide to add a bachelor's qualification part-time. The level structure helps this learner see that the two steps connect, and that the first credential does not close off the second. Such stepwise planning is one of the practical advantages of a clearly structured system.

Another hypothetical example involves a mid-career worker who already holds an upper secondary certificate and is considering a master's program. Before applying, the worker would need to check the admission requirements of each program, the time commitment, and whether the program allows part-time study. The level of the qualification tells the worker roughly how demanding the program will be, but the details of each program determine whether it fits the worker's life.

Level labels can also cause confusion when people move between systems. A bachelor's degree in one country may not have exactly the same length, content or entry requirements as a bachelor's degree in another. This is one reason that frameworks and international comparison tools exist, which are discussed later in this article. For now, readers should understand that level names are helpful signposts but not perfectly identical measures across all places.

Overall, the level structure is best used as a guide to the broad shape of learning, not as an exact ranking of worth. The OECD data shows that tertiary attainment is a substantial and growing share of adult populations in member countries, but it does not reveal the quality of each program or the specific skills each learner gains. Readers comparing options should look at the content and outcomes of individual programs as well as the level they represent.

3Attainment Across OECD Countries

Across the OECD, attainment among younger adults is a useful indicator of where education systems are heading. Among adults aged 25 to 34 in the latest year, 12 percent had less than upper secondary education, 39 percent had completed upper secondary or post-secondary non-tertiary education, and 49 percent held a tertiary qualification ¹. Because this age group has recently completed schooling, its distribution often reflects the current shape of the system more closely than the distribution for all adults. The chart below shows how this group is distributed across attainment levels.

The share of 25 to 34 year-olds with a tertiary qualification rose from 42 percent ten years earlier to 49 percent in the latest year ¹. The share with only upper secondary or post-secondary non-tertiary education fell from 41 percent ten years earlier to 39 percent in the latest year ¹. These changes show a movement toward tertiary study among younger adults across OECD countries on average. The second chart that follows shows the tertiary share at these two points in time.

Averages hide wide differences. Some OECD countries have much higher tertiary attainment among younger adults than others, and the reasons include differences in population size, economic structure, historical investment in education and the availability of alternative routes such as apprenticeships. The OECD average is useful for seeing the general direction, but readers interested in a specific country should look at that country's own data, which may tell a different story.

Consider a hypothetical example of a country that has expanded its university places quickly. Young people in that country may find that a bachelor's degree is now common among their peers, and some may feel pressure to pursue one even when another route would suit them better. A learner in this situation might ask whether the degree leads to the work they want, whether a shorter program would be enough, and whether an apprenticeship could provide both income and skills.

Another hypothetical example involves a country where vocational and apprenticeship routes remain strong. A young person in such a system might complete an upper secondary vocational qualification and move directly into skilled work, with options to study further later. This learner's path would look different from that of a peer who entered university, yet both could be developing valuable skills. Comparing attainment averages alone would miss this variety.

Rising attainment can also change how employers read qualifications. When a larger share of applicants hold a tertiary credential, employers may use it as a basic filter, which can make other kinds of evidence, such as work experience or specific certifications, more important in some roles. Learners should consider how their chosen qualification will be read in the sectors and locations where they plan to work.

Attainment data also raises questions about the quality and relevance of study. A higher share of graduates does not by itself show that each graduate is well prepared for a particular job, and it does not show that each program delivers the same learning. Readers should look at the content of programs, the views of current professionals and the outcomes that the institution publishes, while recognizing that these sources also have limits.

For learners, the most practical lesson is that a qualification is one part of a broader plan. The attainment figures show that many young adults now hold tertiary credentials, so standing out may depend on the combination of a qualification, experience, language skills and specific abilities. Planning should begin with clear personal goals, and the qualification should be chosen to serve them rather than simply to match a general trend.

4Qualifications Frameworks Worldwide

A qualifications framework is a structured way of arranging qualifications on levels according to what learners know, what they can do and how independently they work. Frameworks give each level a description, so that a certificate, diploma or degree can be placed on a common scale even when it comes from a different institution or a different sector of the education system. In plain terms, a framework is a map that helps people see where a qualification sits relative to others, and what kind of learning it represents.

Cedefop, the European agency that supports vocational education and training, has tracked these frameworks worldwide. Its announcement of the fifth edition of the Global Inventory of Regional and National Qualifications Frameworks notes that volume two brings together 93 national qualifications framework reports from 89 countries, plus four regional qualifications frameworks ⁴. The chart below shows the scale of this inventory and the way frameworks are spread across countries and regions.

These figures describe the reports included in the inventory. They are an indication of how widely frameworks have been developed, but they do not mean that every framework is fully implemented, that every country has the same structure, or that the frameworks are identical in their design. Some frameworks are long established, while others are newer and still being put into practice, so the picture varies considerably.

A framework typically describes each level in terms of learning outcomes, which are statements about what a learner should be able to know, do and take responsibility for. For example, a level description might refer to the ability to apply theory to unfamiliar problems, or to manage a project with limited supervision. These descriptions allow people to compare qualifications on the basis of demonstrated learning rather than only on the basis of titles or study hours.

The diagram that follows this section shows how a framework describes a level, linking knowledge, skills and autonomy into one statement. Readers may find it helpful to see how a single level is built up from several dimensions, because this explains why two qualifications with similar titles can sit at different levels if their demands differ.

Consider a hypothetical example of a learner who finds two qualifications with similar names in different countries. Without a framework, the learner might assume they are equivalent. A framework description may show that one is designed for more independent work and the other for guided practice, which helps the learner understand that the two may serve different purposes. Reading level descriptions can therefore prevent expensive misunderstandings.

Another hypothetical example involves a worker who has gained skills on the job and wants to know which formal qualification best matches that experience. By reading the level descriptions in a framework, the worker can see which level's learning outcomes resemble the skills already held, and can then check with a training provider whether prior learning can be assessed. The framework provides the vocabulary for that conversation, although the decision itself rests with the provider.

Frameworks also support lifelong learning by making it easier to see how a learner can move from one level to the next. When steps are clearly described, learners can plan a route that combines study, work and further study over time. This can be especially useful for adults returning to education, who may have already built significant knowledge and need a clear way to build on it.

Finally, readers should remember that frameworks are tools for description, not guarantees. A level in one framework does not automatically match a level in another, and the way a country uses its framework in practice can differ from the official text. Learners should read the descriptions carefully and check directly with the institution or authority responsible for the qualification they are considering.

5Qualifications Across Borders

Qualifications increasingly cross borders, as students study abroad, workers move for jobs and institutions offer programs to international learners. UNESCO reports that internationally mobile students numbered nearly 6.9 million, up from 2.1 million at the turn of the century, which is 2.7 percent of global enrolment, up from 2.1 percent ⁶. The same report notes that about 9 million students are projected to study abroad by the end of the decade, and that nearly 1 in 10 higher education students in Europe and North America is international ⁶. The chart below shows how the number of mobile students has grown.

The projection of about 9 million students studying abroad by the end of the decade comes from a study that was made before the latest counts were published. It is a projection and not a certainty, and actual movement will depend on many factors, including economic conditions, visa policies, currency movements and the availability of programs. Readers should treat it as one estimate among possible futures rather than as a settled outcome.

The mobility figures describe students who study in a country other than their own, and they are not a count of every person who has ever moved for education or work. They also do not describe the experience of each student, who may face very different costs, language demands and levels of support depending on the destination and their own circumstances.

A key question for internationally mobile learners is how their qualifications will be compared when they seek further study or work abroad. Comparison means that a receiving institution or employer looks at the content, level and length of a foreign qualification and decides how it relates to local standards. This is a matter for each receiving body, and the outcome of such comparisons varies, so learners should not assume that a foreign credential will be treated in any particular way.

The Global Convention on Higher Education, a treaty adopted under UNESCO, addresses this issue at the level of states. Its purpose is to make the assessment of qualifications from other countries fair, transparent and non-discriminatory ⁵. In the latest count, 42 states had ratified the treaty ⁵. Ratification means that a state has formally agreed to be bound by the treaty, but how the treaty is applied in daily admissions and hiring decisions depends on the institutions and laws of each country.

The diagram that follows this section illustrates how a qualification travels from one country to another. It shows the stages a learner might pass through, from the original award to the documents provided, and then to the assessment carried out by the receiving body. Looking at this sequence helps learners see where the decisions are made and what information they may need to prepare.

Consider a hypothetical example of a student who completes a bachelor's degree in one country and wishes to study a master's degree in another. The student would need to find out what documents the new institution requires, how it assesses prior study, and whether additional courses might be expected. The student might also contact the admissions office early, since timing and document requirements vary.

Another hypothetical example involves a professional who trained in one country and plans to work in another. Before taking any step, the professional would want to understand what the destination employer or professional body requires, and whether the original training is read as comparable. This is a complex question, and the answer depends on the field, the destination and the specific rules that apply there, so the professional should seek current guidance from the relevant authorities.

Finally, readers should be cautious about assuming that cross-border mobility automatically brings the same benefits to everyone. Costs, language ability, family responsibilities and local labor markets all shape the outcome. Careful planning, early contact with institutions and realistic expectations are usually more reliable guides than general assumptions about how a qualification will be treated abroad.

6Qualifications in the United States

In the United States, the share of working-age adults holding a credential beyond high school has grown substantially over time. The Lumina Foundation, as reported by Community College Daily, found that attainment rose from 38.1 percent at its first measurement to 54.8 percent in the latest year, a rise of 16.7 percentage points over fifteen years ³. The measure counts degrees, certificates and certifications beyond high school, so it captures a wider range of credentials than a simple degree count. The chart below shows the trend in attainment.

Nearly 48 percent of working-age adults hold an associate degree or higher, a rise of 9.7 percentage points since the first measurement ³. This indicates that a growing share of the population holds two-year or longer credentials, although the figure does not show the field of study, the quality of the program or the labor market outcomes of each holder. Readers should treat the attainment rise as a description of how many people hold credentials, not as evidence about what each credential is worth.

The credentials of value measure is a newer way of looking at this question. It counts labor force participants aged 25 to 64 whose post-high-school credential leads to earnings at least 15 percent above the national median annual pay of a high school graduate, and 43.6 percent meet this standard ³. This measure is designed to focus attention on credentials that are associated with higher earnings, rather than on credentials alone. The second chart that follows shows the credentials of value figure alongside the broader measure.

The gap between these two measures is itself informative. A large share of holders of post-high-school credentials may not reach the earnings threshold, which suggests that the choice of field, program and institution can matter a great deal. Learners considering a credential should look closely at what the credential is linked to, and should not assume that any credential will automatically meet a high earnings standard.

Consider a hypothetical example of an adult who is weighing a short certificate in a technical field against a longer associate degree. The adult might ask which credential is more likely to lead to the kind of work they want, how long each takes, and what the local job market requires. The credentials of value idea encourages this kind of question, since it draws attention to the link between a credential and the earnings it supports.

Another hypothetical example involves a parent helping a teenager plan for life after high school. The parent may find that some pathways lead to credentials that are closely tied to local employers, while others are broader. A useful conversation might focus on the teenager's interests, the local job market, the cost of study and whether the credential can be built on later, rather than on the general idea that more credentials are always better.

The attainment data also shows that the United States relies on a wide mix of credential types, including certificates and certifications alongside degrees. This variety gives learners many routes, but it can also make choices harder. Readers should compare the content and outcomes of each option carefully and should consult advisors at the institutions they are considering.

Finally, the U.S. figures describe working-age adults and rely on the methods of one foundation as reported by one publication. They do not represent all credentials held in the country, and they do not show the situation in individual states or communities. Readers interested in a particular area should consult local and official statistics for the details that matter to their decisions.

7Qualifications in Europe

Europe has developed a shared approach to describing qualifications through the European Qualifications Framework, which places learning on a common set of levels that can be compared across national systems. This approach aims to help learners, employers and institutions understand what a qualification represents even when it was awarded in a different country. The framework is one of several tools that European countries use alongside their own national systems, and its purpose is to support comparison rather than to replace local structures.

Eurostat reports that the share of people aged 25 to 34 with tertiary education was 43 percent in the latest year shown, up from 42 percent the year before ². The European Union target is 45 percent of people aged 25 to 34 by the end of the decade, so the latest figure is 2 percentage points below the target ². The chart below compares the tertiary share with this target and shows the distance still to be covered.

The figure is for the European Union as a whole, which includes member states with very different education systems, population structures and economic conditions. Averages across such a group can hide large differences between countries, so readers interested in a specific member state should consult national data. The target is a policy goal set by the Union, and it describes an aim rather than a projection of what will happen.

The eight shared levels of the European framework provide a common way to place qualifications from different countries. Each level is described in terms of learning outcomes, covering knowledge, skills and responsibility. The diagram that follows this section shows the eight levels and how they relate to one another, which helps readers see how national qualifications can be read against a shared scale.

Consider a hypothetical example of a learner who studied for a qualification in one European country and wants to continue in another. The learner might use the shared levels to understand roughly where the original qualification sits and what the receiving institution might expect. The learner would still need to check the specific entry requirements, because a level description is a guide and not a formal decision about admission.

Another hypothetical example involves an employer in one member state who receives an application from a candidate trained elsewhere in the Union. The employer might consult the shared level descriptions to see whether the candidate's training is at a similar level to local roles, while also considering experience and specific skills. This use of a common scale can make the process more transparent, though it does not remove the need for judgment.

The European approach shows how countries with different histories can build common reference points without giving up their own systems. The shared levels make comparison easier, but they do not mean that every qualification is identical, and they do not guarantee that any particular credential will be accepted for a particular purpose. Learners should use the framework as a starting point for questions rather than as a final answer.

Finally, progress toward the target depends on many factors, including demographic change, the availability of places in higher education and the appeal of vocational routes. The gap of 2 percentage points is a measure of distance from a policy goal, and it does not tell readers how quickly or whether the goal will be met. Readers should look at the latest published figures and the policy documents that explain how the target is being pursued.

8Qualifications and Earnings

Earnings are one of the most discussed outcomes of qualifications, but the relationship between them is complex. Average earnings tend to rise with level of education in many countries, yet the size of that rise, the field of study and the local labor market all shape the result. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reports median usual weekly earnings for workers aged 25 and over, and these figures show the pattern clearly for one country. The chart below shows median weekly earnings by level of education in the United States.

In the United States, median usual weekly earnings were 966 dollars for workers with a high school diploma, 1,135 dollars for those with an associate degree, 1,578 dollars for those with a bachelor's degree and 1,876 dollars for those with a master's degree ⁷. These figures describe medians for a broad group, so they do not show the range of earnings within each group or the earnings of any individual. They also do not show the cost of study, which affects the net financial picture for each learner.

The OECD provides a complementary view through the earnings premium, which compares the earnings of workers with a given level of education to those with upper secondary education. On average across OECD countries, the premium for full-time workers is 18 percent for short-cycle tertiary, 39 percent for bachelor level, 80 percent for master or doctoral level, and 54 percent for all tertiary ⁸. The second chart that follows shows these premiums.

The premium varies considerably across countries. It is 25 percent or less in Denmark, Norway and Sweden and above 100 percent in Chile and Colombia ⁸. These differences reflect the structure of wages, the role of collective bargaining, the supply of graduates and many other factors. A large premium does not mean that a qualification is more valuable in an absolute sense, and a small premium does not mean that a qualification offers no benefit, since other outcomes such as job security and personal development also matter.

Consider a hypothetical example of a learner choosing between a two-year practical program and a longer bachelor's degree. The learner might look at typical earnings in the field, the time out of paid work during study, the cost of tuition and living expenses, and the likely path to a stable role. A simple comparison of averages would miss many of these factors, so the decision requires a more detailed look at personal circumstances.

Another hypothetical example involves a worker who has been in a job for several years and is considering a master's program. The worker would need to weigh the expected change in pay against the cost, the hours of study and the chance that the new qualification would open a different kind of role. Earnings data can inform this choice, but it cannot predict the worker's own outcome with certainty.

Earnings data also depends on who is counted. Surveys may include full-time and part-time workers, different age groups and different sectors, and each choice changes the result. Readers comparing figures should check the definitions used, such as whether the figure refers to full-time workers, all workers or workers in a particular age range.

Finally, the link between qualifications and earnings does not guarantee any specific salary, and no qualification ensures a particular income. Earnings depend on many factors beyond education, including experience, location, occupation, negotiation and economic conditions. Learners should use earnings data as one input among many when weighing the value of study, and should look at current information for the fields and places they are considering.

9Qualifications and Employment

Employment is closely connected to qualifications, though the relationship differs from country to country and across fields. The OECD reports that the employment rate of 25 to 64 year-olds is 60 percent for those below upper secondary, 78 percent for those with upper secondary education and 87 percent for those with tertiary education ⁸. These averages suggest that people with more formal education are more likely to be in work, though they do not explain why, and they do not describe the quality or stability of the jobs held. The chart below shows employment rates by level.

In the United States, the unemployment rate for workers aged 25 and over was 4.3 percent for those with a high school diploma, 3.0 percent for those with an associate degree, 2.8 percent for those with a bachelor's degree and 2.6 percent for those with a master's degree ⁷. The second chart that follows shows these unemployment rates. Unemployment rates change with economic conditions, so these figures describe one point in time and should not be read as a permanent pattern.

Comparing the two sets of figures, the pattern is similar: higher levels of education are associated with better employment outcomes on average. However, the OECD figures use a different age range and a different measure from the U.S. figures, so they should not be compared directly as if they came from the same source. Readers should note the definitions and sources before drawing conclusions.

Consider a hypothetical example of a worker who lost a job during an economic downturn and is deciding whether to return to study. The worker might consider whether a new qualification would improve the chance of finding work in a growing field, and how long the study would take compared with the time needed to find a job without it. The employment data can offer context, but the decision depends on the local market and the worker's own goals.

Another hypothetical example involves a nurse working night shifts who wants to move into a related role that requires an additional credential. The nurse would need to check which qualification the role requires, whether part-time study is possible given the shift pattern, and whether the employer offers support. Employment rates describe the broad picture, but this nurse's plan depends on specific details that the averages cannot capture.

A third hypothetical example involves a technician who shares a phone with family members and has limited access to online study materials. This technician may find that a qualification with a practical, workplace-based component fits better than one that relies heavily on distance learning. Thinking about access and daily life can be as important as thinking about the level of the qualification.

Employment outcomes also depend on sector, region and the balance between supply and demand for particular skills. A qualification that is in high demand in one place may be less useful in another, and changes in technology or industry can alter demand over time. Learners should look at current job postings, talk to people working in the field and consider the range of roles that a qualification might lead to.

Finally, employment rates and unemployment rates describe groups, not individuals, and they do not promise that a qualification will lead to a job. Readers should treat these figures as general context and should combine them with local information, personal experience and realistic planning when making decisions about study and work.

10Qualifications in India

India has one of the largest higher education systems in the world, and its growth over recent years has been significant. The Government of India, citing the All India Survey on Higher Education, reports that the gross enrolment ratio rose from 23.7 percent to 29.5 percent and then to 30 percent in the latest year, with data compared over about nine years ⁹. The gross enrolment ratio measures the number of students enrolled in higher education as a share of the population in the relevant age group, so it indicates participation rather than completion. The chart below shows this trend.

Total enrolment rose from 3.42 crore to 4.50 crore, an increase of 31.5 percent over the same period ⁹. One crore is ten million, so these figures refer to millions of students. The growth shows substantial expansion, but it does not describe the quality of each program, the completion rates or the employment outcomes of graduates. Readers should keep these limits in mind when interpreting the numbers.

The latest network includes 64,756 institutions, made up of 48,246 colleges, 15,221 standalone institutions and 1,289 universities ⁹. Expressed as shares, colleges make up 74.5 percent of institutions, standalone institutions 23.5 percent and universities 2.0 percent, which are computed from the published counts. The donut chart that follows shows this mix, which helps readers see that most institutions are colleges rather than universities.

The mix of institution types shapes the choices available to learners. Colleges may offer undergraduate programs in a range of fields, while universities often provide a broader set of postgraduate and research opportunities. Standalone institutions may focus on particular disciplines or professional areas. Learners should consider which type of institution best matches their goals, and should check each institution's own rules and programs.

Consider a hypothetical example of a student from a rural area who wants to study a practical subject close to home. This student might look for a nearby college that offers the relevant program, compare the cost and travel time, and ask whether the program includes workplace experience. The large number of colleges may offer such options, but the student would still need to confirm details directly with each institution.

Another hypothetical example involves a graduate who wants to pursue a research degree after a bachelor's program. This person would likely look for a university with strong research activity in the chosen field, and would check the entry requirements and funding options. The institution type matters here, but the specific program and supervisor fit matter just as much.

Enrolment growth raises questions about how learners are supported after they enter study, including access to teaching, libraries, language support and career services. Participation figures do not show these conditions, so prospective students should ask current students and staff about the experience at each institution, alongside the official information they publish.

Finally, the figures describe national totals and averages, which can hide large differences between states, regions and types of institution. Readers interested in a particular place or field should look for more detailed data and should consult the institutions themselves, since entry rules and programs vary.

11The Next Five Years of Degree Qualifications

Looking ahead, the central question for degree qualifications is how attainment, value and access will develop over the next five years. Tertiary attainment among 25 to 34 year-olds in OECD countries rose by about 0.7 percentage points a year, from 42 percent ten years earlier to 49 percent in the latest year ¹. Continuing at that same pace would give about 49.7, 50.4, 51.1, 51.8 and 52.5 percent over the next five years. This is a computed extension of a past trend and is not a forecast from any source. The chart below shows the latest figure together with this extension.

The extension is a simple calculation, and it assumes that the pace of change stays the same, which is unlikely to be exact. Many factors could speed up, slow down or reverse the trend, including demographic shifts, economic conditions, changes in the appeal of vocational routes and policy decisions. The figures should therefore be read as an illustration of what a continued trend would look like, not as a statement of what will occur.

In the United States, attainment among working-age adults rose by about 1.1 percentage points a year, from 38.1 percent at the first measurement to 54.8 percent in the latest year ³. Continuing at that pace would give about 55.9, 57.0, 58.1, 59.3 and 60.4 percent over the next five years. This too is a computed extension and not a forecast. The second chart that follows compares the current credentials of value figure with the long-term goal set by the foundation.

The credentials of value figure stands at 43.6 percent of labor force participants aged 25 to 64, and the foundation's long-term goal is 75 percent of working adults holding such a credential, a goal set for well over a decade ahead ³. The gap between the baseline and the goal is considerable, and reaching it would depend on many decisions by learners, institutions, employers and policymakers. The goal describes an aspiration rather than a projection of the outcome.

The timeline that follows this section shows how qualifications have evolved from early forms of formal certification to the present, and it helps readers see that the system has changed many times in the past. Such changes suggest that future shifts are also likely, although their direction cannot be known with certainty.

Several developments could shape the next five years. Growth in cross-border study may continue, but its pace will depend on costs, policy and economic conditions, and the projection of about 9 million students abroad by the end of the decade was made before the latest counts ⁶. Frameworks and treaties may make comparison easier, while digital delivery and workplace-based learning may change how and where people study. None of these developments guarantees a particular outcome.

Consider a hypothetical example of a learner planning a path for the coming years. This learner might choose a qualification with flexible entry points, build practical experience alongside study, and keep track of changes in the fields of interest. Planning in this way allows adjustments as conditions change, rather than committing to a single fixed path.

Another hypothetical example involves an institution that wants to serve adult learners who are returning to study while working. Such an institution might design shorter modules that can be combined into a full qualification, and it might check with employers which skills are most needed. The institution's own rules and processes would still govern admission and assessment.

Finally, readers should approach projections and extensions with caution. The data shows past trends and simple continuations, but it cannot predict policy changes, economic shocks or shifts in individual choices. The most useful response is to stay informed, check current figures from the named sources, and make decisions based on personal goals and the specific rules of each institution.