Faced with the current model of tertiary education, would I choose to pay for it?
In most cases, no.
Not because learning isn’t valuable — it absolutely is. I have grown through established institutional frameworks. Formal study broadened my thinking, expanded my practice, and opened professional doors. Structured environments and recognised credentials played an important role in my development.
But the world has changed.
Knowledge is no longer confined to institutions. Lectures, tutorials, case studies, industry research, and technical demonstrations are accessible on demand. You can learn coding on YouTube, SEO through podcasts, design in online communities, and business strategy via open platforms. The question is no longer access to skills — it is value. What am I actually paying for?
If learners are expected to pay significant fees, mainstream education must offer more than content delivery. Why, for example, are institutions still investing heavily in resources freely available elsewhere — often by specialists focused solely on crafting engaging content? Replicating what already exists does not strengthen the value proposition. Curation, context, and application do.
Clarity matters too. I don’t want to scroll through walls of text on institutional websites trying to decode offerings. I want to know: who are your people? What are they doing now in sectors I care about? How are they connected to industry? How will they support my career aspirations? Paying fees should buy access to experience, networks, and current practice — not generic programmes delivered by people who have rarely, if ever, worked in my desired or current industry.
So, what would I pay for?
I would pay for professional mentoring rather than traditional teaching — experienced practitioners working alongside me, challenging my thinking, and sharing tacit knowledge that cannot be downloaded.
I would pay for learning in and alongside current or prospective work — not paused employment or simulated exercises detached from reality. Real projects. Real clients. Real accountability. Learning embedded in practice, where theory and application work in tandem and capability is built in context.
I would pay for access to strong professional networks — communities of practice where learning happens through collaboration and shared experience, and relationships extend beyond graduation.
And yes, I would pay for credentials that genuinely signal demonstrated capability, not time served, but competence evidenced in the real world.
Traditional models were built around fixed timetables and standardised curricula. That made sense when institutions controlled access to knowledge. Today’s learners are digitally fluent, professionally active, and surrounded by free expertise. When so much learning is freely available, fees should buy transformation embedded in practice — not transmission detached from it.
If you were paying today, what would you expect in return?
