Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What happens if they decide educational degrees are no longer professional
Executive summary
If employers and regulators “decide educational degrees are no longer professional” — i.e., to stop treating degrees as necessary credentials — the most immediate effects would be shifts in hiring practices, credential inflation dynamics, and wage signaling; research finds real wages for higher‑education degrees have fallen in some studies and credential value can erode when supply outpaces demand (expected real wages declined for higher‑education degrees) [1] [2]. Reporting and scholarship disagree about whether degrees are collapsing — some sources describe devaluation and credential inflation, while others say the college wage premium still exists [3] [4].
1. What “no longer professional” could mean — a clarification that matters
If the phrase means employers and professions stop treating degrees as required or primary proof of competence, this is fundamentally a change in credential practices rather than an overnight elimination of skills assessment; commentators note firms like Google and Kellogg’s removing degree requirements is part of broader moves to recruit on skills or experience rather than formal diplomas [5]. Academic work frames this change as either “decredentialization” (credentials lose relative importance) or persistent “credentialism” (degrees remain gatekeepers), depending on context [6].
2. How labor markets and wages might respond — signals, premiums and splitting effects
Econometric research shows heterogeneous effects: one recent study finds expected real wages declined for higher‑education degrees, implying some loss in the wage premium attached to degrees [1] [2]. Sociological research finds that expansion at different degree levels creates distinct outcomes: large expansion of lower‑level tertiary education tends to produce credential inflation (devaluing those lower credentials), while expansion at higher levels can promote decredentialization by shifting rewards toward skills [6]. In practice this suggests wage and hiring impacts would vary by sector, degree level, and the supply of credentialed workers.
3. Employer behavior and hiring practices — who gains, who loses
When major employers drop degree requirements, they aim to widen talent pools and prioritize skills or experience; coverage cites Kellogg’s and mentions Google and General Motors as examples of that trend [5]. Critics warn such moves can further devalue degrees and hurt universities’ value proposition for students paying tuition [5]. Defenders argue the college wage premium persists and short‑term disruptions (like AI disruption to entry‑level roles) are not evidence that degrees have collapsed [4]. Thus a shift away from degrees benefits applicants with demonstrable skills or experience but may harm those relying on formal credentials as signals.
4. Education providers and credential supply — incentives and quality pressures
Scholars link devaluation to supply effects: as more people obtain Master’s or undergraduate degrees, an “excess supply of graduates” can reduce the premium attached to those credentials [7] [8]. Policy moves that broaden access (loan programs, “free college” proposals) are cited by some analysts as contributing to degree devaluation by increasing supply, though interpretations differ about causality and net societal benefits [9]. This creates pressure on universities to either improve measurable skills training or risk further reputational dilution [3].
5. Alternative pathways and skill signals — apprenticeships, certifications, and experience
If degrees lose professional status, alternative signals — apprenticeships, industry certificates, portfolios or on‑the‑job experience — gain prominence. European Sociological Review research suggests that when higher‑level credentials expand, rewards can shift toward observable skills rather than nominal credentials, a process called “decredentialization” that elevates skills relative to titles [6]. The practical upshot: credentialless hiring raises the value of demonstrable, transferable skills and assessment mechanisms that reliably predict job performance.
6. Political and social implications — equity, access, and hidden agendas
Removing degree requirements can widen access for underrepresented groups and reduce barriers that reinforce socioeconomic stratification, but some critics see corporate moves as opportunistic cost‑cutting that externalizes training onto workers or undermines public higher education [5]. Advocacy pieces and policy commentators have different agendas: think tanks stress market discipline and individual choice [9], while higher‑education defenders emphasize long‑term returns and social mobility supported by degrees [4]. Readers should note each source brings implicit priorities when assessing whether de‑emphasizing degrees is progressive reform or market‑driven erosion.
7. Bottom line and limits of current evidence
Available reporting and research document both devaluation trends (expected real wages for higher degrees declining in some studies) and counterarguments that degrees still pay off (the college wage premium remains in other analyses) [1] [2] [4]. What would “no longer professional” do is therefore conditional: effects differ by degree level, employer behavior, labor demand, and how skill assessment fills the vacuum left by credentials. Sources do not provide a single definitive forecast of nationwide collapse; instead they show competing trends and significant sectoral variation [3] [6].
If you want, I can map specific professions (medicine, law, tech, trades) to likely outcomes under de‑credentialization using the sources above and highlight which sectors are already experimenting with non‑degree hiring.