Should ‘Mickey Mouse degrees’ be banned?

Increases in the cost of living are no secret nowadays — in fact, they have almost become a staple of life in the Western world. The most recent statistics by the Office for National Statistics have stated that, even though inflation has been decreasing, it is now 4% in the UK. Combined with an increase in the cost of education and a stagnation in graduate salaries, this has led to many students thinking twice before deciding on the university path.  

In fact, some have taken it even further, and are rethinking the idea of entire degrees. These ‘Mickey Mouse degrees’, named after the Disney character, are seen by many to have a chance of paying off the £45,600 average student debt which is equally as fanciful. This has led critics to question the value of certain degrees. For example, an art degree has an expected starting salary of between £18,000 and £23,000. This may not surprise many. However, the average starting salary of a geography graduate, a science degree in a field most would consider relatively ‘safe’, is £26,900. This highlights the fact that a return on investment is becoming increasingly difficult to achieve in education.  

Some may argue that the term dismisses both the softer benefits to society and the soft skills employers value, even if the degree is not directly applied in employment. The idea is that university students will not be able to achieve the results they want if forced to study more vocational or practical degrees.  

“Using the term ‘Mickey Mouse degrees’ to describe certain university courses isn’t particularly helpful as teenagers start to navigate their educational and career choices and explore topics that inspire them,” said Dr Amanda Gummer, a child development expert.  

Banning certain subjects could be based more on public perception and political convenience than actual evidence

The Department for Education is considering expanding the use of apprenticeships in Britain, a move which would involve increasing NHS apprenticeships and providing payments to employers and training providers to support the education of new apprentices. This approach appears to have been successful in Germany, where students have access to a wide range of apprenticeships through the Ausbildung programme, which encourages people to pursue vocational training. This provides a well-educated workforce for the country’s diverse economy, particularly for its manufacturing sector.  

“Improving education is the closest thing we have to a silver bullet for boosting life chances,” said ex-UK Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, who is championing the banning of so-called ‘Mickey Mouse degrees’. “So, it’s not fair that some university courses are ripping young people off.”

However, there are those who say these measures do not go far enough to provide an education for UK citizens. They say that the only way to stop people from being exploited by academia and the entry of a succession of ill-prepared workers into the workforce is to completely ban the study of certain subjects in tertiary education. One of the most famous cases of this was Sunak, who aimed to introduce a staggering 100,000 apprenticeships per year.  

But how exactly would this have worked? Rishi Sunak threatened to withdraw publicly funded student loans for such degrees, which is a sentiment favoured by the head of Reform UK, Nigel Farage. An alternative would be to completely abolish the study of certain subjects. The question remains as to how this would work, and whether universities would use loopholes in any regulations to provide the same degrees under different names.  

Hybrid courses — for example, combining English with digital marketing — would keep education broad while improving employability

While banning so-called ‘Mickey Mouse degrees’ might seem like a direct solution to a complex problem, it raises several uncomfortable questions. Chief among them is: who gets to decide which degrees are valuable and which are not? The risk is that banning certain subjects could be based more on public perception and political convenience than actual evidence.  

Some critics argue that banning degrees outright could create a two-tiered education system. While elite universities and wealthier students might continue to access a broad, liberal education, working-class students could be funnelled into strictly vocational paths. This division not only deepens inequality but also assumes that certain students aren’t ‘fit’ for more academic or creative pursuits — a view that’s both unfair and outdated.  

Instead of banning degrees, the government could focus on reforms that would help students make better choices. Improved career guidance in schools would provide teenagers with a clearer understanding of job prospects associated with various courses. Additionally, universities could be made to be more transparent about graduate outcomes, helping applicants better weigh the costs and benefits. Rather than cutting creative subjects, degrees could include practical elements like internships or industry-linked modules. Hybrid courses — for example, combining English with digital marketing — would keep education broad while improving employability. This approach would support informed decisions without restricting academic freedom or creativity.