How can SDU stand out in a new reality?

Young people’s preferences are changing

I eagerly awaited the first day of October, the national cut-off date for this year’s official and final admissions to bachelor’s and master’s programmes, and the date on which the figures would be available. Overall, we are pleased. SDU has admitted approximately the same number of students as last year, with variations across programmes. Some have seen a decline in students – some due to the new grade requirement of 7 – whereas others have seen an increase.

However, when I study the figures more closely, a picture emerges which calls for strategic considerations. This year’s intake confirms a development that we in the Rectorate have followed with increasing attention – a development that raises important questions about how we can ensure that SDU’s programmes will remain relevant to society. Relevance only creates value if the programmes are also perceived as attractive by young people in our region, in Denmark and internationally. So how do we remain attractive to academically strong and talented students who are willing and able to put in the necessary effort? And how do we navigate a landscape in which demographics, search patterns and policy frameworks are in flux?

Demographics, search patterns and policy reform

Historically, SDU has held a strong position in the Region of Southern Denmark and especially on Funen. We still do, but we are slowly losing ground. We are seeing a shift in young people’s preferences that we need to take seriously.

The demographic decline in the 18–22 age group is fast approaching – and is particularly drastic in the Region of Southern Denmark. At the same time, we are seeing an increasing trend of young people choosing to take several gap years rather than entering the education system straight away. This means that overall, there are fewer young people from whom we can recruit.

We are in the midst of implementing a political reform that limits the intake to academic bachelor’s programmes in order to strengthen business academies and university colleges. The demographic development means that we will be see further limitations from 2030 onwards. However, dimensioning is not our greatest challenge: the number of young people and their preferences is.

How should we work with our education programmes in the future?

It is well known that SDU has a strong quality culture. We have good education programmes and we work hard to communicate this to our target groups.

But I ask myself the question: is being good sufficient right now?  How can we stand out in a landscape in which the biggest cities and universities are attracting the young people? Maybe it’s not even sufficient to be really good – maybe we also need to deliver something exceptional? Maybe we need to try something completely new?

‘Signature programmes’ – A new strategic move?

One option could be to single out individual programmes to be developed into ‘signature programmes’. Extra efforts and resources could be allocated to improving all of the quality parameters for these programmes. I imagine programmes on which every quality parameter is at an exceptional level – from research excellence to pedagogical quality to the study environment. Programmes whose students are part of strong academic communities, in which they clearly feel and understand the research, and in which relevance and collaboration with society are well integrated.

This type of programme would stand out in the competition for the most ambitious students. When signature programmes shine, it would have a spillover effect on the reputation of our other – really good – programmes. At the same time, the programmes could act as a testing ground where we can gain experience that can benefit all our programmes and in that way drive the next level of work on quality culture. It is not about being the biggest but about being the best choice for prospective students who have ambitions for their education.

As mentioned: Signature programmes are one possible way to address the challenges we are – and will increasingly be – facing. There may be other ways to ensure a robust supply of talented students for excellent programmes. It is certain, however, that we will have to change our way of thinking if we are to ensure sufficient intake on our societally relevant programmes in the future.