Why students rarely leave because of the degree programme alone – and what universities should conclude from that.

When students switch subjects or leave university, we usually look for the causes inside the degree programme: exam pressure, poor supervision, a bad fit. That falls short. Many of these trajectories have a prehistory that begins long before the first lecture. Young people make a far-reaching educational decision without ever having learned how to approach one systematically. In the current issue of Forschung & Lehre (9/2026) I argue that decision-making competence should not be treated as a remedial offer for the uncertain, but as a core academic competence.

The real question comes before the comparison

“I am torn between business administration and economics – but sports economics sounds interesting too.” The obvious next step is to compare degree programmes. The better question is: which decision is actually at stake here? “Which subject should I study?” triggers a different search process from “Which educational path fits my objectives, my abilities and the life I want?” The second question broadens the view: what is compared is no longer subjects, but paths into a desired future.

Objectives first, alternatives second

Once objectives are clear, the search for alternatives changes as well. It is no longer only about the subject a friend chose or the university nearby. Objectives help generate further alternatives and identify the information needed for a realistic assessment of consequences. What usually remains are trade-offs: academically attractive but far from home; good career prospects but few links to substantive interests. Such conflicts should not be suppressed but named explicitly.

More information alone helps only so far. Anyone unable to structure their own decision situation does not automatically gain orientation from additional facts.

Decision-making competence can be trained

That is the good news. In important decisions, people typically identify only a fraction of their relevant objectives and alternatives – but these abilities can be strengthened deliberately. In a study published in the European Journal of Operational Research we showed that structured training produces a lasting improvement in proactive cognitive decision-making skills.

A task for the whole system, not a single office

If decision-making competence is a precondition for successful educational trajectories, it cannot rest on one office alone. It has to be fostered before university, taken up in advising and developed further during the degree. Through deadlines, elective structures, module architectures and programme descriptions, universities shape a decision architecture in any case – deliberately or not. Concrete starting points include modules in the first-year phase, reflection assignments in general studies, digital support for choosing specialisations, and structured formats in student advising and career services. These do not replace existing provision; they make it more effective.

Leaving is not the same as failing

A good university should not prevent every decision to leave. It should enable students to recognise in time whether they are on the right path. A well-founded choice may equally lead to a change of subject, a vocational training programme or direct entry into work. What matters is that the step is a considered one rather than a reaction to pressure. The problem is not the switch itself, but a switch that results from avoidable disorientation, unclear objectives or ignorance of relevant alternatives.

Academic success does not begin with the first exam. It begins with the ability to choose one’s own educational path deliberately.

About the article Siebert, J. U. (2026). Den Blick öffnen. Mit Entscheidungskompetenz durch Studium und Berufseinstieg. Forschung & Lehre, 9/26, 52–53. (in German); authorized English translation →

References Siebert, J. U., Keeney, R. L. (2015). Creating More and Better Alternatives for Decisions Using Objectives. Operations Research, 63(5), 1144–1158. Siebert, J. U., Kunz, R., Rolf, P. (2021). Effects of decision training on individuals’ decision-making proactivity. European Journal of Operational Research, 294(1), 264–282.