Hybrid or Hands On? Students’ Economic Preferences over Study Design and Labor Market Payoffs

We study how university students trade off the design and demands of study against expected labor market returns. We conducted a Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) with students of the Economics Department at the University of Warsaw. Choice alternatives varied the share of in person teaching, weekly class hours, weekly preparation time, language mix (Polish vs. English), net monthly study cost (tuition minus stipends), and expected net salary after graduation. The DCE was embedded in a broader survey measuring study experience, time use, work during studies, scheduling preferences, and perceptions of quality and reputation. The instrument and framings follow state of the art DCE guidance and are publicly documentable. Using multinomial logit and mixed logit models, we estimate compensating differentials students require to accept (i) more online teaching, (ii) more weekly effort (classes/prep), or (iii) English medium instruction in Polish language curricula. The results show large, precise utility gains from higher expected salary, disutility from higher weekly preparation time, and strong (non linear) preferences over delivery mode and language. We then simulate policy scenarios (e.g., introducing 50% online, adjusting effort) and quantify the cost equivalent or salary equivalent levers needed to maintain program attractiveness. We position our results in the international literature on DCEs in higher education and discuss external validity with respect to a large national DCE that emphasized earnings over prestige. We conclude with program design implications for universities worldwide navigating hybridization, workload calibration, and language policy in light of students’ revealed economic preferences.