Liberal Arts and Sciences Education in the Netherlands

While Liberal Arts and Sciences (LAS) education is well-established in North America and the United Kingdom (U.K.), LAS is a relatively recent addition to the Dutch higher education landscape.  The first Dutch University Colleges (DUCs) were founded in 1997, partly in response to a desire to attract international students to the Netherlands (De Boer, Kolster, and Vossennsteyn 2010; Becker and Kolster 2012). These colleges distinguish themselves by offering small-scale education in an international environment, often housed in separate facilities to foster a strong sense of community (University Colleges in the Netherlands 2024). DUCs typically operate as honors colleges with rigorous academic demands, higher tuition fees (up to double those of regular Dutch bachelor’s programs), and selective admissions. 

It is worth noting the unique position of DUCs within the broader European context of honors or elite education programs, particularly when compared to the Netherlands’ immediate neighbors, Belgium and Germany. While almost every major research university in the Netherlands has at least one, and sometimes even two, university colleges, Germany, with a population more than 4.5 times the size of the Netherlands, has only three universities offering an LAS degree. In fact, the Universität Hamburg is looking to the DUCs as “role models” for its Bachelor of Arts in LAS when it opens its own bachelor’s program in the fall of 2025. However, while Hamburg’s LAS program was developed directly out of the university’s “Excellence Strategy,” the program’s homepage specifically mentions that, unlike its Dutch and British counterparts, there are no tuition fees. Although higher education is generally free of tuition fees in Germany, certain states, such as the state of Baden-Württemberg, charge international students of all disciplines a flat fee of 1,500 euros per semester. Finally, Belgium, with almost two-thirds of the Dutch population, has only one LAS college, the Vesalius College as part of the Free University of Brussels (VUB).  In contrast to the Netherlands, there are no higher fees for LAS students in neighboring countries, suggesting that similar financial barriers may not exist or may be specific to the Dutch context. These programs, across the neighboring countries of Germany, Belgium, and the Netherlands, frequently advertised as “excellence” or “honors” programs, seek students who are “academically strong, intellectually curious, and passionate to acquire new knowledge in various fields of study” (University Colleges in the Netherlands 2024: 6)  For example, the college used as a case study in this research has a mandatory 12-14 contact hours a week, and students are expected to study an average of 6 hours every weekday, as studying full-time is expected. 

Considering the relationship between socioeconomic status and educational inequalities, this research examines the experiences of international students from financially disadvantaged backgrounds at an unnamed DUC in the Netherlands, focusing on the role of disposable income and social stratification. Drawing on a focus group and eleven semi-structured interviews, we highlight how the university college administration and most of the student body often fail to acknowledge the financial hardships faced by these students, rendering their everyday struggles invisible.

By exploring these experiences, this study contributes to addressing the gap in research on income-related inequality in Dutch higher education, particularly within the context of DUCs, and provides insights for fostering a more inclusive and equitable LAS education. Our analysis revealed two key findings, both relating to the possession of disposable income among students at the DUC. First, the significant impact on the social and academic experiences of students in the Dienst Uitvoering Onderwijs (DUO) program is due to the need to balance work, academics, social life, and well-being. Second, the normalization of a culture and lifestyle within the DUC highlights a mismatch in perception between the financially disadvantaged participants and the broader DUC community, leading to a sense of detachment and a perception of the DUC as a “bubble” detached from the “real world”.

Background: Socioeconomic Disadvantage in Dutch Higher Education

Research on educational inequalities in the Netherlands has predominantly focused on primary and secondary education (Inspectie van het Onderwijs 2018), with limited attention paid to higher education. This study contributes to addressing this gap by examining income-related inequality in the context of DUCs, drawing parallels with the experiences of “working-class” students at “elite universities” (such as Oxford University) in the U.K., whose institutional structures have influenced the development of DUCs (University Colleges in the Netherlands 2017). Furthermore, this research qualitatively explored the impact of paid employment on financially disadvantaged students, an area largely unexplored in previous quantitative studies.

Challenges of Applying Existing Sociological Concepts to the Netherlands 

Research published in the U.K. has demonstrated the adverse impact of working while studying on the academic and social experiences of working-class students at universities. Firstly, paid employment can lead to academic disadvantages, with increased work hours negatively affecting study time and academic performance (D’Amico 1984; Curtis and Shani 2002; Hunt, Lincoln and Walker 2004). Secondly, working students often face challenges in fully engaging with social opportunities at university, leading to feelings of isolation and a lack of social support (Taylor 1998; Cooke et al. 2004). 

Reay, Crozier, and Clayton (2009; 2010) highlight the disconnect that working-class students experience at elite universities, where the prevailing social norms and expectations often clash with their backgrounds. This mismatch can lead to feelings of displacement and a perception of the university as a “bubble” detached from the social realities of the “real world.” Despite these challenges, working-class students often negotiate their place within these institutions through their academic performance and passion for learning.

While this research draws on insights from the British context (Humphrey 2006), it recognizes the limitations of directly applying concepts from British scholarship to the Dutch context. The two most important concepts drawn are “working class” and “elite”, which usually rely on static definitions such as parents’ income. Instead, in this research, the term “financially disadvantaged” is used to differentiate the availability of disposable income between students and its role in shaping student experiences.

Methodology and Participant Selection

This research was conducted by the authors from within the context under investigation, as part of an honors research project offered by the university where the research was based. As authors, we acknowledge that we have had personal experiences with financial hardship during our studies, which influenced our approach to this research. 

The study employs an exploratory research design based on Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA), aiming to capture the nuanced lived experiences of participants without imposing pre-existing theoretical frameworks. IPA was explicitly designed for themes that are equivocal, complex, and emotionally charged (Smith 2007). Using this methodology, we hope to contextualize the findings without drawing generalizations to form theories. Data was collected through a focus group and eleven semi-structured interviews. In the first phase, a 57-minute focus group was conducted to provide the basis for the in-depth interview questions.

Table 1. Participants Overview

Pseudonym	Country of Origin	Study Financing Method/s	Year of Study
Alba	Spain	DUO	Third
Boris	Germany	BAföG,  part-time job	Second
Chi	Germany/Mexico	BAföG	Second
Elias	Germany	BAföG,  part-time job	Second
Franka	Germany	DUO	Third
George	U.K.	DUO	Third
Henrik	Germany	BAföG	Third
Kelly	Ireland	Part-time job	Second
Madda	Italy	Part-time job	Second
Mary	U.K.	DUO	Third
Noah	U.K./Kazakhstan	Part-time job	Third

Participants were recruited through Facebook and word-of-mouth based on the following criteria:

• International students holding EU citizenship; AND
• Students at the DUC who considered themselves “financially disadvantaged”; OR
• Students receiving financial support through either the Dutch student financing system (Dienst Uitvoering Onderwijs, DUO) or the German Federal Training Assistance Act (BAföG)

These criteria were chosen due to the specific challenges faced by these students. At the time of the research (Summer 2018), EU students receiving DUO loans were required to work a minimum of 56 hours per month, while German students receiving BAföG were required to demonstrate low parental income and often found the loan amount insufficient to cover living expenses in the Netherlands.

Eleven in-depth interviews were conducted over two months, with both researchers present at each recorded session. All participant names were changed to pseudonyms to protect their privacy. The interviews ranged in length from 51 to 75 minutes. Transcriptions were analyzed independently by both researchers, with subsequent discussions to identify recurring themes, differences between participants, and noteworthy cases.

The Triple Burden: Balancing Work, Academics, and Social Life

The findings reveal that a low amount of work does not necessarily have a direct negative impact on academic performance, confirming previous research that suggests a proportional relationship between work hours and academic outcomes (Taylor 1998). However, for students working more hours, particularly those under the DUO system, the challenges of balancing work and academic demands were significant. We found an obvious pattern of consequences in various aspects of their lives within and outside of academia. The impact of each aspect interacts with the other aspects, resulting in an overall negative outcome. 

Students who are under the DUO system express particular struggles with balancing the workload from DUC and needing to work the required hours. With no statistical backing, George mentioned: “I don’t know anyone who’s on the student finance system and has graduated on time.” All but one of the participants under DUO believed that their academic performance and the process of gaining knowledge would have been better and more fruitful if they had not needed to work. The pressure intensified during assessment periods, with some participants describing a constant struggle to catch up with their studies (Curtis and Shani 2002). Kelly, George, and Mary described it as “playing catch-up” with their academics. At a particular period, when the bar that George worked at was understaffed, he had to work extra hours, amounting to about 30 hours a week. This greatly impacted his studies. He had said:

“And then that period I failed everything (…) It was the first thing I’d ever failed. I failed everything in one period.”

The mandatory work requirements of the DUO system forced George to prioritize work over academics to not lose his job, even when work hours exceeded the minimum requirement. This highlights the bureaucratic constraints faced by students who rely on DUO loans as if George lost his job, the DUO student loan would halt immediately.

In relation to balancing work and study, one of the most frequently mentioned impacts was fatigue. We noticed very early on in the research that the intensity of both academia and work has caused much distress for the majority of the participants. Consequently, this fatigue and stress spilt over to other areas of our participants’ lives. 

For a few participants, working had a great impact on their academic experience and performance. They felt their experiences differed significantly from those of their peers who did not need to work. This led to feelings of disconnect and a perception that they were not “actual students.” All but one participant expressed regret at not being able to fully experience student life due to the demands of paid employment. As Mary highlighted:

“I feel like I’ve never had the chance to be a student, because I always had to, like, try and have my shit together and have a job.”

Although it is not uncommon for students to work next to their studies, we feel that the sentiments of the participants are amplified in the setting of a DUC. According to many of our participants, the prevalence of affluence among the student body contributed to a sense of isolation for those who needed to work. They have noted that the average student body does not seem to work, does not talk about work, and does not have to finance their studies. This silence, attributed to the perceived financially advantaged nature of the DUC, further marginalized those from financially disadvantaged backgrounds.

Kelly was eager to share her personal experience, as she pointed out that there is limited space at the DUC for this. When talking about working next to studying, she said:

“I don‘t think that’s ever really spoken about, because it [the DUC] is so middle-class. There‘s such a minority of people that actually has to work’. And I know I am middle-class, but there is no one…there‘s not really a space for people to work. […] I just feel like it‘s not even brushed under the carpet, because it doesn‘t really seem to be there.”

Another participant, Mary attributed this silence to the ‘elitism’ of the DUC:

“I don’t think people talk about [DUC] being elitist and I don’t really think it is consciously – but just by not acknowledging these things [having to work to finance studies], I think it becomes.”

The impact of working extended beyond academics, affecting participants’ social lives and romantic relationships. Even though Alba was mostly positive about her work experiences, she talked about a sense of regret regarding her social life. For example, if she had more time to spend at the DUC, some friendships could have been developed more. Kelly, George, and Mary shared the same sentiment about friendships — friendships were maintained at a shallow level as participants were either working, for university or the required DUO hours, or they were exhausted and just needed to rest. 

Kelly illustrated her grief about the impact that work and study had on her social and romantic relationships:

“I have five juggling balls and I need to drop one, because I can’t do this anymore and [my girlfriend] was very much one of these balls. And for other reasons too, I chose to end the relationship, but [work] was one of the strong influential factors.” 

George, Mary, and Alba also noted that working had significantly shaped their daily interactions with their romantic partners and, to a large extent, dictated the directions in which their relationships were progressing. Compared to their BAföG counterparts, DUO students are at a particular disadvantage socially as BAföG students do not have the burden of mandatory work hours. 

Ironically, at some point, the purpose of having a DUO loan becomes contradictory as the participants would have enough money but too little time. All the participants under DUO agreed on this. As Mary had said:

“Basically, the stupidity of the system is that in order to get student finance, you need to work enough so that you already almost have enough money. Because really you need student finance, when you don’t have a job. So, I’m in a situation where I have money but I have no time to do anything with it.”

From the interviews, we observed that one’s socioeconomic status does not necessarily dictate the satisfaction of our participants’ experience as students. However, the satisfaction was dictated by the hidden role that disposable income plays in developing and fostering a social and academic student life. This is something that their more affluent counterparts can do. The participants become financially disadvantaged because of their lack of disposable income and their inability to fully participate in the DUC’s community. 

Nevertheless, participants did note that there were positive aspects that came along with working next to their studies. For example, as observed in previous studies (Taylor 1998), participants claimed that they have better time management. They claim that they are more realistic about what they can do within a certain amount of time and have more empathy and understanding than their counterparts who do not work. All participants who work have met people who they appreciate or had positively impacted them and supported them socially and practically. Kelly also noted that her affinity towards handling high-stress situations has increased a lot. George mentioned that working in bars served as a form of substitute for the social life he had lost by being disconnected from DUC, and that was helpful to him. 

The experiences of the participants highlight the significant challenges faced by financially disadvantaged students at the DUC, particularly those under the DUO system, in balancing work, academics, and social life. The need to work long hours to meet the requirements of the DUO system often leads to fatigue, academic struggles, and a sense of detachment from the university community. As a result, these students experience a “triple burden” that significantly impacts their overall well-being and academic success.

“Seeing Something As Normal, When It Isn’t”

As mentioned in the case studies seen in British scholarship (Reay, Crozier, and Clayton 2009; Reay, Crozier, and Clayton 2010), participants from less privileged backgrounds were often surprised by the affluence of their peers and the normalization of a lifestyle that they could not afford. Some of the participants expressed shock when learning that most of the DUC student body is not financing their studies themselves. As Mary said:

“I didn’t realize how much disposable income so many of my friends have until I realized that their parents were funding them the whole way through, like everything. My parents don’t give me any money.”

Mary’s account at the beginning illuminated that her friends at the DUC are from privileged socioeconomic backgrounds. Most of our non-German participants explained how most of their peers are from higher “classes” and, most importantly, attended private schools. This shock experienced by our participants hints at a major difference between them and the average student body of the DUC. 

Some of our participants, such as Kelly, explicitly identified that they did not come from lower-income backgrounds and claimed to be middle-class in their home countries. Yet, being in the DUC had caused a perception that led to a sense of detachment from the “real world” and a feeling that the DUC existed in a “bubble”. The lack of financial concerns among most students was seen as a key factor contributing to this disconnect. Boris highlighted:

“I mean, let’s say at DUC, a lot of people are in their comfort zone,  right? They are allowed to think about certain issues, because they just don’t have the struggle of financial situation, right?”

Following the participants’ accounts, an important theme that arose in our analysis was the concept of “normal”. The participants called into question what is taken for granted in the reality of the DUC, a reality that is lived by most of the students and is detached from the “real world”. Henrik had said:

“I think the main aspect is when you see something as normal, when it isn’t. They just don‘t realize how lucky they are in that they can do whatever they want without any financial constraints.”

Primarily, the theme of normalization appeared in the interviews when discussing social lives. Some of the participants had noticed and purposefully commented on the conspicuous consumption of the average DUC student, such as the normalization of travelling at DUC. All our participants regret that they are unable to travel during their term breaks either due to financial reasons or work. Simultaneously, Chi, a participant in her second year of study, gave exaggerated examples of the travel destinations of their privileged counterparts:

“Yeah, [term break] is also a topic where I realized there is really a gap between a lot of UC students talking about: ‘I just went to New York and Rio de Janeiro.’ I don’t know, how can you afford that?”

Chi’s account exposes the difference in perception between her and the average student body, who seem to think that travelling during term breaks is normal. In general, the participants felt that the student body is oblivious to there being existence of students in DUC who are financially disadvantaged, as George noted:

“I think, especially at DUC, it‘s assumed that people don‘t really have financial problems here.”

George’s statement echoes the sentiment of Mary earlier in the essay, in which silence around financial concerns contributes to building an elitist environment in the DUC. Many of the participants reinforced this idea by sharing their inability to discuss their financial situation in the DUC and, when they attempted to explain their circumstances, were met with dismissive attitudes and a lack of empathy. Mary illustrated this with a story:

“I once had a tutor scheduling presentations and she asked me “hey can you do yours on Thursday” which was like two days later and I said “no sorry I have to work” and one girl laughed and I went like “Sorry, is that funny? or like “Do you have a job?” And I think people can be very unsympathetic, because it sounds like an excuse to a lot of people. But, it’s just like I have no choice”

The experiences of participants highlight how institutional practices and attitudes can inadvertently perpetuate educational inequalities. As Van Zanten (2010: 330) puts it, “dimensions of elite education are the outcome of explicit and implicit choices made by teachers and administrators”. The lack of support and understanding for students facing financial hardship can create additional barriers to their full participation in university life. Mary emphasized this by sharing:

“Definitely, I should not have to go to cry to [the Vice-Dean] in order for them to give me a tuition waiver to pay my tuition later. […] It was really treated as a unique case and you think ‘how can this be abnormal?’ So many students here, you must have had students before who can’t afford their tuition for a couple of months.” 

Our participants who come from lower-income families, such as all the German participants under the BAföG program, were already aware of being financially disadvantaged before attending a DUC. As Elias’s account illustrated:

“Maybe a bit of this thing that I never considered that I‘m coming from a family background in which it‘s obvious that I‘m gonna study something like this elite programme” 

Elias was aware that the decision to study at a DUC was exceptional because of his lower socioeconomic background, reinforcing the normalization of DUCs being a place where mostly students who are financially advantaged attend. 

In essence, the normalization of affluence among most students creates a disconnect and fosters feelings of isolation for those from financially disadvantaged backgrounds. These students often feel like outsiders due to their inability to participate in the normalized lifestyle and consumption patterns of their peers, highlighting the mismatch in perceptions between the two groups. The lack of awareness and empathy from peers and the administration further exacerbates this disconnect and contributes to the perpetuation of educational inequalities within the DUC.

Towards a More Inclusive Excellence in LAS Education

This study explored the experiences of eleven financially disadvantaged students at a DUC in the Netherlands. By focusing on the concept of “financial disadvantage” rather than replicating the British notion of “working class,” this research captured the experiences of a broader range of students, including those who identify as middle-class in their home countries but do not have the extent of disposable income compared to their peers.

Similarly, many scholars have used the term ‘elite’ in the Sociology of Education. While we avoided reproducing it, our participants have indeed referred to DUC as elitist at times. The roots of the concepts of “elite universities” are found in the “upper class” or “aristocracy”, whether public or private. Universities reproduce “elitism” by deciding autonomously upon their selective admission requirements and access to the universities is greatly facilitated by socioeconomic status (Douglass 2007). 

Our analysis revealed two key findings, both relating to the possession of disposable income among students at the DUC. First, the significant impact on the social and academic experiences of students in the DUO program is due to the need to balance work, academics, social life, and well-being. Second, the normalization of a culture and lifestyle within the DUC that highlights a mismatch in perception between the financially disadvantaged participants and the broader DUC community, leading to a sense of detachment and a perception of the DUC as a “bubble” detached from the “real world.” Further, the lack of awareness and empathy from peers and administrators contributed to feelings of isolation and marginalization of those financially disadvantaged.

The findings underscore the need for greater awareness and support for financially disadvantaged students at DUCs, which are created to be “excellence” or “honors” programs. Further research is needed to examine the extent of these inequalities across different DUCs, such as statistical inquiries into the financial backgrounds of students who attend DUCs, and to explore the role of institutional policies and practices in perpetuating or mitigating these disparities. 

In conclusion, this non-exhaustive set of recommendations is intended to serve as a practical guide for DUC administrators, financial aid offices, policymakers, and student representatives, with the aim of fostering a more inclusive and equitable LAS education. To achieve this, we recommend a series of concrete institutional interventions, including, but not limited to:   

• Procedure for financial hardship disclosure: Mary’s experience of being “treated as a unique case” because she was unable to pay her tuition fees on time points to the need for a structured procedure when students face financial hardship. Students should be informed at the beginning of their studies who the designated contact person is at their DUCs.  At the same time, because DUCs do not operate their own financial aid offices, the main university could provide its staff with increased awareness of the unique context of their DUCs.    
• Tailored support services for financially disadvantaged students: As expressed by our participants, a source of their distress is the normalization of conspicuous consumption and the lack of empathy among their peers. Here we specifically advise the University College Student Representatives of the Netherlands (UCSRN) to create safer spaces, workshops, lectures to raise awareness of this issue, as part of their public programming.
• Adjustments to DUO’s work requirements: Regarding the potential elitism of DUCs, future research needs to assess the feasibility of managing the work requirements of DUO and the increased workload at DUCs. If this proves difficult to reconcile, as our research suggests, the Dutch state has created an educational pathway that discriminates against international students from financially disadvantaged backgrounds. 

References

Boer, Harry de, Renze Kolster, and Hans Vossensteyn. 2010. “Motives Underlying Bachelors–Masters Transitions: The Case of Dutch Degree Stackers.” Higher Education Policy 23(3):381–96. 

Botsis, Hannah, Yasmine Dominguez-Whitehead, and Sabrina Liccardo. 2013. “Conceptualising transformation and interrogating elitism: The Bale scholarship programme.” Perspectives in Education 31(4): 129-140.

Bourdieu, Pierre. 2012. “The Social Theory of Pierre Bourdieu.” Pp. 323-3244 in Contemporary Sociological Theory, edited by C. Craig. Last. Malden: Blackwell Publishing.

Callender, Claire. 2003. Attitudes to Debt: School Leavers and Further Education Students’ Attitudes to Debt and Their Impact on Participation in Higher Education. Universities UK.

Cooke, Richaed Barkham, M., Audin, K., and Bradley, M. 2004. “How Social Class Differences Affect Students’ Experience of University.” Journal of Further and Higher Education 28(4):407–21. 

Curtis, Susan and Najah Shani. 2002. “The Effect of Taking Paid Employment during Term-Time on Students’ Academic Studies.” Journal of Further and Higher Education 26(2):129–38. 

D’Amico, Ronald. 1984. “Does Employment during High School Impair Academic Progress?” Sociology of Education 57(3):152. 

Douglass, John Aubrey. 2022. The Conditions for Admission: Access, Equity, and the Social Contract of Public Universities. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. 

Hesse-Biber, Sharlene Nagy and Patricia Leavy. 2006. The Practice of Qualitative Research. London: Sage. 

Humphrey, Robin. 2006. “Pulling Structured Inequality into Higher Education: The Impact of Part‐time Working on English University Students.” Higher Education Quarterly 60(3):270–86.  

Hunt, Andrew, Ian Lincoln, and Arthur Walker. 2004. “Term-Time Employment and Academic Attainment: Evidence from a Large-Scale Survey of Undergraduates at Northumbria University.” Journal of Further and Higher Education 28(1):3–18. 

Inspectie van het Onderwijs. 2018. De Staat van het Onderwijs: Hoofdlijnen. Ministerie van Onderwijs, Cultuur, en Wetenschap. Utrecht: Inspectie van het Onderwijs.

Becker, Rosa and Renze Kolster. 2012. International Student Recruitment: Policies and Developments in Selected Countries. The Hague: Nuffic.

Smith, Johnathan. 2007. Qualitative Psychology: A Practical Guide to Research Methods. SAGE Publications.

Taylor, Nicholas K. 1998. “Survey of Paid Employment Undertaken by Full‐time Undergraduates at an Established Scottish University.” Journal of Further and Higher Education 22(1):33–40. 

Reay, Diane. 2010. Sociology, social class and education. Pp 396-404 in The Routledge International Handbook of the Sociology of Education, edited by M. Apple M., S. Ball, and L. Gandin, Routledge.

Reay, Diane, Gill Crozier, and John Clayton. 2009. “‘Strangers in Paradise’?” Sociology 43(6):1103–21. 

Reay, Diane, Gill Crozier, and John Clayton. 2010. “‘Fitting in’ or ‘Standing out’: Working‐class Students in UK Higher Education.” British Educational Research Journal 36(1):107–24. 

University Colleges in the Netherlands. 2024. “University Colleges in the Netherlands 2024-2025.” Retrieved May 1, 2025 (https://universitycollege.nl/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/University-Colleges-NL-2024-25-brochure-ENG.pdf) 

van Zanten, Agnès. 2010. The sociology of elite education. Pp. 329-339 in The Routledge International Handbook of the Sociology of Education, edited by M. Apple M., S. Ball, and L. Gandin, Routledge.

Appendix A. Background of the Authors

Both authors attended a DUC for three years to obtain their bachelor’s degree. Author A identifies as working-class in their home country, Germany. In the DUC, a considerable tuition fee waiver was given to EU citizens. Despite that, they often experienced food insecurity during the period of their studies due to insufficient funds provided by the German student loan. Author B is a Malaysian national whose financial status fluctuated throughout her life. She was able to attend a DUC because of a competitive need-based scholarship, covering over €30,000 in tuition fees and other living costs.

---