UNIVERSITY admission is a defining phase in the lives of students in Bangladesh — one that tests not only academic ability and readiness for higher education, but also patience, financial capacity, and mental endurance. Every year, hundreds of thousands of students compete for a limited number of seats in public universities. Only a small fraction succeeds. For many others, the process ends in disappointment, uncertainty, self-doubt, and, in some cases, the loss of an entire year of their lives.
Public universities in Bangladesh offer far fewer seats than the number of eligible applicants. Although private universities may provide quality education and modern facilities, they remain beyond the reach of many families because of high tuition fees. For middle- and lower middle-class families, admission to a public university is not simply an academic goal; it often represents the limit of what they can afford for higher education. Failing to secure a place therefore feels deeply personal for many students, as though they have failed both themselves and their families.
To avoid that sense of failure, students enter one of the most mentally exhausting periods of their lives. Admission season becomes a race where aspirations collide with harsh statistics. Students sacrifice sleep, hobbies, and social lives while preparing for highly competitive examinations. Coaching centres flourish during this period, turning admission season into a large commercial industry. Applicants pay non-refundable fees to multiple universities, and when these costs are multiplied across hundreds of thousands of students, the total amount becomes enormous. This raises an uncomfortable question: has the admission process remained purely academic, or has it gradually evolved into a system that also profits from students’ desperation?
Beyond competition itself, one of the least discussed yet most serious problems is the amount of time consumed by the admission process. Different universities hold examinations on separate dates, stretching the process over four or even five months. Students travel repeatedly from one city to another, sometimes across the country, simply to sit for a single exam. Instead of moving forward with certainty, they remain trapped in an exhausting cycle of waiting — waiting for admission tests, waiting for results, waiting for merit lists, and waiting for migration procedures to end.
This lengthy process creates a gap between higher secondary education and university enrolment that can last nearly half a year. For students who fail to secure admission anywhere, the consequences become even harsher. Many are forced into what is commonly known as a ‘gap year,’ spending another year preparing for the same examinations as ‘second timers’ while watching their peers move ahead.
The lack of coordination among universities further intensifies these pressures. Important admission tests are sometimes scheduled on the same day, forcing students to choose one institution over another. In an already competitive system with limited seats, losing an opportunity because of administrative mismanagement adds another layer of unfairness. Yet there appears to be little institutional effort to synchronise examination schedules and minimise such conflicts.
The burden becomes even heavier for students who must travel long distances to examination centres located in different cities. For financially struggling families, repeated travel expenses can become overwhelming. Booking transport on short notice, arranging accommodation, managing meals, and dealing with delays create additional stress for both students and guardians.
For female students, these difficulties can become even more complicated. Many families remain uncomfortable sending daughters alone to unfamiliar cities. As a result, parents or guardians often accompany them, effectively doubling travel and accommodation costs. In some cases, students may even forgo examinations altogether if a guardian cannot take leave from work or afford the additional expense. Distance and safety concerns therefore continue to indirectly shape unequal access to higher education opportunities.
Although some reforms now allow students to sit for admission tests at centres closer to their home districts for certain public universities, many institutions still conduct examinations centrally. Students continue to apply separately to multiple universities, pay separate fees, and sit for separate exams. The physical, financial, and psychological burden falls almost entirely on them.
The system also rarely acknowledges structural inefficiencies in seat distribution. Many talented students secure positions in several universities but ultimately enrol in only one institution. Since universities publish results and set admission deadlines independently, students often complete admission procedures at one university simply to secure a seat while continuing to wait for results elsewhere. Yet each institution collects admission fees regardless of whether the student eventually remains there.
When students later withdraw, the seats they vacate are not always filled efficiently. Consequently, even highly competitive subjects may end the admission cycle with vacant seats despite intense nationwide competition. Thousands of students struggle for limited opportunities while some university capacity remains underutilised. This reflects not merely administrative weakness, but a broader lack of coordination across the higher education system.
Students from financially secure backgrounds usually have alternatives. Some pursue higher education abroad, while others enrol in private universities without enduring the same level of competition and uncertainty. For students from financially constrained families, however, the options are far narrower. Many academically capable and hardworking students fail to secure either a university seat or their preferred subject. The fear of becoming a financial burden weighs heavily on them throughout the process. Admission tests gradually become less about education and more about proving personal worth.
Competition is unavoidable in any system where opportunities remain limited. The real question, however, is whether the admission structure itself operates fairly and efficiently. A more unified national admission framework could reduce repeated examinations, lower financial pressure, and shorten the lengthy timeline students currently endure. The system used for medical college admissions — where seats across public and private institutions are distributed centrally according to merit — offers one possible model from which universities could learn.
Students are not demanding an easier system. They are asking for one that is fairer, more coordinated, and less exhausting. Higher education is meant to empower young people and expand their futures. The path towards it should not leave them mentally, financially, and emotionally drained before university life even begins.
Jannatul Ferdous Sohana is a university admission candidate. Jannate Romman is an 11th grade student at Rangpur Government College.
