Objective.

This article analyzes the policies for making university curricula more flexible and their translation into concrete decisions within study plans, based on a comparative study of 64 degree programs at the University of the Republic (UDELAR), Uruguay, and the National University of Río Negro (UNRN), Argentina.

Methodology.

through a review of institutional documents, plans, and curricula in effect as of 2023, the meanings attributed to flexibility in both contexts are qualitatively examined. Relevant variables for comparison are identified and analyzed using bivariate tables and graphs, considering the area of knowledge and the duration of the degree programs.

Results analysis.

the results show that less than half of the plans explicitly incorporate the notion of flexibility as a feature of their design. At UDELAR, strategies such as optional and elective courses, the incorporation of common subjects, and credit-based organization are prominent, while at UNRN these strategies are incipient or residual. Furthermore, both universities exhibit a highly structured transition from the first to the second year, resulting in a process with limited flexibility.

Conclusions.

Overall, the findings reveal uneven progress in incorporating curricular flexibility and persistent tensions in the organization of educational pathways. Rather than offering recommendations, this article provides critical insights situated within the context of recent transformations in higher education and the relationship between curricular policies and their implementation.