Washington Post:
In an era when college students commonly take longer than four years to get a bachelor's degree, some U.S. schools are looking anew at an old idea: slicing a year off their undergraduate programs to save families time and money.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I earned my Bachelors in 3 years by going summer sessions. I also worked at a part time job to supplement what I got through the GI Bill. So, this new program is going to cut credit hours for degree requirements and cut course lengths. Tuition will remain the same, but it will buy less education. Why not, companies do that all the time with grocery products. Put less product in the package and charge the same price. Some of the recent college grads I've talked to certainly didn't get their or their parents' money's worth after 4 years, cutting the program to three years will make matters worse. Our colleges need more demanding programs, not the other way round.
I loved my GI Bill too, one of the best decisions I made for my education. However, in my experience, people (like your friends) who complain they didn't get their money's worth out of their educations have themselves to blame. Turning out under-prepared professionals is a problem common in other countries but not the US.
I could not disagree with you more. Just visit any college campus and spend some time talking to a few of these young people who are about to graduate college. Then there is the fact that Harvard and Yale gave degrees to GW Bush. I've known college grads who couldn't properly fill out a job application or locate cities or states (let alone foreign countries) on a map. Just a few evenings of watching "Jaywalking" on the Leno show should prove just how dumb a lot of our college grads are. We are not teaching critical thinking in our colleges and today's youth are very loosely educated in the humanities.
Yep.
The 3-year British system requires entrants to have spent more time in secondary school (the so-called 6th form and A-level eentrance exam system). The total years of education is equal to or longer in some cases than in the current US system.
Perhaps mirror that by completing what you can at your local community college before spending three years at your chosen university.
I entered college in 1970 and went through in three years, including study abroad. I carried a full load every summer instead of going home.
The weird thing was they made me wait a year to graduate with my class.
I hope they don't do it for all students. We all know that most Americans are immature.
Oops . . . meant to say "Think of all the facetime . . . "
This of all the facetime with the porcelain throne undergrads will miss out on, the savings for their parents on beer and drug money, and the time saved on pretending they're actually getting an education. Move to online learning and approach it as a lifelong task. Universities are a waste of time and space nowadays.
You could have even said facebook time
Cut out all the BS and they could probably accomplish it in 2 years. Shh!... don't tell the parents.
A BA without the BS?
lol
nice :)
Unfortunately, some students are achieving 4-year engineering degrees. Some students have to go for 5 years to become architects. The three year plan is already in effect with so many students going abroad for a year because it only took them three years to really do their one major, which is why my school USC promote double majors. Some students get stuck and can't even graduate in 4 for whatever reasons. A lot of people spent three and a half years in undergraduate school. While it saves money, some people can always take the community college path of achieving a very inexpensive AA degree before taking the leap to achieving a BA.
Three years? Isn't that what law school is for?
What's the difference between a 70,000 Ivy League degree and a 30,000 Ivy League degree? Community College for the 30,000. Now who's the smart one? And who's the dumb and/or rich one?
well, we know for sure wasn't a educational counseling degree...
well the difference is your resume for starters- call it elitism or snobbery but some high end star Design firms hire strictly Ivy Leaguers, so right there your career options are impacted.
Yeah I went to a 5 year architecture program at Cornell, no way around that other than doing the 4 year undergrad plus 2 year Master's .Even in the 5 years it was so densely packed and intense that I always took mandatory electives over a few summers at city colleges.
Hard times spur creativity, and
Neccessity is the mother of invention...
correct. the four year degree ties to archaic times when information was not so instant. Also, the tuition charges are outrageous particularly in light of the ability to deliver information.
It is only archaic for those who have no idea what the real purpose of a college education is. Just think--a whole nation of people just like the gop base!
frank zappa and the mothers of invention...
PI ZAPPA KRAPPA
Public/Private... Education system is basically to keep people people enslaved in the agenda of business. They could care less about really learning how build higher collective consciousness as humans. If higher education was really about learning. This whole planet would be so much better off. but instead It's about creating workers to pollute and divide.
study harder for the SAT, next time....
It's too radical to grasp huh?
Not to mention education is not education, but purely another greedy self-interest business.
Only to those who are not educated.
excellent post. fanned.
They can't handle the truth.
Have you heard of the "unschooling" movement? It deals less with college years than it does primary and high school grades. Very interesting. I've read John Holt and Grace Llewellyn (she wrote a book called 'The Teenage Liberation Handbook'.. cool title). Prior to reading those authors, I thought homeschoolers were all those religious fundamentalist fanatics. Yes, many are, but not all. Actually a good portion of homeschoolers are that, but unschooling is really a bit different.
Llewellyn gives example after example of extremely creative kids doing extraordinary feats and having quite diverse interests. Very often, these kids, if they chose, would go on to university and perform much better than their peers. Here's a link to her book, if you are interested:
http://www.amazon.com/Teenage-Liberation-Handbook-School-Education/dp/0962959170
Duh. With the exception of certain science and engineering degrees, of course. three years works. Besides, based on NY last week, 27% of the teachers cannot clear basic math so why would it matter. It is generally a rip-off that benefits tenured profs. B-school is a particular rip-off and the key concepts can be taught in 9 months, the rest is fodder.
or perhaps we should demand actual real degrees of teachers instead of education degrees? Then maybe our students won't be taught by people so afraid of math that they turn it into language class.
Well, they are actual degrees, but I think I understand what you are saying. If I am correct, and you are saying that teachers, especially in elementary and secondary levels should get degrees in their field of expertise, such as math or science, history, etc. then, yes I agree with you. We need more experts imparting their knowledge than people trained to educate.
I am saying this as someone whose major was Early Childhood Education.
We could call it Cliffsnote College.
"Colleges Considering 3-Year Degrees To Save Undergrads Time, Money"
Does anyone really buy into that? Let me bring it down to a more realistic level:
"Colleges Considering 3-Year Degrees To Save thei Own Asses"
Excellent call.
I think you got it all wrong. I'm not blaming teachers, I'm blaming the greedy administrators.
The reason why so many students have to study 5 years to get a bachelor's degree is because the colleges require courses for graduation, then don't teach them every year. Voila, an extra year of tuition. If they couldn't set up the schedule for students to graduate in 4 years, why would they be able to set it up for 3?
Nobody's going to save any money if the kids have to attend two semesters in the summer. They are paying for those two semesters the same as if they were that extra year, and with the extra course load, they will not be able to work while in school. So they will have to borrow even more money.
With this logic, one can forget attending a college or university for formal education at all That will save money. Go to libraries, take online courses, join study groups and get apprentices.
University and colleges are important institutions, maybe they will go back to their original purpose and break away from the Education industry racket.
I wish they would. The one exception being their commitment to public education. A great tradition born in this country which we have nearly completely abandoned.
I got my degree in England, where they usually take 3 years, not 4. The state pays most the tuition, hence they get you out faster there
parents been trying that one for years, doesn't always work though...
Americans who never stepped out of their box will think that a sin. je. Lucky you. I don't think anyone here except for a few can truly say what man's (human) purpose in life should be.
"I got my degree in England, where they usually take 3 years, not 4."
Yeah, by they have an extra year of HS, so in the end it's the same.
Check out the history of Wisconsin or California or New York State University system. This is how it WAS just a few decades ago! What changed? Who was in charge? These a policies that can be reversed (or continued). The same is true of the public school system - NYPS were some of the nation (and world's) best only two generations ago.
Loading comments…
First Posted: 05-23-09 01:03 PM | Updated: 05-23-09 01:12 PM