Higher-ed association attacks three-year degree

A three-year degree would leave the vast majority of students with "a piece of paper, but not with a degree that has real value," she writes.
------------------------
Yeah, that *never* happens now!

What self-serving B.S. from Ms. Schneider ! Of course professors LOVE their long summers off (as well as Christmas break, spring break, etc.) and they want to keep those federal aid dollars rolling in as well. Well, here's a little news for the august professors--online learning is going to decimate your positions, and four-year, bricks-and mortar colleges will be a memory akin to typewriters, spats, and buggy whips.

Those 18-20 are also adults. To those who want, the three year degree program should be availible to them if it's appropriate for their field of study. It's known that a three year degree doesn't make people into doctors because medical school is needed for that. If more universities offered the program in which a Bachelor's degree can be offered in three years at a minimum, then the program would be self sufficient because some students are going to take a year off for work.

"The college experience may be idyllic," Stephen Joel Trachtenberg wrote, "but it's also wasteful and expensive, both for students and institutions."
-----------------------
Yet, your salary could have afforded thousands of students an education.

dan1138: Professors are only paid over the summer if they work over the summer (e.g. teach summer school), so your point is moot. Asking them to teach year-round would, in effect, raise their salaries by 1/3rd (9 -> 12 months).

Secondly, online learning is a joke. Bloomberg recently had a good article about all of the potential employers that throw applications from individuals with online degrees in the trash. Would you go to a doctor or hire an engineer that got their degree online? I wouldn't. Those places are diploma mills that wouldn't exist without student loans (going to BIg State School actually costs less).

It has always been straighforward to graduate in three years at larger schools. Students can take many courses during the summer. Students can get a jump start by taking some AP courses in high school and get out of a semester of courses at the university. If the students take 1-2 extra courses during a semester, then they can also graduate early.

The big issue is why universities do not strongly encourage more students to go into engineering and science where they can get jobs that typically pay twice as much as those who graduate in sociology, psychology, english, etc. (where many do not even get jobs in their field - i.e., Blockbuster).

Secondly, online learning is a joke. Bloomberg recently had a good article about all of the potential employers that throw applications from individuals with online degrees in the trash. Would you go to a doctor or hire an engineer that got their degree online? I wouldn't. Those places are diploma mills that wouldn't exist without student loans (going to BIg State School actually costs less).
-----------------------------------------

Frontline also did an episode on the for-profit online schools. Needless to say, the findings weren't complimentary. Nationally, less than 25% of students who enroll at places like the University of Phoenix or another for-profit online college actually ever earn a degree. I also believe Frontline found that the highest percentage of individuals who default on their student loans are those individuals who have degrees from for-profit online colleges. These online "schools" aren't even good places to take a few courses and then transfer to a brick and mortar school because their accredidation standards are so poor most brick and mortar colleges or universities won't accept courses as transfer credit. Which means the student has to re-take a course they've already "finished."

Dan1138 has something of a point though about online learning as a whole. As broadband becomes more widely available I think the number of individuals who take courses online will grow. But those individuals, if they're smart, won't be taking those courses from University of Phoenix, etc. they'll be taking them from large traditional brick and mortar schools that will offer an increasing number of courses online.

Colleges just want our tuition. They could easily shorten degrees to three year if they cut out some of the stupid gen-ed requirements. We get four years of English in high school, and in almost all school systems it is required to be writing intensive and include not only the basics but creative and critical writing. I would have loved to have been able to have an additional degree pertinant course rather than have to take a PE classes as freshman and sophomore. Seriously how many people need to have bowling for a grade as part of graduation requirements.

I did my B.A. in three years, while working, doing a couple internships and staying involved with friends and parties. I had a great GPA and drank quite a bit. I slept a solid eight hours every night and slept until noon on weekends. I couldn't figure out why anyone would need four years or more for undergrad.

In four years, I earned 160 credits, or 5 years worth. I brought 12 credits with me for prior language study (meaning that I got credit for lower-level classes that I never had to take). The rest came from taking 18-20 credits every semester, plus a January term abroad (6 credits). By senior year, I only needed one more class (a gen ed), so I thought about graduating early. I was on scholarship and my parents paid room and board and they didn't want me to finish early, so I tacked on a minor my last year.

For me, it was a good choice and I got a lot out of all four years of school (I also put a lot into it), but clearly, a degree can be done in three years (I even double-majored). Colleges really do need to stop telling people, "No one does a degree in four years anymore; the average is five." and start looking for ways to get students in and out.

I finished my BA and MA in a little over 4 years. I did not have the extra money to take off during summer and winter sessions, but I had saved enough money to get through if I worked hard. I viewed school like the consumer I was. A 3 year BA can be done easily, using summer and winter sessions. One can work at a college too, which offsets costs.

Hmm, the AAC&U piece talked right past the op-ed piece. The op-ed didn't suggest cutting credits, just shifting class time around to use the year more efficiently. Furthermore, the AAC&U talked about the number of students who arrive unprepared for college work. This *should* only be the case for community colleges (who accept everyone), NOT universities (who should restrict entry to those who are qualified and prepared). Since three credits cost far less at a community college, forcing students to take remedial courses there will save them lots of money compared to taking the same remedial courses at the university of their choice. Who knows? It may even provide more incentive for students itching to get to their favorite U to work harder in high school to avoid those remedial classes.

There is nothing stopping any student from getting a degree in 3 years RIGHT NOW. Load up on classes during the regular semesters and take summer classes, and you can get it done.

There is a world of difference between a liberal arts education for business or law and a science education as in Chemistry.Time spent in classes equal credits earned only if you are not taking laboratory classes. Often three to six hours in laboatory for a credit. And you do not shortcut! The lab work is critical learning time! On-Line educaTION HAS NO MEANING FOR SUCH TRAINING! Those are money mills; excellent for in-service training as is conducted by DOD in its many schools.

There is a world of difference between a liberal arts education for business or law and a science education as in Chemistry.Time spent in classes equal credits earned only if you are not taking laboratory classes. Often three to six hours in laboatory for a credit. And you do not shortcut! The lab work is critical learning time! On-Line educaTION HAS NO MEANING FOR SUCH TRAINING! Those are money mills; excellent for in-service training as is conducted by DOD in its many schools.

There is a world of difference between a liberal arts education for business or law and a science education as in Chemistry.Time spent in classes equal credits earned only if you are not taking laboratory classes. Often three to six hours in laboratory for a credit. And you do not shortcut! The lab work is critical learning time! On-Line educaTION HAS NO MEANING FOR SUCH TRAINING! Those are money mills; excellent for in-service training as is conducted by DOD in its many schools.

The problem with the three-year degree is that it allows no time for internships or co-ops. Employers care more about work experience than classroom time. New grads with no professional work experience might as well apply to work at Walmart. I know my company and myself roundfile such resumes.

dan1138 writes:
What self-serving B.S. from Ms. Schneider ! Of course professors LOVE their long summers off (as well as Christmas break, spring break, etc.) and they want to keep those federal aid dollars rolling in as well. Well, here's a little news for the august professors--online learning is going to decimate your positions, and four-year, bricks-and mortar colleges will be a memory akin to typewriters, spats, and buggy whips.
___________________________________________
Have you even looked at any colleges lately?

1. The on-line model you espouse is more expensive, more dependent on Federal Aid and student loans and leaves students deeper in debt often without the income to pay off that debt. But the for profit schools don't care - they got their money up front.
2. Most faculty WORK during the summer, either teaching extra classes (to make up for the pay-raises they haven't gotten in the last 3-4 years) or actively involved in research, the vast majority of which is productive (thank these people the next time you use the internet, pop a dvd into your player, or use your microwave.)
3. We've heard this before: Books will diminish the need for lectures, correspondence courses will do away with traditional colleges, radio will do away with schools, tele-courses will do away with schools. Guess what - we're still here because the person to person interaction in a physical community turns out to be crucial to the learning process.

I see a couple of issues–
1.You really can't get a basic education and effective vocational training in only 4 years. The earlier idea of a college education was to be able to think and to understand history, philosophy and math. Then science became important then job training became the major goal.
Now more than ever we need training to become thinking citizens. Bu† vocational training is also extremely important--and is requiring more and more years to complete. Plato was probably right in requiring 40 or so years of education.
2. I have seen some 3 year BS degrees in Europe.As much administrators may rationalize the effectiveness of a 3 year degree--and it is possible in lightweight schools, but in the heavyweight schools 5 years is becoming more likely.
In graduate schools we also see big differences. Quite commonly in Europe the Masters degree requires only one or two courses plus the thesis. In the US it's more likely to require 20 units and the thesis. At the doctor's level in the US may take another 30 or 40 units plus a dissertation. Quite commonly in Europe it requires only a dissertation or three published articles in peer-reviewed journals.
While education should be becoming more lengthy and more in depth, it is often becoming easier and less in-depth. Professors should be experts in a wide range of areas in their fields, but I find them to be increasingly less interested in the depth of knowledge in more interested in publishing in very narrow areas. While much research is valuable, much of the published work is really valueless. As an academic attending a good many conferences I see very few professors listening to lectures that are not directly related to their fields. Its that old case of knowing more and more about less and less until you know everything about nothing. We must develop real teachers for our universities.

That's really interesting coming from Trachtenberg. I graduated from GW in three years due to pretty liberal AP policies. But, apparently parents at GW are told that they shouldn't be surprised if their kid is there for five years!

The issue of actually using AP credits to shorten time in college has come up in Jay Mathews' chat/forum. Most colleges just don't support students in taking full advantage of those credits, if they even accept them at all. That's one easy way to shave time off without totally reconfiguring how college looks or works. Colleges could also make it easier for students to take more classes. Many colleges have tuition only cover 17 credits so if you take 6 classes you have to pay that 18th credit out of pocket. Cheaper than an extra semester, sure, but that can be enough of a barrier for people to think twice.

Also, usually financial aid runs out so people have to pay for summer classes entirely out of pocket/by private loans. It can make it more expensive than staying the extra year.

Small policy changes could make it much easier for people to graduate early, or hey, on time (or at all)!

"I did my B.A. in three years, while working, doing a couple internships and staying involved with friends and parties. I had a great GPA and drank quite a bit. I slept a solid eight hours every night and slept until noon on weekends. I couldn't figure out why anyone would need four years or more for undergrad."

So what major and college was this? Where I went to school they had a saying: "Grades, friends, sleep--choose two."