Search News


Browse Archives

News

The Buzz and Spin on 3-Year Degrees

February 17, 2009

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

When U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander spoke this month at the annual meeting of the American Council on Education, he urged college leaders to offer three-year bachelor's degrees. The concept would cut "one fourth of the time and up to one third of the cost," he said, calling three-year degrees the “higher ed equivalent of a fuel-efficient car,” compared to the traditional “gas guzzling four-year course." Alexander is a Republican with both political and academic experience (he is former president of the University of Tennessee). At another session at the meeting, Richard Celeste said he was interested in the idea of three-year degrees. Celeste, a former Democratic governor of Ohio, is president of Colorado College.

Alexander and Celeste are not alone in their consideration of the idea. Richard Vedder, a Spellings Commission alumnus who leads the Center for College Affordability and Productivity, is among the higher ed critics who have embraced the notion of the three-year degree. In a blog posting, he noted that Thomas Jefferson's two-year program at the College of William and Mary didn't stunt his intellectual growth. "Today, undergraduates seldom finish before 22, and Ph.D.'s seldom receive their degree before the age of 27 or 28.... Colleges have been able to get away with keeping productive resources under their control for longer and longer periods (collecting tuition all the while), despite no demonstrated evidence that this has sizable positive learning effects," he wrote.

Moving away from four-year degrees has been encouraged by Wick Sloane, one of this Web site's columnists. Also endorsing the idea is the late George Keller, who led the University of Pennsylvania program for the study of higher education and who died in 2007, but not before finishing the essays that make up Higher Education and the New Society, published last year by Johns Hopkins University Press. In the volume, he made the case for three-year degrees by noting that many students today are more likely to enter college with Advanced Placement credit and to leave with plans for graduate school, somewhat minimizing the need for "depth" in undergraduate programs. Further, he said that the best model to be pushing now -- in light of rising college prices and the proliferation of knowledge -- is one in which college is three years but more emphasis is placed on lifelong learning.

Colleges and universities have an "apparent intransigence" on the issue, he wrote, despite three-year degrees being "a no-brainer."

Are they really a no-brainer?

In fact such a plan has been proposed previously -- and tried in several cases. The idea has also flopped more than it has taken off. Some in higher education believe that circumstances may be right for the idea now, despite previous failures. And one new experiment -- at Manchester College -- appears to be off to a good start. But educators there say that the idea makes sense only for a relatively small subset of students. Still others worry about the rigor or actual cost savings of three year programs.

Until recently, the biggest flurry of attention for the three-year degree came in the early 1990s, when S. Frederick Starr, then the president of Oberlin College, proposed it as a way to deal with college costs. He was widely praised by politicians and pundits for floating the idea. Starr argued that it would save money, and that students would embrace it. Because Starr spoke frequently about the issue, some people assume that the college actually acted on the idea.

In fact, the Oberlin faculty was decidedly unimpressed. One professor wrote a letter to The New York Times in 1993 to be sure everyone understood: "Lest readers be misled by the news media offensive of S. Frederick Starr ... Oberlin College does not offer a three-year degree. It does not plan to do so, and it does not advocate students trying to finish college in three years. Indeed, even in the midst of a broad strategic planning process initiated by Mr. Starr, we are not discussing such a possibility. The idea seems to be only on Mr. Starr's personal agenda. Perhaps he will pursue it when he leaves Oberlin next June."

Student Interest That Didn't Materialize

Albertus Magnus College, in Connecticut, tried a three-year program for several years in the 1990s, by going from a semester to trimester system, with the idea that students could take courses year round and graduate in three years. The program was halted after most students started skipping a semester a year and very few took advantage of the possibility of graduating in three years.

Upper Iowa University some years ago created a three-year option that remains on the books there. But Linc Morris, vice president of enrollment management, said that no students are currently enrolled in the program and that he doesn't think anyone has tried it for at least three years. Upper Iowa operates on a quarter system in which students typically take two courses a quarter, but spend more time on each course than would be the norm elsewhere. The accelerated option was based on the assumption that some students would be able to get out in three years by adding courses during quarters and taking summer courses.

Because the university charges tuition by credits, students finishing in three years would not have saved money on tuition. But they would have avoided room and board for one year, as well as fees, which are charged by the quarter.

Records at the university show that five students enrolled in the program one year, but that none finished their degrees in three years.

National data suggest that the Upper Iowa and Albertus Magnus students weren't unusual. For example, many proponents of three-year degrees say that the growth of AP programs should make early graduation easy, since more students enter college with college credit. But the College Board has no data to show a correlation between taking AP courses and finishing early. In fact, College Board officials tend to talk about AP these days as a tool to encourage students to graduate on time (four years), not early. Data that the College Board do have show that students who take AP courses have a higher four-year graduation rate than the student body at large. Still, of those who have taken AP courses, only 63 percent graduate within four years, with the rest taking longer or dropping out.

'Fast Forward' at Manchester

Manchester College, in Indiana, is in the first year of a three-year option for students -- billed as a way to save students money and allow them to start earning salaries a year ahead of schedule. Under the Fast Forward program, selected students who are admitted to the college are given the option of acceleration. These students must take an average of 16 credits a semester (the normal range is 12-16) and take their general education courses online over the summer to finish in three years. Manchester estimates that students can save a total of $25,000 in the program, assuming that they live rent-free at home during the summers. The savings come both from room and board costs for the year they skip, and slightly lower tuition rates that the college charges for summer courses compared to those offered in the academic year.

The college notes that the financial gain can be much more, however, if students land a job a year earlier than they would otherwise.

Fourteen students -- about 4 percent of the freshman class -- are in the program. David F. McFadden, executive vice president at Manchester, said the college is pleased with the response and doesn't anticipate the program ever becoming standard for everyone. Because students must apply to the college for four years -- and then be identified as having potential for Fast Forward -- the college has a lot of control over who receives the opportunity. McFadden said that the ideal students not only are well prepared and disciplined academically, but generally need to have a good sense of their college goals coming in.

For some majors, he said, requirements are such that students need to be taking specific courses from their first semester at the campus. "They really need to know what their majors are going to be," he said.

McFadden said that some of those attending information sessions for potential applicants at Manchester this year said that they were attracted by the program. But he said that he thinks the college's approach of offering the three-year option only after acceptance is a good one for identifying the right students. "Not that many students think about this in a concrete enough way to come to college saying 'This is what I want to do,' " he said.

The students in the program have "very specific interests," and they did well academically in their first semester. He stressed that Manchester still believes that, for many students, colleges is "a place to come and know more of what's possible," and four years may be quite appropriate for that quest.

McFadden said students in the three-year program may also gain something because of the need to work closely with professors on planning their course selections with precision. He said he had just spoken with a student at another college who had been on track to graduate in four years, but who had missed some requirements for his major, and had quickly seen a four-year degree become a five-year degree, and that extra year was going to add significantly to the student's debt. A three-year program, McFadden said, "allows fewer missteps" than a four-year degree, and will force students to be "more focused and deliberate." As a result, he said he thinks people starting three-year programs and following appropriate advice may end up with higher completion rates than those who plan to finish in four.

Mercedes Plummer, who is in the first year of the Manchester program, is working toward an education degree so she can teach physical education and become a coach for elementary or middle school children. She said that since has a specific education and career goal, she isn't worried about the focus. Saving money was the attraction of the program, she said. She'll borrow modestly to pay for the three years of costs. But the $25,000 she's saving would all have been additional loans that she will now avoid.

Because the summer learning is online and asynchronous, Plummer said that it will not force her to miss everything she would have done during the summer -- she plans to hold a part-time job. "I don't have to stay on campus," she said. While some of her friends question her choice, saying she'll miss the "experience" of four years of college, Plummer said that graduating with less debt is plenty of compensation for that. "I know what I want to do," she said.

At Manchester, and most of the programs attempted to date, colleges have clung to 120 credits (the standard for a bachelor's degree) and sought ways for students to reach that level in three years. Some educators think that the 120 figure should be a little less sacred, and that this will lead to programs that can be completed in less than four years.

Leslie E. Wong, president of Northern Michigan University, said he believes that some college degrees could be earned in as few as 100 credits -- if well chosen -- rather than 120 credits. In such cases, he said, colleges would need to make general education "more focused" than is typically the case today. Further, he questioned whether colleges hesitate to award full credit for intense educational experiences, such as study abroad. "If someone goes away for two semesters, why don't we give extra credits, given that good study abroad is so powerful an experience?" he said.

The idea is not just to shorten education, Wong said, but to make college completion more realistic for those with limited funds or adult learners with limited time. What, he asked, is so special about 120 credits?

Wong acknowledged that some might assume a loss of knowledge or skills for those graduating with just 100 credits. And he noted that the requirements of some majors and pre-professional programs might make 100 credits impossible for some students. But he said that he would like to see colleges have the flexibility to experiment with 100 credits, and at the same time have measures so students could demonstrate their learning.

Suppose, he said, that graduation was linked to completion of an electronic portfolio in which a student demonstrated knowledge and skills, and that such portfolios could be presented at 100 credits, not just at 120. To those wanting to judge students reaching the two credit levels, "the proof would be in the pudding," he said.

While many educators assume that they must offer 120 credits in a bachelor's programs, that rule isn't ironclad. Some accreditors require 120 credits, and many specialized accreditors require so many credits that, when combined with institutional requirements, 120 credits are necessary. But the Education Department's definition of a bachelor's degree doesn't specify credits. Instead it defines bachelor's degree this way: "An award (baccalaureate or equivalent degree, as determined by the Secretary, U.S. Department of Education) that normally requires at least four but not more than five years of full-time equivalent college-level work.... Also includes bachelor's degrees in which the normal four years of work are completed in three years."

Looking for Evidence

The question of proof of knowledge is central to the success of any venture in three-year degrees, said Clifford Adelman, a senior associate at the Institute for Higher Education Policy who has been studying European higher education -- in which three year bachelor's degrees have become the standard through the "Bologna Process," which has set common standards for participating countries. But Adelman said that the key to understanding the European degrees is that they are accompanied by specific learning outcomes and by statements of what the degree qualifies a holder to do. These continent-wide standards are quite different from anything in the United States for three or four years of undergraduate study.

"What makes the Bologna degree what it is is that it's got learning outcomes," Adelman said. "If all you are going to do is tell me that instead of 120 credits, you have 90 credits, that's just a useless piece of paper," he said.

Adelman also questioned whether the focus on three years would help the students most in need of help. The three-year model is based on full-time enrollment, he noted. The population growing more quickly -- and more in need of additional institutional support -- is made up of part-time students, he said. Colleges should focus on their needs, even if they will take much longer than traditional students to graduate. "Life is not necessarily an easy road to a bachelor's degree," he said. Most students can't take a full-time course load, let alone more, Adelman added. "If you want to improve graduation rates, three-year degrees are counterproductive."

He characterized the push for three years as coming from those whose ideas about higher ed amount to: "get it over with and get it over with fast."

Barmak Nassirian, associate executive director of the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers, said he also worried that the European three-year degrees were not an appropriate model for the United States. A more common high school curriculum and limited expectations about general education, he said, are key to the three-year approach.

Nassirian suggested that if three-year degrees are created simply by squeezing more content into shorter time periods, "I'm actually skeptical that you would save much money." Further, he said, while efficiency and economy are important values, they aren't the only values that matter.

"There's no question that the way we do it has all kinds of avoidable inefficiencies. I'm not suggesting that what we have is perfect," Nassirian said. "But it's very important to be upfront with people and explain the trade-offs" of trying to finish college in three years instead of four. "You wouldn't be able to go from physics to philosophy or philosophy to physics," he said.

And without agreed upon standards for program content, he said, there is a risk that three-year programs could just be less time and less substance. "There's nothing wrong with ramping up programs, but the absence of metrics creates the problem," he said. While it is a satirical example, he admitted, Nassirian said the focus on cutting a year reminded him of the comedian Father Guido Sarducci's sketch on his plans to create the "Five Minute University" -- in which students would learn in five minutes "what the average college graduate remembers" five years after graduation. The cost is $20, which covers tuition, cap and gown rental, and snacks.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on The Buzz and Spin on 3-Year Degrees

  • Posted by Cassandra on February 17, 2009 at 4:55am EST
  • Students can already complete a bachelor's degree in 3 years if they attend class over each summer in addition to taking (and passing) 5 courses each Fall & Spring semester.

    Gee, why then do sooooooooo many students need 5-6 years to finish?

    The focus is on the wrong problem...yet again.

  • Credits
  • Posted by greyer on February 17, 2009 at 6:20am EST
  • The 120-credit requirement is by no means standard. Indeed, at several elite liberal arts colleges, students take 4 courses a semester (each counting for 1 credit at some) and a total of 32 courses to graduate. Because of the high reputation of many of these colleges and their claim of greater rigor, each 1-credit course transfers out as 4 credits if carried to public institutions. While most students elsewhere carry 5-6 courses a semester, these better prepared students at elite colleges adopt a different and more indulgent pace. These same colleges charge upwards of $50,000 each year and typically discourage a larger course load.

    Ironically too, the low course load enables a better teaching load for faculty at these elite institutions, ranging from 4 courses a year to 5 at others. This is another of the inequities in our HE system perpetuated by universally accepted (and without questioning) tags of elitism for some and the need to navigate the trenches for others. These elite colleges would determinedly oppose a 3-year degree, though they could easily mount them (more easily than institutions where students take 40 courses to graduate), because loss of revenues to them would be large. Such opposition will, of course, skirt the matter of finances altogether, and claim loss of academic excellence as loudly as possible. Even accrediting bodies expertly ignore such differences. But it certainly is inaccurate to represent the typical US degree as involving 120 credits.

  • 3 Year degrees - learning outcomes
  • Posted by Tim on February 17, 2009 at 6:55am EST
  • One must look beyond how many years of study it takes to get a particular qualification to what are the learning outcomes and where does the qualification sit within the overall framework of qualifications. Cliff Adelman is right regarding the absolute importance of being able to define what the programme (yes, I am in England)of study is, what the students are expected (and entitled to expect) to achieve and the quality of that experience.

  • Personal Defense
  • Posted by T on February 17, 2009 at 8:00am EST
  • That's the name of a course I took in college to "backfill" enough credits to get my undergraduate degree. And it's not the only non-degree related course I took. Admittedly, that was over 20 years ago, and maybe higher ed has changed in that period of time. I think curriculum could be streamlined to reduce the amount of semesters needed. But as one poster has already said, "It's all about the Benjamins."

  • Posted by Eileen Redden on February 17, 2009 at 8:35am EST
  • The real problem today is students taking 5 years to get a 4 year degree. Sometimes it is the student's fault (dropping courses, taking light loads, etc.), but many times it is due to courses not being offered or too few sections offered, etc. It tends to snowball-if a student doesn't get into the introductory course, he is shut out of the other courses in that area. Colleges and universities do not want to help their students finish more rapidly for economic reasons. My son was able to complete a 4 year degree at UVA in three due to having more than 50 credits when he entered. (college courses taken while in high school and AP courses) But he said it is no longer possible to do that as the courses he was able to take in the summer are no longer available. They were only necessary, so he could get through the courses in his major, which had to be taken in sequence and were only offered in particular semesters. UVA in his day was generous in granting AP credits, which may no longer be the case.

  • 3 Year Degrees
  • Posted by Tina on February 17, 2009 at 9:20am EST
  • I'm not quite sure what all the fuss is about when it comes to 3 year degrees. 20 + years ago, I completed my BS degree in Computer Science in 3 years and successfully started a career in industry at that time. It was simple and easy to do just by taking 6 classes a semester and doing a couple of summer courses. It makes logical financial sense in many cases and is just not that difficult. Perhaps the problem has to do with the fact that counselors are often down playing students abilities to accomplish. I can remember the "Are you SURE you really want to do this?" "Do you really want to work this hard?" and comments like these. If expectations are always low, that sends a negative message out to young adults that they really don't have to try or work too hard for anything that they want.

  • Check out SNHU
  • Posted by Joe Stehno , Director of Guidance at Bishop Brady High School on February 17, 2009 at 9:31am EST
  • Southern New Hampshire University in Manchester, NH has been offering a three-year business degree option for a number of years. They redesigned their traditional curriculum to focus on the acquisition and demonstration of competencies, not just credits. The program is for motivated, higher achieving students and would serve as a great model for other institutions.

  • 3 year degrees
  • Posted by Maggie on February 17, 2009 at 9:31am EST
  • With the economy in a dismal state I'm sure some college students will not be in a hurry to graduate and enter the job market. The other question becomes, what gets cut when you go to a three year degree? The core curriculum?

  • Marketing
  • Posted by Edward on February 17, 2009 at 9:31am EST
  • These 3 year programs seem like nothing more then marketing/politicking to me. I graduated in 3.5 years to save myself some money since I was paying for college on my own without doing anything extraordinary. At most schools, if someone wants to put in the work, they can get out sooner. That said in retrospect, I wish I took the 5 year program because I missed out on a lot of fun I would have had otherwise. Yea, it was better financially, but money isn't everything.

  • The Bologna Project and the Liberal Arts
  • Posted by Jerry Pattengale , Assistant Provost at Indiana Wesleyan University on February 17, 2009 at 9:31am EST
  • Scott, I am pleased with this rather well balanced look at the three-year question, esp. the historical glimpse at college case studies. My concern about using the Bologna model, which I've shared elsewhere and personally with Cliff (whom I highly respect), is that in an attempt to compare apples to apples (degrees across national boundaries), we're not comparing orchards to orchards (educational systems). If a country has a K-13 system, and proposes to cover the key liberal arts questions before college (or outside of a professional degree), then any comparison of that college degree with American degrees is inherently flawed (with our K-12 system). Also, from what I can gather, the standardization of U.S. degrees has influenced the Europeans (and now, others) to do the same. I think Cliff is beating a very important drum, and we need to listen, learn and engage with the Bologna planners. However, we also need to influence the discussion and not compromise the liberal arts questions. While recently speaking at a FYE conference in Ireland I chatted with many European, and this was indeed a concern (and unsolicited). As for the three-year timetable itself, I think we need to support models that are both efficient and effective. The agrarian calendar has long been questioned, and thus the success of many adult or continuing education programs. Currently, with the variety of credit sources, from dual-credits in high school, AP courses, CLEP tests and online courses, proactive students are able to adjust their college time. What I hope we never move to is a 13th year before college in the pretense of gaining ground.

  • Getting pulled in different directions...
  • Posted by Shari on February 17, 2009 at 9:35am EST
  • It would be possible for student to finish in 3-4 years if they had the funding to do so without working. I had to work full-time in order to have enough money to live while going to college (in addition to financial aide) as my parents made too much money to qualify me for more aide but not enough to help out at all. Maybe the problem is that students are pulled more directions then they were 20+ years ago when you could be a full time student and ONLY a full time student.

  • Curriculum with Purpose
  • Posted by Mike on February 17, 2009 at 9:40am EST
  • Cassandra and Eillen have identified the key elements. The real culprit is the Department of Education. Calculating and rewarding 6-year graduation rates provides the framework for universities to prolong the time-to-degree.

    It is possible in big public research universities, public master sector, public liberal arts college and private universities to have a higher percentage of its undergraduate student-body graduate in 4-years.

    For this objective to happen with purpose, the campus community needs to be orgranized and structured to strategically have more students graduate in 4-years.

    The key is purposeful. Campus leadership is required to create the envirnoment and structure that becomes part and parcel of the institutions culture.

  • Education is more than training
  • Posted by Ollie , Professor on February 17, 2009 at 10:10am EST
  • We have lost our way. If training for a job is the purpose of universities then 3 years may well be sufficient. However, universities are for education; for the development of wisdom and moral development; for preparing individuals to take the reins of our free and open democratic society.

    Well trained as opposed to well educated populations are more likely to accept a ruling class society. We should not embrace a model that encourages that outcome.

  • Begin with high schools
  • Posted by Bob on February 17, 2009 at 10:20am EST
  • Much of the rest of the world, Europe and India in particular, offer three-year undergraduate degrees in most fields. Different from the US understanding of the purpose of a college education, they view higher education as primarily intended to specialize in a subject area. Students there focus on the major subject or subjects rather than spend two years on general education, as they do here in the US, because their high school education is much more rigorous than what we have in the United States.

    If we were to reorganize the high school curriculum as a preparation for college education, then most of what is called general education at the college level could be completed at the high school level, permitting colleges to focus on specialization. If were were able to do this, most students in most subject areas would be able to complete their college in three years or less.

    This would, of course, require a standardized high school curriculum, developed in close collaboration with the higher education leadership a the national level (we need one). Our educational system is way too fragmmented at this point, and would require an overhaul that would ensure a seamless approach to education at all levels.

    Bob.

  • Posted by Observer on February 17, 2009 at 10:20am EST
  • About 33 years ago U of Tennessee did something jsut like this. Of course it bit the dust as edcators added more and more courses and switched to semesters.

    Tennessee too the quarter sequence courses of three 3 hour courses and made them two 4 hour courses. The teaching squeezed 3 qarters of learning into 2 quarters. This effectively cut out about 1/3 of general education and sped up the completion process without eleminating requirements.

    I think in todays world, going with 10 week semesters with 12 enrolled hours would add up to 26 semester hours and 108 for three years. That is close enough to 120 to be considered as an alternative.

    Mt big question is how do colleges get regional credentialling associations to ok such changes?

  • Express or Condensed Degrees
  • Posted by Paul , Training Manager at La Salle University on February 17, 2009 at 10:20am EST
  • With AP classes in high school, high school students able to take community college and regular university level college classes during the summer, or at night and weekends, CLEP exams, and distance learning programs, why are we not surprised by the move to "institutionalize" a 3 year B.A. degree?
    With the soaring costs, and the difficulty in obtaining financial aid for students, who will be burdened with debt when they graduate, can you blame them for finding ways to cut their costs and reduce their debt burden? Staying home and commuting, going to a lower priced community college with articulation agreements to again reduce their debt burden are increasingly attractive to students and their families.

  • 3-year baccalaureate
  • Posted by Jonathan Lindsey , retired on February 17, 2009 at 10:55am EST
  • Consider the four decade history at Bates (ME)and Judson (AL).

  • Me too Tina...
  • Posted by baughersl , Provost and VP Academic Affairs at Bowling Green State University on February 17, 2009 at 10:55am EST
  • I also completed my undergraduate in 3 years and it was more than 20 years ago...I did so for the same reasons that are being discussed in this market...I didn't have the money to stay in school for long periods of time and I needed to work. I also held down two jobs while completing in three years. Would I recommend this strategy if resources are available to a student? No...because education is about enjoying the extra curricular activities as well as learning in the classroom. However, the option is there if students choose...

  • A Travesty of Privilege
  • Posted by Senior Professor on February 17, 2009 at 11:05am EST
  • Some objectivists among us fail to appreciate the divinely inspired academic calendar, notwithstanding the fact that it appeared when needed by potato farmers. Next, some sycophant of science will ask that we Mandarins pay attention to the last 50 years of learning and measurement research, claiming that doing so will increase learning and impact. Rubbish! Do they not know our behavior is above evaluation? It is also time to counter the churlish observation that there is something wrong with five, six, or seven year graduation calendars. Such haste would require that we offer classes when students (ugh!) need them and would painfully inconvenience those of us who work so hard talking about working hard. The personal and societal economic impact of taking six years to graduate a four-year program is certainly no concern of ours. Three years is out of the question!

  • 3-Year Degrees
  • Posted by Richard Bernard on February 17, 2009 at 11:40am EST
  • I recall hearing the late Ernest Boyer say that no faculty in the U.S. has ever agreed exactly on what should be in a bachelor's degree, but they all know that it takes four years to complete. To this I would add that I found that many parents loved the idea but that not many traditional-aged under-graduates wanted to finish early and not many non-traditionals could devote the time needed to do so. And, many adults doubted that most American traditionals could mature sufficiently in four years.

  • I did a 3 year program
  • Posted by Bob on February 17, 2009 at 1:25pm EST
  • I want to provide a very different perspective from most of the comments so far about 3 year degrees. I completed my BA in 3 years. And it was not cramming a four year into 3. The program at Raymond College (one of the former cluster colleges at University of the Pacific)was designed to be a three year degree program. Classes were 6 units each (compared to 4 at the other colleges) and we took 3 courses at a time, for 18 units. There was also a one month inter-term with a 4 unit class, for a total of 40 units a year (no summer school). The 6 unit classes were more demanding than the 4 unit courses, but were also multi-disciplinary and in my opinion, far better in terms of learning. It did take a certain type of student to do it, as many students in other colleges at the University never considered a Raymond course, as they were "too hard" or "too much work". It also took good faculty who were involved with the students and learning. Quite frankly, my college education was far better than what many of my friends received at 4 year schools. And what is the result of a 3 year degree in terms of career? Among my graduating class include: successful attorneys, accountants, business owners, entrepreneurs, doctors, writers, social service, government, and more. If done right, a 3 year degree works!

  • Posted by Little College on the Prairie on February 17, 2009 at 1:50pm EST
  • My undergraduate honors program waived general education requirements in exchange for a thesis project and 24 credits of honors courses (which I believe included the 9-credit thesis). Add in a few independent study courses, some AP credits, a few heavy semesters, and maybe a summer or two and it's pretty easy to hit 125 credits and be out in under 4 years. Since honors courses tended to be demanding and to cover a wide range of topics, many students got a liberal education and often came very close to meeting general ed requirements without trying, but were still able to do more in less time.

    I knew more than one person who got a degree in 3-3.5 years or completed two or more majors on top of the honors program in 4 years. It was also a great fit for those of us who had a four-year scholarship and no declared major.

    However, like the students in the article, one girl I knew had ambitious plans to be out in 2.5 years since she already had 18 AP credits and knew her thesis topic coming into her freshman year. She got to college, realized she didn't have life figured out, and wound up taking the full 4 years.

  • What is College FOR?
  • Posted by Linda P Taylor , Principal at College Funding Network on February 17, 2009 at 1:50pm EST
  • Reading both the article and the comments make it clear that there is an even more basic question to be answered before deciding on how many years college should take. That question is WHAT is college for?

    Comments show it varies from getting a job, having fun, gaining wisdom, getting an education (as opposed to a degree), etc. Without lack of clarity on WHY go to college, it is no wonder there is no agreement on how long that process -- whatever it is and for -- would take!!

    We can talk about my experience that much of the problem today is students simply "choosing" to take 5 years to get a 4 year degree. Sometimes it is the student’s fault by taking light loads for various reasons. But more and more it is due to the student's inability to get their required courses! Usually that is because it is not being offered or too few sections are offered, the program is changed, etc.

    We can talk about credit "creep" where more and more units/classes have been added to majors to graduate.

    We can talk about students who start college with no clear path or major which means they are taking classes that may or may not be appropriate to the final major.

    But I think the dialogue first needs to be What is college for - both individually AND nationally.

  • 3 year degrees
  • Posted by Valerie Breeden on February 17, 2009 at 4:10pm EST
  • I completed my Bachelor's in 36 months. Mountain State University has a program in Leadership that offers just that. You go year round, its called a cohort program, where your peers are with you for the whole time. It works.

  • RE Three Year Baccalaureate
  • Posted by LD on February 17, 2009 at 4:10pm EST
  • I was an administrator at Judson in AL for a couple of years. They began their 3-year degree plan as a way to hang on to students who were transferring after two years. They still do not charge tuition for the "Maymester" term that makes the 3-year theoretically possible, which is a big budget hit and makes for unusual tallying of FTE. But the fact is, most students there do not finish in 3 years; some degree programs can't be done that quickly; course sequencing problems get in the way; and some cannot take the course load to keep them on track for a 3 year degree. Yes, it can be done on paper, but it's more complicated in real life.

  • What is there to mean by "Higher Education"
  • Posted by Robert Tucker , President at InterEd, Inc. on February 17, 2009 at 7:35pm EST
  • I would remind us all that the notion, "higher education" is a clear example of a family resemblance concept; i.e., there is no single criterion that runs through all model cases but many criteria are shared by most model cases in an overlapping fashion.

    When we use the term, “higher education” we sometimes appear to be referring to an antiquated notion the institutions of which served only a very small fraction of the population for a very narrow set of purposes.

    Today, the institutions of higher education serve a very large and diverse set of populations for equally diverse purposes. It is important, perhaps central, to note that all rational definitions of "quality" rest on “suitability to purpose” assessments, we cannot separate our discussions of quality from our specifications of the audience and its purposes.

    For the most part, the conservative professoriate is alone in refusing to embrace the new necessities. It seems that they are trying to preserve a vision of higher education that, perhaps, never was.

    My personal vision is that many forms of higher education are moving toward just-in-time and just-as-needed delivery and management models. All this is good.

  • The economy
  • Posted by Jack on February 17, 2009 at 7:35pm EST
  • So what would happen if we dumped all those students out at 21 instead of 22?

  • Posted by Dennis Ruhl on February 18, 2009 at 3:15pm EST
  • Most old Canadian universities offer a 90 credit 3 year BA. Most people opt for the 4 year 120 credit program. General education requirements are minimal at most schools. I think the BA requirement is 6 credits of English and 6 credits lower level and 6 credits upper level math or science.

  • One Canadian's perspective
  • Posted by Joan McConnell , Executive Assistant (Student Affairs), Faculty of Science at University of Manitoba on February 19, 2009 at 6:50pm EST
  • The Faculty of Science at the University of Manitoba offers a 3-Year degree as well as two 4-Year degrees. The 3-Year degree is 90 credit hours and is called a General degree - not meant for specific scientific training. Students who want specialized training opt for the 4-year Major or 4-Year Honours program; Honours being favoured for prep for grad studies. Both 4-Year degrees are 120 credit hours or more.
    Both our General and 4-Major have no time limit: students could do 6 hours a year if they wished (and had the time).
    I would suggest that this model could be adopted - no term load limit, specialization being preferred but a general degree being permitted.
    Cramming a four year degree into three years shouldn't be a matter of legislation, but only of timetabling.

  • IT productivity gains make 3-year programs feasible
  • Posted by James Morgan on February 24, 2009 at 4:00pm EST
  • There is no reason the computer-related productivity gains realized by businesses should not apply in the classroom.

  • 3 year BA/4 year BS
  • Posted by Ted Dibble , Chemistry Department at SUNY-ESF on March 31, 2009 at 2:00pm EDT
  • The purpose of a college degree was mentioned in the article and by some commentators, but one obvious issue has been mostly avoided: the difference between science and liberal arts degree requirements.
    I recall from my undergrad days at the University of Michigan (20+ years ago) that a number of students were doing double (even triple) majors in the liberal arts and/or social sciences. Each major required about 30 credits (10 courses) in the department, perhaps with the addition of a couple of introductory courses and cognate courses. By contrast, us chemistry majors had a total of about 3-4 free electives for our 4-year college career: every other course satisfied a departmental or college requirement (social science and humanities distributions and foreign language). A quick look at the web pages at my alma mater suggests that this has not changed much.
    I can easily imagine some benefits to a 120-credit liberal arts or social sciences degree along the lines described above, but I would like to hear opinions as to why such a degree should REQUIRE 120 total credits.

    The pun in my Subject Line was not intentional!

  • Rethinking Higher Education
  • Posted by Ron , Facilitator - Instructional & Leadership Development Centre at Saskatchewan Institute of Applied Science & Technology on March 31, 2009 at 3:45pm EDT
  • "Two year" institutions often offer programs that transfer into traditional university programs. These community colleges, "junior" colleges, and tech schools allow students to get degrees and diplomas, normally at a far lower cost than the traditional university. Even more important, the graduates have a credential that allows them to get a job where they can see if they like their chosen field while earning money to go on if they choose.

    We need to rethink the role of universities in undergraduate education. Students, parents, and high school councilors need ask themselves what is the best way to meet the goals of the students. Too often there is an automatic assumption that anything less than university is some how second rate when the "other" institutions may be first rate by any measure of the first 2 years of high education.

  • Posted by David on March 31, 2009 at 8:15pm EDT
  • This might work at state schools if the first year wasn't spent in remedial classes or expensive time spent figuring out what students want to do.

  • Comments from the UK
  • Posted by Guy Gratton , Senior Visiting Research Fellow, School of Engineering at Brunel University on April 7, 2009 at 10:45am EDT
  • Here in the UK, the 3 year Batchelors degree is the norm - whether BSc, BA or BEng (or a few others). Our output is good, and some graduates manage to go straight on to a PhD programme from that.

    However, as has been commented by many above, the only way in which we manage to do this is a national educational system targeted towards HE, and in which in particular the last 2 years (ages 16-18 roughly) are on a narrow number of subjects: typically 4-5 (offering my own experience, I studied maths, further maths, physics and chemistry before moving on to a 3 year engineering degre).

    The other aspect, also mentioned in the article, is the existence of learning outcomes. Here, we don't go to university for a degree - we go to university for a degree in Aerospace Engineering, European History, French Literature - in other words specific subjects with predefined learning outcomes. We do not cover the breadth of material contained in many US degrees, that here is considered to belong in either pre-16 education (which in the UK again we examine separately by subject, in examinations called GCSEs - General Certificates in Secondary Education, a good student typically taking 6-10 in discrete subjects such as english, maths, physics, history, etc.).

    So, as I understand it, 3 year degrees work and provide a good output. But, they work here within the context of a specific structure that prepares students for higher education, and accepts a directed relatively narrow degree with specific learning outcomes.

    Incidentally, to refer to a "European system" is not really correct. What is described is essentially the UK system, the French system for example is rather closer to the American one.

    Guy Gratton

  • Shift Coming
  • Posted by RT on April 29, 2009 at 4:15am EDT
  • The four year degree contains around 40 three semester credit course totaling 120 hours. The three year degree would consist of 30 three semester credit courses totaling 90 credits.

    The question becomes could a student eliminate 10 courses and still achieve a productive education.  I would think the answer may be yes.

    Education will change: the economics of the deal for the student demands it.  Costs continue to move up and payoff remains flat to down.  At some point a shift happens.

    Possible future shifts: the US moves towards the UK model.  For example, the two year MBA business student goes five years instead of six.  The speciality student taking a masters in finance, accounting, taxation, or economics goes four years instead of five.

  • 3-Yr degree with 120 credits & no summers
  • Posted by Robert Seidman , Professor-3Yr Degree Program at Southern NH University (USA) on July 9, 2009 at 5:15pm EDT
  • Actually, our 3Yr degree students earn 120 credits in 6 semesters. We stopped measuring seat-time 13 years ago when we started the program. Just graduated our 10th class this May 2009.

    See http://amps-tools.mit.edu/tomprofblog/archives/2009/05/947_highly_succ.html for an explanation.

    RHS

  • Successful integrated 3-year degree program
  • Posted by Robert Seidman , Computer Information Technology at Southern NH University on November 21, 2009 at 5:30am EST
  • Here is the current link to my article on the longest running successful integrated 3-year degree program in the US without course compression.
    http://tomprofblog.mit.edu/2009/05/12/947-highly-successful-3-year-degree-program-graduate-10th-class-in-may-2009/
    RHS