Comments on: Does a three-year bachelor’s degree make sense? http://www.theother85percent.com/2009/08/does-a-three-year-bachelor%e2%80%99s-degree-make-sense/ Working adults and the new world of higher education Tue, 03 Aug 2010 14:30:45 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: David Hasbury-Snogles http://www.theother85percent.com/2009/08/does-a-three-year-bachelor%e2%80%99s-degree-make-sense/comment-page-1/#comment-16210 David Hasbury-Snogles Fri, 13 Nov 2009 22:02:11 +0000 http://www.theother85percent.com/?p=190#comment-16210 The UK model has for decades always been based on a 3 year Bachelors and the requirement that competency must be achieved before progress is permitted i.e. the student must 'graduate' through each year of college before he/she is allowed to move on to the next one. In fact the only instance of 'cramming' I personally have seen is where my son took his Bachelors (with Hons.) in just 2 years! I can only assume that the US High School system does not take students far enough before they attend College, so that their first year at University is equivalent to finishing school in England. We take our 'Advanced Level' qualifications over the last 2 years of school (up to age 18) and then move on to College, often after a Gap year (year off inbetween) in which travel, work and general non-college ambitions are met. Other than that I cannot see any point in spending four years to obtain what can easily be achieved in three (other than to keep the unemployment figures down of course!). The UK model has for decades always been based on a 3 year Bachelors and the requirement that competency must be achieved before progress is permitted i.e. the student must ‘graduate’ through each year of college before he/she is allowed to move on to the next one. In fact the only instance of ‘cramming’ I personally have seen is where my son took his Bachelors (with Hons.) in just 2 years!

I can only assume that the US High School system does not take students far enough before they attend College, so that their first year at University is equivalent to finishing school in England. We take our ‘Advanced Level’ qualifications over the last 2 years of school (up to age 18) and then move on to College, often after a Gap year (year off inbetween) in which travel, work and general non-college ambitions are met. Other than that I cannot see any point in spending four years to obtain what can easily be achieved in three (other than to keep the unemployment figures down of course!).

]]> By: Mike Offerman http://www.theother85percent.com/2009/08/does-a-three-year-bachelor%e2%80%99s-degree-make-sense/comment-page-1/#comment-14069 Mike Offerman Tue, 08 Sep 2009 16:09:56 +0000 http://www.theother85percent.com/?p=190#comment-14069 Thanks for your thoughtful comment, Paul. Mike Thanks for your thoughtful comment, Paul.

Mike

]]> By: Paul http://www.theother85percent.com/2009/08/does-a-three-year-bachelor%e2%80%99s-degree-make-sense/comment-page-1/#comment-13926 Paul Tue, 01 Sep 2009 19:51:47 +0000 http://www.theother85percent.com/?p=190#comment-13926 This is an interesting finding, and I think it helps make the case that higher education's adherence to a traditional model must end, or at least be reduced in order for substantive changes to occur. Universities after all exist within the frame of human society, and no single society can be shown conclusively to be utterly static. Even the most reticent change through the indirect and more mobile shifts of other societies. The example SNHU appears to provide is one of a shift in thinking. I would argue that this sort of shift is possible for SNHU because it is a comparatively small U. Not that my ignorance is evidence, but I did not know SNHU existed until today, and the sort of change in perspective implied by the study and SNHU's results appears to indicate that like many things, real change begins small. It would be a remarkable sort of exception were the subejct of the study Arizona State Univeristy, or the University of Minnesota, two of the largest public universities in the US. Taking one or more models of how the system and organizations within it need to change to improve education, and placing them within very large universities, would prove Rummler's statement on the good performance of an individual in an under-performing system. Large institutions are inherently resistant to such changes for a number of reasons (budgets spring to mind as one of the most obvious), and I would hope that SNHU's example will prove to others that change can happen. Universities such as Capella are also an example of how higher education needs to and is changing. Capella is not necessarily in the 3-year undergraduate category, but is another sort of model that has results to back its existence. I do agree that the perspective that says our homegrown system is tops is bull-headed at the very least. I think the system in the US will change. It will take a long time, but then, it was only a decade ago that people said online education wouldn't work, and now, before we know it, there is nary a reputable B&M institution of higher education that doesn't have at least one class online. This is an interesting finding, and I think it helps make the case that higher education’s adherence to a traditional model must end, or at least be reduced in order for substantive changes to occur. Universities after all exist within the frame of human society, and no single society can be shown conclusively to be utterly static. Even the most reticent change through the indirect and more mobile shifts of other societies.

The example SNHU appears to provide is one of a shift in thinking. I would argue that this sort of shift is possible for SNHU because it is a comparatively small U. Not that my ignorance is evidence, but I did not know SNHU existed until today, and the sort of change in perspective implied by the study and SNHU’s results appears to indicate that like many things, real change begins small. It would be a remarkable sort of exception were the subejct of the study Arizona State Univeristy, or the University of Minnesota, two of the largest public universities in the US.

Taking one or more models of how the system and organizations within it need to change to improve education, and placing them within very large universities, would prove Rummler’s statement on the good performance of an individual in an under-performing system. Large institutions are inherently resistant to such changes for a number of reasons (budgets spring to mind as one of the most obvious), and I would hope that SNHU’s example will prove to others that change can happen. Universities such as Capella are also an example of how higher education needs to and is changing. Capella is not necessarily in the 3-year undergraduate category, but is another sort of model that has results to back its existence. I do agree that the perspective that says our homegrown system is tops is bull-headed at the very least.

I think the system in the US will change. It will take a long time, but then, it was only a decade ago that people said online education wouldn’t work, and now, before we know it, there is nary a reputable B&M institution of higher education that doesn’t have at least one class online.

]]>