Schools find it a moneymaking scheme. They don't have enough classes for
everyone in the major of their acceptance to get all their credits so they need
to do a summer session or go into a fifth year. This way the school would make
certain they have enough spots in enough classes for people to get the degree
in the proper number of semesters.
I don't think many of the commenters are understanding the purpose of this
proposal. It's not about giving free tuition or working your way vs not, or
any of the other complaints mentioned. Here's the problem that
it's attempting to solve: A lot of universities will accept more students
than can fit in their program. They tell you that it's a 4 year program,
but then you need two higher level classes that are only offered every 3 years,
or you need to take 4 different classes that are consistently offered at the
exact same time. If I pay for tuition for 4 years, and do my best to graduate in
a timely manner, but the school can't get organized enough to make it
physically possible for me to graduate on time, they should have to pay.
It's not about a government handout, it's about making the
universities responsible for holding up their end of the bargain.
Another clear example of a "nice" idea but a stupid one...oh, wait, it
was by a politician so we have to accept it! Look "Obama"
Urquhart, what you are doing is making young people more dependent upon the
government. You are taking away from them the incentive to work and grow and
advance and encouraging people to be lazy and dependent. I WORKED my way
through college; I know it can be difficult but I LEARNED how to do it and so
have MY children. What YOU are proposing is to continue on the path to make
everyone dependent upon the government so YOU can keep your position and make
YOU feel better? A ridiculous idea...PERIOD!!!
Nothing is "FREE". So where is the school going to come up with this
extra money? Raise the prices of textbooks? Charge to use the computer labs?
Cut back library hours? Remove additional light bulbs from the buildings?
Increase taxes on the population?This doesn't make sense.
You're simply shifting the burden. The ones that will hurt the most, are
the ones who don't go to a college or university. They then get to pay for
other peoples education while not receiving one themselves.
Is graduating in 4 years actually an indication of how well a student is
doing?A lot of people have to work for a living, aside from going to
school, an it's not really practical to expect them to knock out for
consecutive years of college . . . Unless they're majoring in something
incredibly easy . . . But then what's the point in funding an
education like that?
I think I would go in a bit of a different direction than IKIILIILI. I think
students need to take courses that inform them more of the human experience, as
opposed to courses that teach them how to fiddle with current technology. For
example, while the other engineering majors around me were taking Music
Appreciation 101 to fulfill their humanities general ed requirement, I was
suffering through mid-level philosophy courses learning metaphysics,
epistemology, ethics, and so forth. And while I still question the sanity of
that choice, I'm glad I did it because it gave me a better foundation for
understanding the human experience.But then if higher education is
nothing more than vocational training, then perhaps "I Know It" has the
right idea. In that case, there should still be a choice to actually get an
education rather than just vocational training.
Proud EXMO: It happens all the time. Pick a major. The requirements for the
degree are laid out. But the closer you get to graduating, you find you cannot
get the classes you need because they are not scheduled for that semester, or
the required classes are scheduled in the same time slot. So your 4 year degree
takes longer. And then there is the priority thing (sometimes
written, sometimes not). Recruited students (i.e. jocks, foreigners,
nonresidents, philanthropist-Daddy kids, grant carriers) who will boost the
income get first consideration for school resource allocation. This
proposal says the school will provide the opportunity to graduate in a timely
manner, or pay for the overtime.
I have 3 problems with higher education. Until these 3 things are fixed,
I'm convinced that any other effort is futile.It needs to be
timely for people who can only take the minimum full time requirement. If you
work full time, 21 credit hours isn't going to happen. Designing it for
students who have help doesn't work for those who don't have it.Curriculum = crap. I'll never use the math and biology courses I
took in my life or career choice. I appreciate the knowledge. But I'd
rather have taken excel and personal finance with that time and money spent.
I'd also rather every student take the same instead of classes which
aren't even remotely related to your major. Communication skills are weak
in freshmen. I get it. But don't make students learn about a Phospholipid
Bilayer if it will NEVER help them.Less book "knowledge" and
more real world experience. If you don't teach people how to make it in the
real world, then as an investment, school is a waste. I've known brilliant
people without diplomas and less than brilliant with them, both successful and
It seems backwards to me. Tuition should increase if a student can't get
done in 8 semesters.
Let's provide incentives to graduate in 4 yours by making the cost per
credit hour $x for the first four years of undergraduate classes, and $x +$100
for each credit hour of undergraduate work taken in the fifth or later year.
Otherwise, you have no incentive for "career students" to ever get done
with school and get a real job.Change that to the base price for the
first however many hours it takes to graduate if you want to allow for folks who
cannot take a full course load, and then bump it up after they have taken the
equivalent of enough hours for a bachelor's degree.
The only way to graduate in 8 semesters is to take at least 16 hours of credit
per semester. Most kids who are working are not able to take this many hours.
So this program will mostly benefit kids who come from wealthy families and thus
don't have to work much.
Two ways to go with this:1) This is a stupid proposal2)
Right idea but all college should be paid for like they do in many countries...
I'm afraid that the "devil would be in the details". I
wouldn't trust the University to follow the spirit of the law, much less
the law itself.I have a better idea.Why not fund the
student - rather than the institution.By this I mean: grant every
graduating high school student a certain amount of "tuition vouchers" to
use at WHATEVER institution he/she chooses. We need STOP all tax dollars flowing
to Universities without regard to how good a job they are doing!So......say the "tuition credit" amounted to 5k - the student would be
free to spend it at a meat cutting school, a University, or a private
educational institution. When the money is gone he'd be - on his own.This concept would FORCE the public institutions to compete with, not
only other Universities, but, also private ones. Public institutions would be
forced with compete not only academically, but cost-wise as well.Public Universities have gotten more than "fat and happy" over the
years. Isn't it time we STOPPED funding them whether they do a good job -
I don't understand this proposal....He says that the student
would have a map to follow and if he/she stays on that map and doesn't
graduate in 8 semesters they would get free tuition.What is the
scenario under which this could even occur???How could the student
follow map and not graduate in 8 semesters?