I’m beginning to think that the only way to salvage bipartisan support for providing broad access to an affordable, high-quality liberal arts degree, would be to remove the word “liberal” from the descriptor. And possibly the word “arts.”
At least, that’s my sense after reading through SB 5442, a bill signed by the governor earlier this week that instructs our state’s public colleges and universities to develop accelerated three-year baccalaureate programs.
The legislature finds that some students are eager to complete a degree in the shortest time possible in order to enter the job market. The legislature further finds that providing a streamlined path to a baccalaureate degree would shorten the time required for students to complete a degree, improve the graduation rate, and improve accessibility for students who have proven academic abilities.
It would also reduce the cost to the state of subsidizing resident students choosing the three-year option (one less year, and all that), though the politicians don’t bother to come out and say it. In that sense it is yet another sign of Olympia’s lack of commitment toward funding higher education.
But for all its focus on increasing efficiency, the one thing such an accelerated program couldn’t possibly provide is a broad, high-quality liberal arts education comparable to what one currently gets in a traditional four-year program. Why? Because in requiring that eligible students be able to obtain these degrees “without attending summer classes or enrolling in more than a full-time class load,” the legislation leaves no option but to eliminate electives so that students can concentrate their one-fourth-fewer credits on their core studies, thus graduating less-well-rounded, less-well-educated students.
Working on a B.A. in Economics? Why bother wasting all that time and tuition money on frivolous extras like history, philosophy or ethics, right? What is the possible societal or economic benefit of corporate executives appreciating things like literature, psychology or the fine arts? I mean, the last thing taxpayers should be subsidizing is the arts, let alone the liberal ones.
Whatever.
Can I see the utility of a three-year option? Sure. But don’t call these “baccalaureate” degrees, because they’re not, and pretending they are only cheapens traditional degrees. The legislation claims it intends to provide students more options “while not diminishing the quality or value of a standard baccalaureate degree,” but that simply isn’t possible, because a student earning an accelerated B.A. degree will simply not receive as broad an education as one who went the traditional route, and that reality should be clearly noted on the diploma. I’d suggest calling it a B.S. degree if that nomenclature wasn’t already taken, but perhaps the clearest designation would be “A.B.A.” for “Accelerated Bachelor of Arts,” which would accurately place it somewhere between a two-year A.A. and a four-year B.A.
That way at least, both students and employers alike would be sure to know that they were getting what they paid for.
Maybe we can call it a “nearlaureate” degree. Or if we want to stick to Latin, maybe dodransalaureate or nonuncilaureate? It still sounds fabulous, and will cow the average HR screener….
any smart bushy tailed student can find their way out of college in 3 years if they really wanted to. You don’t cost anything the summer quarter you take off.
They could tie fed aid to a higher number of credits per year inducing taking summer qt classes.
well, at least Monday we find out who the new UW President is, and how much Nike paid for them.
Well, what if the electives most students take are entirely forgotten and forgettable? They don’t make a difference in their thinking or appreciation of the world around them. You can’t foster a passion for good writing, philosophy, music and art at that age–it’s too damn late. And besides, philosophers are born, not “made”, like mathematicians. Don’t tell me that a business major is going to magically become a better reader after taking a survey course in British romanticism. These people weren’t meant to have those thinky thoughts. And economics is a branch of ethics. Don’t forget that Adam Smith was first and foremost an ethicist who endeavored to understand why people behave the way that they do.
It always surprised me that it takes Americans 4 years to achieve what Europeans achieve in 3.
@5 this happens to a lot of kids who took AP and IB classes and then take the typical two years to figure out what their major should be.
only problem is, our state unis treat them as Seniors when they only have a year and a bit under their belt in college.
@6 That’s really only the case because a European high school diploma that makes the student eligible for entrance to a university (A levels, Arbitur, etc.) is basically the equivalent of an American Associate’s degree.
Distance education: http://www.athabascau.ca
@6: @8 is partly correct, plus European degrees tend to be much more focused– you usually know going in what your major is, and then you mostly just take classes geared at that. There are advantages and disadvantages to this system. Some people benefit from that sort of strong guidance and lack of options, but on the other hand, your life path is kind of decided by the time you’re 17. I’ve met graduates of European schools who knew all along what they wanted to do and were glad to get everything out of the way, and others who regretted not being able to take more classes and explore their options. For me, that would have been terrible, because it took me studying a lot of subjects and trying a lot of different jobs before I found something that I love and am pretty good at.
Oh, and @5: I have to disagree with you there. My school had a pretty broad set of core requirements, which resulted in my taking a variety of classes that had a huge impact on my life. I never cared about visual art before taking intro to art history, the required three quarters of reading classics of social and political thought gave me a variety of useful skills (including a much better BS detector), and while the quarter of programming I took hasn’t had any impact on my career, it did help me learn enough web programming to help my friends out on a project. Anyway, I tend to think having a broad set of skills and experiences is good for people.
Yeah…anyway, I think that evidence isn’t established by personal testimony. So now you can identify a renoir…and that’s made all the difference. Oy.
Okay stick to subject @ Hand Fellas
@3 You might be interested in the recently published Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses by Richard Arum and Josipa Roksa, and the discussion and debate it has generated. One of their general findings is that students who major in the liberal arts and sciences score better on assessment exams that measure critical thinking, complex reasoning, and writing skills.
http://www.amazon.com/Academically-Adrif…