Colleges consider 3-year degrees

Colleges consider 3-year degrees

www.msnbc.msn.com

In an era when college students commonly take longer than four years to get a bachelor's degree, some U.S. schools are looking anew at an old idea: slicing a year off their undergraduate programs to save families time and money.

(visit the link for the full news article)

This is a great idea, as long as students are still able to actually learn what they need to during those three years. But for most students, this could save anywhere from $25,000 to $50,000. That's money that doesn't need to be taken out in loans, or just cash that students can save for when they graduate. I did not know that Cambridge and Oxford were three-year schools!

It's true that many students even take longer than four years to graduate. Five years at the school I'm going to would cost $250,000. Of course most students cannot afford this at all, especially with so many parents unemployed. So let's say most schools become three-year schools, and a good chunk of kids take an extra year to graduate. That also saves them money. And from a three-year degree to a five-year degree, that's a savings of $100,000.

Schools honestly don't need as much money from students as they take. Many schools, mostly Ivys, are actually pro-rating their cost based on the income of the family. Personally I think that all schools should do this. And as much as we criticize Obama, some of the money that he's allotted to schools is helping me save $30,000 a year, through low- or no-interest delayed loans, work studies, and scholarships. Otherwise because of FAFSA and the duration that my parents have worked in the past year (instead of being unemployed for over half of the last eight years), I would have been given nothing.

But generally a three year school would save so much money, and as long as students are educated they could start making their own income even sooner.

www.msnbc.msn.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

I think this is a very good idea for some students. Some students are far more well adjusted than others. And, that's not meant to be a moral judgment. Some people take longer to sort out their goals or need more time to take classes or are working full time while going to college. A large variety of students with different needs.

So, I think if they make this a possibility and not force anyone, this is a great idea.

I like the pro-rate idea!

Originally posted by ravenshadow13


This is a great idea, as long as students are still able to actually learn what they need to during those three years. But for most students, this could save anywhere from $25,000 to $50,000. That's money that doesn't need to be taken out in loans, or just cash that students can save for when they graduate. I did not know that Cambridge and Oxford were three-year schools!

It's true that many students even take longer than four years to graduate. Five years at the school I'm going to would cost $250,000. Of course most students cannot afford this at all, especially with so many parents unemployed. So let's say most schools become three-year schools, and a good chunk of kids take an extra year to graduate. That also saves them money. And from a three-year degree to a five-year degree, that's a savings of $100,000.

Schools honestly don't need as much money from students as they take. Many schools, mostly Ivys, are actually pro-rating their cost based on the income of the family. Personally I think that all schools should do this. And as much as we criticize Obama, some of the money that he's allotted to schools is helping me save $30,000 a year, through low- or no-interest delayed loans, work studies, and scholarships. Otherwise because of FAFSA and the duration that my parents have worked in the past year (instead of being unemployed for over half of the last eight years), I would have been given nothing.

But generally a three year school would save so much money, and as long as students are educated they could start making their own income even sooner.

www.msnbc.msn.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

250,000 are You serious? I feel sorry for Your parents because that is the price of a nice house. Why on earth would You ever do that to Your parents. School is not worth that much especially since You can go to schools in the south for a lot less about 30,000 for 4 years.

Originally posted by jkm1864
250,000 are You serious? I feel sorry for Your parents because that is the price of a nice house. Why on earth would You ever do that to Your parents. School is not worth that much especially since You can go to schools in the south for a lot less about 30,000 for 4 years.

You might want to read her post again. She said 250,000 for 5 yrs. Then she said she was able to save her parents $30,000 a year.

It's still way more than 30,000 for some college you are talking about. But, her parents could always say NO to her if they wanted to. It's their daughter, their choice how they spend their money.

And, we don't know if she's paying for all or some of her education through loans that SHE will pay back. They base your grant/loan money on your parents' income, regardless of who pays.

reply to post by jkm1864

My father is unemployed and has a PhD. If he was employed, we would have been able to afford all of the college costs. Because he is not, I was granted $32,000 a year in aid, $24,000 of which is scholarship.

I "do it to my parents" because both my parents have Ivy league degrees which cost about the same percentage of their parent's income. It is more important to have a very good education and pay back loans to go to a cheap school like a community college, IMO.

But I also work very hard in school and get very good grades and test scores. If I had not done this, I would not have been granted as much money for college. I think that's totally fair.

[edit on 5/23/2009 by ravenshadow13]

reply to post by ravenshadow13


I think you meant to reply to the other person. I was mostly agreeing with you. You don't "do" anything to your parents. I'm sure they do what they like, and that's their right.

I'm glad they value education.

You are very lucky.

reply to post by Pamie


Oops! Fixed, thanks for pointing that out. I did not mean to reply to you ^_^