<p>Alexandre: But their parents want them to!!!!!!!</p>
<p>I know a few students who were offered jobs by their internship companies and were asked to start right awayand finish their degrees by taking night classes paid for by the compay.Too sweet to turn down.</p>
<p>
[quote]
hat you guys seem to be doing is defending problems. Why would want to defend problems? I think you have to be a little more optimistic than that. The easiest way to fail at anything is to convince yourself that nothing can be done.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Dude. Please. I am not sure your sources for information on higher education policy and practices. I am increasingly led to question them. Are you really in touch with the work being done out on issues like this.</p>
<p>You can label your dismissive comments "optimism" if you wish. I think it's something else. </p>
<p>What's optimistic, to me, are programs like the Carolina Covenant and MPact. What's optimistic is research being done by the Pell Institute. Or the interesting new proposal on looking at graduation rates via production frontier analysis. And any other number of dozens of examples or work being done and discussed on campus and in policy circles. </p>
<p>What's odd is that when people on CC get engaged with these issues, and they take the time to discuss these theories and findings with each other, to posit some ideas and attempt to sort addressable challenges from factors that are legitimate increases on TTD, you label it "excuse making." </p>
<p>I'm glad you've taken on the noble cause of making colleges change their shirking ways. That's a admirable thing. However, I think your first challenge is going to be finding a college that truly has the cavalier, uncaring, excuse-making attitude you accuse 'em of having.</p>
<p>One of the concerns is this:</p>
<p>How much in tuition does an additional student really cost if he chooses to stay a year longer?</p>
<p>Certainly, the university funds itself through tuition. The costs of a student's extra year in university are primarily going to the university, not to the expenses of the student. It doesn't necessarily cost students thousands of dollars per year for them to just take classes where all they get is a little attention from the professor, who still isn't going to give the student much attention? - yet - this seems precisely to be what most students only do (at least in state universities). So is it the university that benefits from students who stay for extra years? (since after all, the university gets more of the tuition dollars from the taxpayers through that)</p>
<p>Thanks for saying that Inq. I was pondering the same thing. How much cost to the university is there in adding a couple students to a class already being taught? Not much.</p>
<p>Poor academic ability and performance seems to have the most significant impact on how long it takes to get a degree. (see post #71)</p>
<p>If you have a gpa in your first year below 2, then only 20% of freshmen graduate in four years. If you have a gpa higher that 2.5, then 80% graduate in four years. Graduation in four years seems to be related to SAT scores, high school grades, and quality high school courses.</p>
<p>Students from lower income levels probably have lower gpas. Why? Need to work, more stress, poorer high school preparation, poorer study skills, lower ability??</p>
<p>
[quote]
How much in tuition does an additional student really cost if he chooses to stay a year longer?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Obviously, the marginal cost of ONE student staying over is essentially nil. But, if thousands of students stay back, eventually the nill money becomes real money since the physical space (classrooms, dorms and cafeterias) is finite. Thus, I think a better question (at least for tax payers), is how many more students could U-Dub (or U-Mich or Cal) accept if the masses got out after four years.</p>
<p>It's an interesting question, and a number of factors come into play.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>I really don't believe dorms/cafeteria space would be impacted by 4th year (and beyond) students. I don't know of many state U's where students live in dorms beyond their 2nd year, much less 4th year.</p></li>
<li><p>It's my conjecture that the majority of classes enrolled by these students are advanced classes with relatively low student enrollment. You generally don't here about students with junior/senior students being shut out of classes due to over enrollment. These are the type of classes which could most readily accomodate addtional students.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>My gut still tells me it's not a bad deal, financially speaking, for the large state U's.</p>
<p>
[quote]
My gut still tells me it's not a bad deal, financially speaking, for the large state U's.
[/quote]
I suspect it's a bigger deal when those students need aid, because that's another year of grants given out and another year of loans to add to their burden.</p>
<p>But upperclassmen don't come "cheap" in any event. Even those that pay. They are more likely to be taking upper-level classes taught with low enrollment and intensive faculty-student contact. And while it's not expensive to add one more student to a class like that, as the numbers add up you will have to add more sections and classes (lots more, since these are meant to be low-enrollment courses). And seniors are more sophisticated, specialized users of the library and other academic services. They are also heavier users of career services. </p>
<p>If universities saw students as profit centers (and I don't think they do, at least not the colleges we're talking about in this thread), it's much cheaper to just enroll a big bunch of extra freshmen, not serve them well, and have fewer "survivors" to have to provide the more-expensive education to. Senior hangers-on are not a good deal--for anyone.</p>
<p>The other issue is the political hit you take when your students don't graduate in what their parents, the public, or legislators think is a timely fashion. Just look at the discussion here--some people think there is something "wrong" with a college when students don't get out the door in 4 years, no matter what their reasons. That can be more than a political hit but also a funding hit, too.</p>
<p>"They are also heavier users of career services."</p>
<p>uh, their parents wish they were....</p>
<p>"much cheaper to just enroll a big bunch of extra freshmen, not serve them well, and have fewer "survivors" to have to provide the more-expensive education to"</p>
<p>oh, so that's why DS is in a triple smaller than standard doubles. I didn't understand the financial strategy. :-)</p>
<p>I'd also point out that Michigan charges more for tution for upper classmen than lower to cover the supposed higher costs.</p>
<p>From an accountants point of view, this debate is all about cost accounting. From what I've heard, costs associated with the addtional students are semi-variable at best, and possibly even fixed. With all the brain power at the U's, someone must have done a study and figured this out. Let's get someone genius from the Ross School to figure this out.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I'd also point out that Michigan charges more for tuition for upper classmen tuition than lower to cover the supposed higher costs.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Partially cover, not cover. But yes, they do this for the reasons mentioned.</p>
<p>Cost accounting for instructional costs isn't without its challenges, as I understand it. I just don't know if anyone here at the university ever looks at a young person on the cusp of a degree and an adult independent life as a cost unit who would be marginally not-that-expensive to keep hanging around writing tuition checks. I mean, I'm not saying that it's even true that they're cheap (I don't believe it, tuition only partially covers the cost of education as it is), but my point is that even if it were, U-M just doesn't think that way. It looks for ways to get people out and graduated in a timely way, not the opposite. </p>
<p>If a cost economist came by and showed that it's a better economic deal to encourage more seniors to stick around another year, I honestly think that would be hard sell. There are probably all kinds of things Michigan could do to improve its bottom line vis a vis tuition, costs, and students (i.e. eliminate the nursing & dental school and axe the music school, all of them godawful expensive)--but that doesn't mean U-M would do them.</p>
<p>I'm not challenging what you're saying from an accountant's point of view, of course. You're right. I'm just saying higher ed doesn't always run itself according to those principles. Sometimes that's a bad thing, but sometimes it's entirely appropriate.</p>
<p>Actually, that upper division tuition was my only complaint against the school. Not that it was truly UMich's fault that the high school stressed taking AP credits as helping "save money" in college. But most of the students I know that went to Michigan, went in with AP credits. While that gave them more leeway in terms of taking classes they liked and flexibility in their schedules while still assuring they graduated in four years, it did mean a nasty surprises when sometime during their sophomore year they were greeted by a tuition bill charging Upper Division tuition instead of lower because they factored in the credits they received going in to determine class status.</p>
<p>Going back to my post #45...
My statement that students who transfer to other universities often do so because of academic difficulty...
This was based on a study at a large private university where about two-thirds of transfers had below a 2.5 gpa.</p>
<p>I like U of Illinois because they keep tuition the same for all four years. Whatever your tuition was upon entering will be the tuition your senior year.</p>
<p>Nice, because my son had so many credits from APs, the system thought he was going to be a senior. He got all the solicitations from the people doing senior portraits and selling frames for your diploma--at the end of his freshman year! :eek:</p>
<p>He didn't graduate early, of course, b/c few of those AP credits counted towards his CS major and music minor. Besides, he was having too much fun in college to graduate early! But at least he's not graduating LATE. Class of '08!</p>
<p>I'm not necessarily saying that, as an instituion of higher learning, you need to make decisions purely based on financial data. Oh course not.</p>
<p>But I am saying that having that kind of information in hand is essential in the effective management of any enterprise. As has been pointed out to me on numerous occasions, UM has a budget greater than that of 3 individual states. It would seem to me that it would be imperative to engage in this type of analysis in order to most appropriately apportion limited resources.</p>
<p>hoedown:</p>
<p>perhaps a different way to look at the issue is maximizing resources. For example, the UC system recently added a campus (Merced) at the cost of millions. It's entirely possible (and even likely) that such campus would not have been educationally necessary (ignoring the political dynamics) if the other campuses did not have a bunch of sixth-year seniors roaming the halls.</p>
<p>
[quote]
While that gave them more leeway in terms of taking classes they liked and flexibility in their schedules while still assuring they graduated in four years, it did mean a nasty surprises when sometime during their sophomore year they were greeted by a tuition bill charging Upper Division tuition instead of lower because they factored in the credits they received going in to determine class status.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yeah, that's the ugly side of AP credits at any school which has an upper division differential.</p>
<p>
[quote]
But I am saying that having that kind of information in hand is essential in the effective management of any enterprise. As has been pointed out to me on numerous occasions, UM has a budget greater than that of 3 individual states. It would seem to me that it would be imperative to engage in this type of analysis in order to most appropriately apportion limited resources.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, if it's any reassurance, there are loads of data nerds here who wrestle with these kinds of questions and analyses.</p>
<p>schools with at least 5 freshmen still enrolled in their 7th year
from IPEDS Graduation Rate Survey Supplemental
"still enrolled in long programs"</p>
<p>school, number of freshmen still enrolled in their 7th year, total freshman class, graduation rate after 6 years, percent of freshman class still enrolled in their 7th year</p>
<p>Eastern Michigan University 605 2767 38 21.86%
University of Puerto Rico-Mayaguez 180 2252 47 7.99%
New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology 146 303 44 48.18%
University of Akron Main Campus 99 2463 35 4.02%
Rochester Institute of Technology 70 1854 58 3.78%
Tennessee State University 66 1354 44 4.87%
Northeastern University 45 2808 61 1.60%
Drexel University 37 1880 60 1.97%
South Carolina State University 30 680 47 4.41%
University of Cincinnati-Main Campus 28 2250 49 1.24%
Auburn University Main Campus 25 3693 62 0.68%
Southern University and A & M College 18 1280 27 1.41%
St. John's University-New York 18 2380 64 0.76%
Concordia University-Saint Paul 15 258 42 5.81%
Rutgers University-New Brunswick/Piscataway 15 5420 71 0.28%
University of Kansas Main Campus 14 3784 59 0.37%
Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University 13 2205 45 0.59%
New Jersey Institute of Technology 13 649 54 2.00%
University of Louisiana at Monroe 13 1444 28 0.90%
Lincoln University of Pennsylvania 12 354 40 3.39%
University of Kentucky 12 2742 60 0.44%
University of the Pacific 11 624 65 1.76%
California State Polytechnic University-Pomona 10 2489 46 0.40%
Washington State University 9 2456 63 0.37%
Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College 8 5173 57 0.15%
Massachusetts Institute of Technology 8 1049 94 0.76%
University of Southern California 8 2822 83 0.28%
Butler University 7 861 70 0.81%
California Polytechnic State University-San Luis Obispo 7 2673 69 0.26%
Kansas State University 7 3280 56 0.21%
University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth 7 1131 51 0.62%
Southern Polytechnic State University 6 327 25 1.83%
University of Georgia 6 4375 73 0.14%
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute 5 1323 81 0.38%
University of Arizona 5 5126 59 0.10%
University of Arkansas Main Campus 5 2189 56 0.23%
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University 5 4608 76 0.11%</p>
<p>I'd like to point out that Northwestern has at least one very common 5 year degree program, that being the BA/BM dual degree program for music/ non-music double majors, which skews the data.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Supposedly only 87% of Caltech students are business, science, engineering, or computer science majors? That seems low...
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The other 13% are probably math majors.</p>