 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
jocelynDAD
Member
|
Posted: Mon Mar 19th, 2007 05:39 am |
|
Carolyn has included the Kiplinger's latest listing of College/Universities, suggest all interested go to Carolyn other site and read the listings - very informative.
Often we get the question as to the benefits of an LAC or a private institution as compared to a public college/university.
On the listing of Public Universities is included the 4 year graduation and the 6 year graduation rates. Here are some examples (and these are not the worst examples)
College 4 year % 6 year % difference
UCSD 50 83 33
UC Davis & Irvine 42 80 38
UCLA 56 87 31
Berkeley 58 87 29
Cal Poly 21 69 48
Georgia Tech 29 76 47
Oklahoma 19 56 37
Penn State 48 84 36
Wisconsin (Madison) 42 78 36
Wisconsin (LaCrosse) 20 69 49
Rutgers 46 71 25
Michigan State 35 71 36
At 5 of the above schools, of the graduates at the 6 year mark, more graduated in the 5th and 6th years than graduated in the normal 4 year mark.
So tuition, room and board for one or two more years, with merit aid (if any) or need based financial aid ending (at most schools at the completion of the 4th year) can add immeasureable to the cost of obtaining that Sheepskin!!!!!!!!!!!! 
|
scoop
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 4th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 565 |
| Mana: |    |
|
Posted: Mon Mar 19th, 2007 11:32 am |
|
| I admit that looking into the four year graduation rate was something I didn't even know to inquire about before I started learning here. What are some of the most common reasons for students not to graduate in four years? Honestly, I didn't know anyone who did NOT graduate in four years..thought that was many years ago. Is it lack of credits or something I am not thinking about. Thanks very much.
|
mackinaw
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 6th, 2006 |
| Location: | Michigan |
| Posts: | 786 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Mar 19th, 2007 12:32 pm |
|
JDad, I don't think it's necessarily true that when students take 5 or 6 years to graduate it's 1 or 2 more years of tuition and room-and-board.
At my university, roughly 70% of undergrad students work part-time while attending college, most of them going "full-time." But full-time is technically defined as 12 credit hours per semester. And at that rate it simply has to take longer to graduate unless the students attend year-round, i.e., including summer schools. This high percentage of students with jobs is mainly explained by economics -- i.e., they need the money to pay college costs. (They can, and many do, start out at community college and then transfer; that's a cheaper route but the BA/BS degree at the end is the same.)
While these students are "in college" longer, they're also earning money, and their costs of tuition are not based on block tuition but per credit. So if it takes a 5th year to complete college this does not mean a 25% increase in tuition paid (but there is, of course, for the inevitable increases in tuition rates from year to year). Rather, many of the students are stretching out their time at university because they're "working" their way through.
(To respond to Scoop's question, I'm sure there are studies of the reasons, but in my experience the chief one is $$$, as I've described. There are also many others including health, family issues, poor performance (or poor preparation for college, and the need to take some remediation in some cases). Other factors include student's (poor) planning and switching of majors. But it's not all the "fault" of students. There are institutional ones as well, including (a) financial aid; (b) overcrowding and inability to students to get all the courses they want on demand (this can be exacerbated when students change majors and then need to fill in missing courses for their "new" major); and (c) the quality of the academic advising, which affects whether students make good choices of courses to move ahead in their programs, getting into their majors, and so on.)
Last edited on Mon Mar 19th, 2007 12:40 pm by mackinaw
|
jocelynDAD
Member
|
Posted: Mon Mar 19th, 2007 12:43 pm |
|
Scoop:
It is difficult to be specific as there can be many reasons, but at the larger Universities, one of the critical problems is being able to take the 200, 300, 400 level courses in your major. The classes tend to fill fast and there is only so many scheduled. Further, the class(es) needed may be scheduled on off years, so if you miss it, you wait two years for it to be on the schedule.
At smaller colleges, this can happen as well, but in the smaller setting, the interaction between Profs and students re scheduling and such that it can be minimized.
Secondary to the scheduling problem is the changing of majors - at a larger University, you might have to enroll in another college (within the University) before you are allowed to take up a different major.
Ex. Lafayette and Lehigh. My two oldest sons attended Lafayette but both also considered Lehigh., They wanted to study Engineering (as HS Seniors) at Lafayette all classes are inside a single college, so when they wanted to change majors, no sweat - do it. At Lehigh, if you are enrolled in the Liberal Arts section you had to petition to study in the Engineering COllege. Wash U (s3 school) had the exact same situation. When S3 wanted to switch from Engineering to Accounting, he had to (1) get approval from Bus Adm College, (2) he was provisionally accepted for a semester, (3) after that semester grades demonstrated S3 capabilities, then (4) he was allowed to transfer into the Bus Adm College and change his major.
Often, the basic or core requirements might be different and more classes must be taken to qualify etc.
Smaller colleges tend to have the same core requirements for all majors, ergo it is much easier to change majors.
Now the exception makes the rule, many do finish in 4 years, my three oldest sons did just that, S4, took 5 and a half years with a semester off, so it was 6 years in total. He really liked college and the fraternity life.
|
jocelynDAD
Member
|
Posted: Mon Mar 19th, 2007 12:54 pm |
|
Mac: Our posts crossed and naturally some of your points are true and valid,
However, this rates from the colleges are of their students who start at that college with the first year class. It should not include CC students or other transfer students.
The rate is supposed to be of the 100% that started together as first year, how many of that 100% graduated your school in 4 or 6 years.
Now I know the 'figures lie and liars figure' school of statistics are rampant in the data from many colleges. However, it is fair to say that if colleges could fudge any numbers the numbers of graduates is an area of significant notice.
When you have an Oklahoma Univ acknowledge that only 19% graduate in 4 years and a Cal Poly 21%, U of Wisc (Lacrosse) 22 % and Georgia Tech 29%, Berkeley only 58% and UCLA 56 % and they are the tops in UC system. It has to make you (or at least me) pause and reflect.
BTW, U of Va and W& Mary (UNC as well) showed a very impressive number for both 4 and 6 years. So it can be done at the University level, but it is not being done at many.
|
scoop
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 4th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 565 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Mar 19th, 2007 01:09 pm |
|
| Great explanations, thanks. I'm seeing how important it is to find out about the ramifications of changing majors and/or needing to change schools within your university or college. Is it the admissions officer that can tell you what percentage of students are able to get into the classes they need?
|
jocelynDAD
Member
|
Posted: Mon Mar 19th, 2007 02:02 pm |
|
Scoop:
You always can ask admissions, but in truth most Adcoms are focused outwardly, towards recruiting and not inwardly with the faculty.
The generic answer would be the general numbers (see Kiplinger's list or any Guide book), and that you have to ask the Departments that you are interested in majoring.
Best source is students in the major/department and some Profs. If the major(s) is a popular one, should be easy to obtain, If the major is a smaller/unique - well then it is all important to find students in that discipline, if possible.
Last edited on Wed Apr 11th, 2007 01:47 pm by jocelynDAD
|
CarolynLawrence
Administrator
| Joined: | Sun Mar 5th, 2006 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 3309 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Mar 19th, 2007 05:44 pm |
|
Graduation rates are definitely something to consider, but, as Mack points out, there can be many reasons for students leaving or not graduating on time.
Among my daughter's acquaintances this year, for instance, one has left school because of a severe health issue, one has left because of a substance abuse problem, and one is considering not returning next year because she misses her boyfriend. I would not attribute ANY of these problems to something lacking in the school itself -- only to individual circumstances. At my daughter's school, a fair number of students also elect to do a fifth year in order to complete a double major or take advantage of an honors grant for a year of independent research. Both are lumped in with the overall graduation rate -- yet, I wouldn't say either is a sign that the school is somehow deficient. On the other hand, because of the curriculum at the school, students typically only take 4 courses a semester instead of 5 or 6 like at some other schools. That can mean if you don't pass a couple of classes, you are stuck doing an extra semester. That, again, isn't necessarily a sign that something is wrong with the school, just that it's curriculum may not be right for some students who aren't adequately prepared.
And, graduation rates vary considerably based on economic circumstances, racial and ethnic categories, major, even gender. When looking at the graduation rates, it's sometimes useful to delve a little deeper and look at the graduation rates of the category most like your child -- how many females graduate in four years? How many kids on financial aid? How many kids in the lower half of the class? etc. How likely is YOUR child to graduate in four years?
Again, graduation rates should not be ignored as there can be very significant differences between schools, and sometimes there ARE underlying issues. When you see a low graduation rate, do investigate further, and ask questions about things like advising, availability of classes, etc. But, graduation rates are just another datapoint of consideration, not the sole reason to choose or reject a particular school.
Last edited on Mon Mar 19th, 2007 05:53 pm by CarolynLawrence
|
DesperateDad
Member
| Joined: | Tue Mar 14th, 2006 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 846 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Mar 19th, 2007 06:57 pm |
|
one needs to be careful with such data since much of the lower 4-year grad rates at public colleges is due to income. For example, the UCs purposely admit 33% Pell grantees into each campus. Since the UCs provide a lot of self-help in the finaid formula, the low income kids have to work during the school year, and work more than the standard allotment of 8-10 work study hours. Because these kids are also typically the ones who are less prepared for University-level work, they should be spending more time in tutorials but cannot. In any event, the students take the minimum load to be considered full-time, which means that graduating in four years is impossible. Another confounding factor is that private schools only provide finaid for four years -- a clear inducement to graduate on time -- in contrast to the publics in Calif which continue to dish out need-based aid as long as a student is working towards a degree.
OTOH, the UCs are extremely generous with AP/IB credits, so many kids who want to graduate in four years can easily do so; I was at a luncheon last year where one kid graduated from Cal in 3 years, and his friend graduated in 2.5 years! Therefore, its important to compare apples to apples -- full pay students at a private school and similar students at a public.
At colleges like Cal Poly, its become religion that it require five years to graduate. It really doesn't for most majors, but is the parental units pay for five years, the kids will enjoy.
|
mackinaw
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 6th, 2006 |
| Location: | Michigan |
| Posts: | 786 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Mar 19th, 2007 07:10 pm |
|
JDad, my reference to CC's was only with respect to how students can reduce tuition costs yet graduate in "normal" time. I wasn't suggesting that those students are figured into the retention/graduation rates of 4-year colleges. OTOH, from my observation, attending a CC is not at all a way to speed one's way to a 4-year degree. My sense is that drop-out rates are very high at CC's and also most of those kids, too, are working while attending school, so it's not necessarily a fast track to BA/BS degree.
For many students, attending a CC is what one sociologist once referred to as a "cooling out" transition for students who either can't afford or can't get into their preferred 4-year college. They attend a CC as their second, most available choice for what to do after graduating high school, and perhaps they will also pick up some useful skills that help them in the working world (with an AA degree), but whether they ultimately even get their AA or move on to a baccalaureate degree is highly uncertain.
OTOH, I recall a conversation that I had once with a dean at FSU, where I was interviewing for a job. He was comparing not only students at FSU to those at UF but also the students at FSU who went directly into FSU as freshmen to those who transferred from community colleges. He characterized those transfer students (those who arrived at FSU with an AA degree) as generally highly motivated and likely to work harder and be more focused than the students who started out at FSU as freshmen. For this reason, the CC transfers typically ended up with higher overall GPA's than the average FSU graduate. I would surmise that these "survivors" of the CC route were indeed special, and knew how to plan and organize their time better than average even if, as the dean said, they were on average probably not as bright as the FSU students who arrived there as freshmen.
DD, I agree with you that income/finances, and the need to work in order to attend college, is the major reason why kids don't graduate in 4 years at public institutions.
Last edited on Mon Mar 19th, 2007 07:52 pm by mackinaw
|
WestrnMom
Super Moderator
| Joined: | Fri May 26th, 2006 |
| Location: | West Coast, USA |
| Posts: | 1213 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Mar 19th, 2007 07:53 pm |
|
Do those numbers include students who drop out or transfer in the % who do not complete within 4 or 6 years? Or does 100% include only students who have either graduated or are still attending that university?
In my experience, as my older child attends a public university, she and her friends have not taken longer to graduate due to money but due to (1) inavailability of classes--not necessarily being too full but upper division major classes may be offered only one semester a year or once every other year, (2) required classes being offered at the same date and hour, and (3) intensity of coursework. Some classes require many more hours outside of school than others, so they can't be doubled or tripled up. This is true of anyone that must take studio classes, like art coursework, theatre, music, film, or dance. Those who graduate on time either take majors with fewer course requirements, summer school, or they forgo classes in their major that would be good to take from a career perspective but are not absolute requirements for graduation.
|
mackinaw
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 6th, 2006 |
| Location: | Michigan |
| Posts: | 786 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Mar 19th, 2007 07:58 pm |
|
Westrn Mom, yes assuming those are the standard persistence/attrition 4,5,6-year graduation rates that are reported on the CDS, those %'s include the dropouts. That is, the denominator consists of all students who enrolled as freshmen (including those who never graduated), and the %'s are the % of that entering class who graduated in 4, 5, or 6 years.
|
Current time is 07:46 pm | |
|
|
|
|
