tomslawsky

^The data is worthless. Big schools that have to average in soft and hard majors look far worse. Try not to just think in terms of "extremes". Schools without engineering programs are artifically bumped up for having only easier majors or majors with less class requirements.

tomslawsky

By the way, another title for this thread could be "which schools admit students who are not responsible enough to take charge of their own education and graduate on time". But, of course, even these numbers would have to be adjusted, too.

Here_to_Help

Some schools, like William & Mary, don't allow you to stay for more than 5 years!

And is time off still counted as part of the yearly graduation rate?

worried_mom

Graduation rates are an interesting statistic, but as many others have pointed out, one that is inherently flawed. Perhaps they are one more thing that might be considered by prospective students and their parents, but I certainly would not give it any great weight. There are many legitimate reasons why a lower percentage of students graduate in 4 years at one school versus another. It may or may not have anything to do with the school itself or its policies (as would be the case if the school wasn’t offering required classes frequently enough or not providing enough seat capacity in these classes --which is what I think the OP is trying to get at).

Sometimes it's just differences in the student bodies that result in lower percentages -- for example, whether the students tend to be highly career-oriented (business majors, pre-med, pre-law, etc.) who just follow their chosen path without deviation, or if they tend to be more generalists who can't decide on a major until relatively late in their college career or who switch majors several times. Also, the percentage of students who need to work part-time for financial reasons (perhaps taking reduced course loads each term or even taking an occasional semester off) will vary from school to school.

Here's an example (admittedly extreme and unique) of how these data can be very misleading: Why is BYU's 4-year graduation rate an abysmal 31%? Because a large majority of the students leave (usually right after the freshman year) to go off on a 2-year church mission before returning for the final three years. That has absolutely nothing at all to do with the school. (And yes, I know it’s a church-run school, but the mission work is entirely voluntary and a personal decision for each student.) Including the 4-year graduation rate for BYU in a simple listing as the OP has done – without any context or explanation – gives a very false and negative impression of BYU.

bclintonk

No, I don't think so, for all the reasons I've already stated. You're wrongly assuming that not graduating from the school at which you originally matriculate within 4 years means buying more than 4 years of college tuition, room & board, etc. There could be all sorts of reasons this is not true--time off for work, illness, transfer to another school which could result in graduation in 4 consecutive years but is not recorded in the original school's 4-year graduation rate, graduation in 8 non-consecutive semesters after a transfer that results in a brief interruption, participation in a 5- or 6-year coop program in which some semesters are spent working, participation in a 5-year degree program (fairly common in architecture, for example), participation in a 3+2 or 5-year joint degree program in which both the bachelors and masters degree are awarded after 5 years, and so on.

Perhaps, but you seem to be assuming there's just a single standard model of undergraduate education in which 4 years to graduation is normal and "ontime." That may be true at LACs and in many arts and sciences programs in universities. It is not true in many other fields.

Keilexandra

^^ Even if there's a valid explanation behind the number, this still affects student experience. If I'm a BYU student and I decide not to go off to mission, I should expect many of my friends to disappear from campus for two years.

wuggroe

I notice that the Catholic schools (Notre Dame, Georgetown, Boston College, Holy Cross) do quite well on this metric. I wonder why?

GoBlue81

One reason is that G'town/BC/HolyCross have no engineering ... thus no extra credits required for graduation, extra time for co-op; no drop-outs from engineering (% dropping out from rigorous engineering program can be quite high); no incentive to transfer from pre-med to engineering, etc. These are certainly unique factors for schools with serious engineering programs.

ewho

Many students at Stanford can enroll the co-term program and get BS and MS in the 5th year. This could never happen at Yale, Harvard and Princeton. I am not sure about the percentage (10%?), but I know that my S will not graduate in 4 years.

wuggroe

"One reason is that G'town/BC/HolyCross have no engineering ... thus no extra credits required for graduation, extra time for co-op; no drop-outs from engineering (% dropping out from rigorous engineering program can be quite high); no incentive to transfer from pre-med to engineering, etc. These are certainly unique factors for schools with serious engineering programs. "

Notre Dame is first in this metric, and does have an engineering program.

Princeton, Yale, UPenn, and Duke all have excellent grad rates, and engineering programs.

rjkofnovi

"The data is worthless. Big schools that have to average in soft and hard majors look far worse. Try not to just think in terms of "extremes". Schools without engineering programs are artifically bumped up for having only easier majors or majors with less class requirements".

hawkette specializes in worthless data. At least the worthless data that makes her favorites schools look better than others.

GoBlue81

How many of these are serious engineers pursuing a career in engineering? Why would you be interested in co-op if your goal is law, medicine or Wall Street?

par72

Several of the schools with very high graduation rates-Holy Cross, Davidson, ND, Princeton, Duke also have some of the strongest alumni giving rates.

GoBlue81

And there are plenty of exceptions:

School / Alumni Giving Rank / 4-year graduation rate

USC / #7 / 69%(#37)
MIT / #11 / 82%(#20)
Emory / #12 / 82%(#20)
Stanford / #15 / 79%(#24)
G'town / #29 / 90%(#4)

modestmelody

I'd like to add a bit to the criticism-- some schools may have a lower four-year graduation rate because they supply more resources than other schools to fund opportunities abroad and for research that would require taking some time off. Hardly anyone would fault a school for having more paid fellowships and funds available to send students to once-in-a-lifetime opportunities that will delay college a semester or two.

There are just too many things, many mentioned in this thread, which could easily hurt four-year graduation rates, whereas IMO, the six-year rate is far less likely to have to worry about these fluctuations. That is why we should use six-year grad rates-- as a protection from some major factors that cannot be controlled.