"No-Frills" College Proposal

Parents Forum
1

<p>I’m not certain whether this is an interesting idea or not:
[A</a> four-year college, strictly educational | Philadelphia Inquirer | 01/22/2009](<a href=“http://www.philly.com/philly/education/20090122_A_four-year_college__strictly_educational.html]A”>A four-year college, strictly educational)</p>

<p>The Pennsylvania State Board of Education (a body that is not particularly powerful or important; I’m not exactly sure what it does) is proposing creating a new type of public higher education institution, one that would offer a four-year bachelor’s degree and nothing else – no dorms, sports, gyms, student organizations, etc. It would also have year-round classes, so that a four-year degree could be completed in three years (less with AP credit, or more realistically 4-6 years with substantial concurrent employment).</p>

<p>By way of background, Pennsylvania has one of the more Byzantine public higher-education structures. There is the Pennsylvania State University (Penn State), which has its main campus in University Park (State College) and 6 or 7 satellite campuses around the state; four independent state-supported universities, two of which are comprehensive research universities with multiple campuses of their own (Temple, Pitt, Dickinson, and HBCU Cheyney); and something more than a dozen masters universities (former teachers’ colleges mainly) scattered around the state in mostly rural areas (West Chester, Millersville, Bloomsburg, Kutztown, and the confusingly named Indiana and California Universities, among others). Plus, of course, community colleges, some of which are quite substantial and vibrant. The state universities are pretty efficient, but they do offer “frills” like campuses, dorms, and football teams.</p>

<p>As a practical matter, this proposal isn’t going to go anywhere any time soon. State government is engaged in continuous budget-slashing, and the Governor is fighting to preserve at least some shreds of his signature programs. No one is going to take up the cudgel for this, or sacrifice existing institutions to make it happen. (Some existing institutions may have to be sacrificed anyway in the next few years, though no one is proposing it yet.)</p>

2

<p>Well, I’m pleased that “the powers that be” are at least thinking about the high cost of higher education. What’s lost in this particular proposal is the “experience” of college, which includes things like summers off, changing majors, and yes attending athletic events.</p>

3

<p>This would basically be the equivalent of online education. Schools like the University of Phoenix already have the no-frills edge on state systems.</p>

4

<p>actually, this sounds a little more like City College of NY (I think)- the one where it is free to attend, but there are very few majors. A very no frills school. </p>

<p>The difference between this and distance ed is that there is actually face time in class and some degree of social interaction between students, even if limited to before and after classes. Sort of like night school.</p>

<p>Might be a good option for many people. Distance Ed can be intimidating, especially in discussion based courses where use of the keyboard and screen get really intense.</p>

5

<p>This sounds like it might be a very good model for non-traditional students- people who have kids at home or are already in the work force and want to get their B.A.</p>

6

<p>Sounds like a great choice for students who want an education and don’t care about the “college experience.”</p>

7

<p>It would only fly in a very high population area, or as an online option.
In my state there are commuter schools in each of the major population centers that can function and, started out life functioning, very much as described. It needs to be a major population center because the student has to live somewhere, and most will probably be working at least part time.
What these no frills schools learned in Alabama that in order to attract enough 18 year old freshmen to round out the population of commuters, they had to add dorms and football and workout facilities, etc, etc.</p>

<p>What I wonder is that phenomenon a reflection of the general prosperity of our country that may be gone for the next 20 years or even forever?? We have the luxury of worrying about our 18 year olds going to a school where they have to live in an apartment, thinking that is a negative. Meanwhile I was the first person in my family to go away to a residential campus - everyone else went to the junior college 10 miles away because they could commute and live at home, then transferred to finish at the 4 year school, but had married by then.</p>