<p>
</p>
<p>Well, something has to account for the fact that, according to IPEDS, Michigan’s 6-year graduation rate of about ~89% is basically the same as Harvard’s 4-year graduation rate (88%). </p>
<p>I suspect that wait-lists and corresponding course unavailability are a contributing factor, as they (sadly) are at Berkeley. But even if they are not, other contributing factors are equally unacceptable. To wit:</p>
<p>*Perhaps Michigan simply does not provide undergrads with sufficient support & advising to graduate in 4 years. But that then raises the question: why not? After all, undergrad support/advising services are relatively cheap and Michigan has plenty of funds.</p>
<p>*Perhaps too many Michigan undergrad programs are not realistically designed to be completed in 4 years; engineering programs are particularly notorious for being only nominally completable in 4 years. But that also raises the question of why can’t the programs be designed to be more efficient? For example, one could provide a 2-step process where engineering students would first graduate with a non-accredited B.A. “Technology” degree after 4 years, but then stay for the 5th year to then earn the accredited BS engineering degree. Not only would that improve the 4-year graduation rates, but would also vastly bolster the job prospects of those students who are interested in tech but don’t feel the need to complete all of the requirements of a fully-fledged engineering degree. They could leave the school with a degree after 4 years. It won’t be an accredited engineering degree, but hey, it would still be a bachelor’s degree from Michigan. </p>
<p>*Perhaps many Michigan undergrads have to work part-time to support their educations and hence take longer to graduate. But that again raises the question of why Michigan then doesn’t provide better financial aid? Like I said, Michigan has plenty of funds. Harvard is even more expensive than Michigan for the average student at each school (as the vast majority of Michigan students are state residents and hence pay a subsidized price), yet Harvard nevertheless graduates its students at a brisk pace, as Harvard devotes extensive funding opportunities to its poorer students. </p>
<p>*Perhaps the most important factor is that Michigan simply admits far more students who are not particularly talented or motivated than does Harvard. Naturally, these students are probably not going to graduate in a timely fashion, and may not ever graduate at all. But that then just raises the question of why Michigan persists in admitting unmotivated, untalented students. </p>
<p>Now, I can anticipate the ‘dropout-prodigy’ counterargument - what of Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, or Matt Damon? After all, all of them dropped out of Harvard and they’re nevertheless doing well for themselves. Fair enough. Certainly if you’re an entrepreneurial or acting superstar, you won’t need a college degree. And I myself have recommended that any student with a promising entrepreneurial idea should probably drop out to launch a startup, and return to college later if the startup fails. </p>
<p>But for the rest of us normal folk who are not a proto-Time-Magazine-Person-of-the-Year or proto-Sexiest-Men-Alive, a college degree has become de-rigueur An increasing number of employers simply won’t interview you at all - not even for a mundane mail-room position - if you lack a degree. And certainly the guilded professions such as medicine or law are, with only rare exceptions, barred from those without degrees. Besides, I think most people actually go to college with the intention of actually graduating. And graduating on time, rather than being the next Van Wilder or Johnny Lechner.</p>