Parents of university students - do you agree?

[Studentdebtmum]

Why should students spend three years at university if they could achieve the same qualification and learning outcomes in two?
I’ve created a UK Parliament petition calling for a review of degree lengths and better access to two-year degrees where they can be delivered without reducing academic standards.
This isn’t about shortening every degree. Many courses need three years or longer. It’s about giving students the choice to study more intensively where it’s appropriate.
A two-year degree could help reduce student debt, cut the cost of living away from home, and help families avoid paying for months of empty student accommodation, while allowing graduates to start their careers sooner.
If you agree that students should have this option, I’d really appreciate your support. Please sign my petition and, just as importantly, share this post so we can reach as many people as possible.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/771873
Thank you so much for your support. Every signature counts.

I think you might struggle to get academics on board with missing the summer conference season in order to teach undergraduates.

I’ve delivered the occasional fast track undergraduate programme and found almost universally students really dislike the intensity and pace plus the lack of hours available to work part time. The drop out rate was huge.

I work at a University and there are already several accelerated courses taught in 2 years. Students get shorter holidays and a more intense workload as assessments immediately follow taught content before they're onto the next semester.

It works for some, not for others. There were also significantly less students who applied for the accelerated programmes so maybe most prefer the standard 3 year course?

Tell me you know nothing about how universities run without telling me you know nothing about how universities run... 😂😂😂

I suggest you do your research better as it already is an option. One of DD’s UCAS choices was a 2 year intensive Medical Sciences BSc at Lancashire - apparently very popular with prospective medics/dentists who missed their grades and want to apply again postgraduately. Degree length isn’t regulated but there is a realistic minimum amount of time needed to achieve the correct number of credits to graduate.

The lack of summer break was off putting for DD - she ended up studying Biomedical Science (not at Lancashire!) and it really is intensive by nature, even as a standard 3 year degree. She needs her breaks to rest/recover as the volume and complexity of the material is often very difficult to manage. By condensing the degree there is no way in my opinion that you wouldn’t be sacrificing quality learning. Summer jobs to build up cash for the academic year ahead are also important - nearly impossible to do if you’re on an intensive pathway with little to no time off.

Dear god no.

it’s intense as it is

Those conferences are part of what keep teaching fresh and unique as well. I do understand the point - my subject is history (my kids also studied it) so contact time is actually limited (8-10h) but it isn't about rote learning and just learning the information, it is the independent study that creates the overall degree. Squeezing into two years, potentially means being 'taught' only really and isn't that different to A levels and will dilute the discipline and I am sure the same is true of other arts and humanities subjects. Could you do Business and Management and maybe Law in 2 years (or perhaps standard 2 years with 3 year deeper options) maybe. I think there is a lot of learning and growth in academic learning beyond what is taught in lectures which would be lost and is still valuable. Instead of this, I think I am more supportive of better investment in apprenticeships from entry level to degree apprenticeships. I would like to see them in everything from Butchery to Law. I would like to see more variation at 16. Ways to continue subjects like history that are not A level - more hands on, maybe like Archaeology Btec. I have 3 DCs all LOVE history, but only one is very academic, but the other two would love to carry on but A levels might not be the right path, so one is waiting for Access to become available at 19 and working and one is thinking it through now. I'd like to consider ways to think outside the box and provide education that allows different ways of learning.

Do you think Scottish degrees (4 years) should be compressed to 2 as well?

I promise I used paragraphs, but MN just keeps taking them out.

That is such an ignorant comment, clearly showing you nothing about how the academic year and workloads operate. Attending and presenting at conferences are important elements of many universities' and staffs progression, reputation, and collaboration. And going to conferences is not something everyone does either.

No I don't agree at all.

I think funding and tuition fees are the problem. Compressing and curtailing what should be a very special time in a young person's life just because we've had a succession of monstrous governments is completely wrong, imo.

Academics also need time to research and write the books and articles which develop understanding of their subjects and inform future study and teaching. That research may require them to travel so they can't also be on campus.

That is literally what I took away from PP’s post? That summer conference season is important to academics and so it’s nonsensical to suggest they give this up in favour of additional teaching time?

DH is an acadmic his summer is reasearch, attend conferences and run a min research meet up under EU money funding planning groups next steps, updating courses and designing new ones, marking usually resits but somtimes projects and getting admin bits done - also supervising master and phd students. He's not sat around doing nothing.

I mean DH already works way more than his comntracted hours - if they increase the work load even more then it's not worth doing the job.

There are a few course run in two years at some uni - how they manage those I've no idea but many of the courses DD2 is looking at all seem to get students to do the projects and short term placements over the summers - so they aren't going to want to lose that time.

I and DD1 both had field work in our summers - mine was just one between yr 2 and yr 3 was 2 months in field and basis for dissertation and worked rest of the summers to afford uni at all. DD1 had field work as part of degree for part of summer between y1 and y2.

There also OU option- where you can take roughly six years but work full time alongside.

As well as time for conferences, research, writing and the like that @HelenaWilson @FieryA mention, academics also need some time to take annual leaves themselves.

The already-constrained summer (because teaching activities bleed over into July and creep into September; and because 90% of our research has to be squeezed into summer) is the only block of time we have to get a big, chunky two or three week break.

You can prize that out of my cold dead hands. I'd leave the sector before I gave that up to do intensive undergraduate teaching.

As someone who works at a university (not an academic) I think this would be awful for the students

It would certainly save on costs for parents. Lone parent here - two kids who between them will have done eight years. It’s bleeding me dry. I’ve paid their rent throughout. All degrees used to be two years.

I am not sure that this would be popular. Academic study, even at undergraduate level, isn’t just about rushing through it and getting it completed as rapidly as possible. It’s not a factory!

For younger undergraduates they are also still physically, emotionally and cognitively maturing over the three years. Why would it ever be beneficial to skip that?

The summer break is also valuable for doing preparatory or background reading, alongside working.

Surely Covid taught us that reducing the student experience to pure content delivery is not successful?

That sounds painful and I hope they appreciate you! I didn’t get proper parental support at university (long story) and would have so valued that.

I thought degree have always been three to four years.

Though two year short track ones have been around since 70 at some institutioans and courses apparently - and Open University started having undergraduates in 1971 - so p/t study been around since then if not before.

I do agree costs is an issue but that's partly how government has chose to fund it all - also summer jobs I relied on to help pay for uni even back in 90s do seem harder to find.

When were all degrees two years?

My mother did a two year degree in the 1950s. It was standard.

Resist also happen in summer - and can help students avoid re-taking an entire year with associated substainal costs.

It’s unlikely there would be any saving on tuition fees, but I can see there might be a saving in accommodation costs.

One does wonder where universities will find the extra staff needed to facilitate compress a three year course into two though.

I don’t believe it was.