Post by captaggie on Sept 18, 2006 13:05:55 GMT -5
www.newsobserver.com/579/story/487631.html
College Careers
The UNC system president looks after the state's interests by pushing colleges to do more to make sure students graduate
You'd be right to feel cheated if that high-performance car you just bought would reach only 50 miles an hour. North Carolina taxpayers get that disappointed feeling when they pay for a university system that graduates in six years just half the freshmen who enter its doors. There's a big waste of horsepower somewhere, and kudos to Erskine Bowles, the new president of the University of North Carolina system, for insisting on an engine overhaul.
The UNC Board of Governors, which oversees the 16 campuses in the UNC system, has approved Bowles' push, which he hinted would be a priority before he assumed the presidency in January.
There are a number of explanations for why North Carolina has gotten to this point, even if few of those explanations amount to good excuses. Certainly the problem is a common one. The New York Times reports that about 50 colleges nationally have a six-year graduation rate below 20 percent. Many serve poor and minority students. All in all, fewer than six U.S. college students in 10 graduate within six years.
The average at UNC system schools is typical: 59 percent. But the range is quite broad. UNC-Chapel Hill awarded diplomas to 84 percent of its 1999 freshmen within six years, and N.C. State graduated 70 percent -- respectable by comparison even if there's room for improvement. Appalachian State's rate was 64 percent, and East Carolina's was 54 percent. But just 45 percent of N.C. Central's entering freshmen graduated in six years.
Throughout the system, the graduation rate at seven schools was less than 50 percent. The lowest rates were at N.C. A&T State, with 40 percent, and UNC-Pembroke with 35 percent.
Indeed, there are few reasons -- illness and finances are legitimate ones -- why students shouldn't be able to graduate in four years or so. Certainly it would save parents and taxpayers money while increasing the pool of well-educated North Carolinians. And it would open spots for new students.
Colleges of course shouldn't lower their academic standards simply to push students through. But they should take care to set requirements for satisfactory progress that are both realistic and firm. The schools' part of the bargain includes helping freshmen with their transition into the college environment, ensuring that mandatory courses are available, providing high-quality counseling, and making sure financial aid goes to those who need it.
Bowles is on the right track in pressing for better six-year graduation rates. It signals to administrators his seriousness about improving the college experience. He properly has resisted a one-size-fits-all approach, letting campuses set higher targets for their graduation rates based on admissions policies, scholarship budgets and other factors. And he's also looking ahead at how to finance the new plans. Schools that serve more lower-income or non-traditional students, of course, should qualify for more resources to help those students along.
To run efficiently, universities still need enough gas in the tank.
College Careers
The UNC system president looks after the state's interests by pushing colleges to do more to make sure students graduate
You'd be right to feel cheated if that high-performance car you just bought would reach only 50 miles an hour. North Carolina taxpayers get that disappointed feeling when they pay for a university system that graduates in six years just half the freshmen who enter its doors. There's a big waste of horsepower somewhere, and kudos to Erskine Bowles, the new president of the University of North Carolina system, for insisting on an engine overhaul.
The UNC Board of Governors, which oversees the 16 campuses in the UNC system, has approved Bowles' push, which he hinted would be a priority before he assumed the presidency in January.
There are a number of explanations for why North Carolina has gotten to this point, even if few of those explanations amount to good excuses. Certainly the problem is a common one. The New York Times reports that about 50 colleges nationally have a six-year graduation rate below 20 percent. Many serve poor and minority students. All in all, fewer than six U.S. college students in 10 graduate within six years.
The average at UNC system schools is typical: 59 percent. But the range is quite broad. UNC-Chapel Hill awarded diplomas to 84 percent of its 1999 freshmen within six years, and N.C. State graduated 70 percent -- respectable by comparison even if there's room for improvement. Appalachian State's rate was 64 percent, and East Carolina's was 54 percent. But just 45 percent of N.C. Central's entering freshmen graduated in six years.
Throughout the system, the graduation rate at seven schools was less than 50 percent. The lowest rates were at N.C. A&T State, with 40 percent, and UNC-Pembroke with 35 percent.
Indeed, there are few reasons -- illness and finances are legitimate ones -- why students shouldn't be able to graduate in four years or so. Certainly it would save parents and taxpayers money while increasing the pool of well-educated North Carolinians. And it would open spots for new students.
Colleges of course shouldn't lower their academic standards simply to push students through. But they should take care to set requirements for satisfactory progress that are both realistic and firm. The schools' part of the bargain includes helping freshmen with their transition into the college environment, ensuring that mandatory courses are available, providing high-quality counseling, and making sure financial aid goes to those who need it.
Bowles is on the right track in pressing for better six-year graduation rates. It signals to administrators his seriousness about improving the college experience. He properly has resisted a one-size-fits-all approach, letting campuses set higher targets for their graduation rates based on admissions policies, scholarship budgets and other factors. And he's also looking ahead at how to finance the new plans. Schools that serve more lower-income or non-traditional students, of course, should qualify for more resources to help those students along.
To run efficiently, universities still need enough gas in the tank.
