With most of the world economy trying to recover from the reeling affect of the global recession over the past two years, a new education concept seems to be emerging. In recent times, authors like Jennifer Epstein and Lamar Alexander have posted articles on websites, such as USAToday.com and Newsweek.com explaining how giving newer opportunities to students to finish their four year bachelor’s degree within three years will prove extremely beneficial.
While both the authors sport similar sentiments, we will take into consideration those as projected by Jennifer Epstein. The article is a comprehensive piece explaining how most students will benefit from the introduction of three-year courses within universities, especially in terms of monetary benefits. While most of the arguments presented by the author in favor of three-year degrees stand valid, it may be taken into account that some of the crucial aspects with regards to the education system remain untouched and unexplored. If these few unexplored facets were to be considered, I am sure the conclusion of the author’s article might have differed alternately. In the counter-arguments I present further on in the paper, I will explore how introduction of three- year degree courses would rather mar the entire purpose of higher education and how the students will relatively suffer intermittently if subjected to the said change. However, to be fair to our opponent, we will first consider and reflect upon the points mentioned by her.
Jennifer Epstein is of the view that with the downturn in economy, it has become extremely difficult for the college students to manage to pay for the college fees. Further, with incessantly rising costs, the entire task of meeting the expense of a college degree has become even more cumbersome. According to the author, on an average, a student has to pay $43,000 (including lodging fees) per year. With this outrageous amount, most students get discouraged to go for higher education. This is one of the major reasons why government and several of the institutions are now offering their students options to finish their degrees in four years. Not only does this save a lot for the students, it also saves on a lot of tax payers money with respect of the cost associated per student as borne by the college.
While most of the arguments presented by Ms Epstein stand valid, the fact however is that even as the governments and institutions work towards reducing the costs for students to make the course more affordable, not many students will ultimately benefit from the change. To understand the point here, we first need to set our priorities right. What is more important – hastening the process of initiation of student into professionalism or providing him proper education and equipping him with all the necessary qualities required in this era of globalization? Is there no way of reducing course...