Pushing Students to Finish in 4

Sandip Sehmi is what his classmates at UC Irvine call a “super senior.” The 22-year-old biology major is also what a growing number of state lawmakers and educators nationwide regard as an unnecessary taxpayer burden.

Like well over half of his fellow full-time undergraduates at America’s public colleges, Sehmi will take more than four years to obtain his bachelor’s degree.

“It’s my fifth year and I want to get out and get on with my life,” said Sehmi, who works 20 hours a week as a car mechanic in addition to taking a heavy course load. “But it just wasn’t realistic to get out in four years.”

State educators, however, are increasingly unsympathetic to the plight of “super seniors,” who may reduce admission space and--more worrisome to budget-conscious lawmakers--take revenue from state coffers.

California picks up about $8,000--68%--of the annual educational cost of each full-time UC student, and $6,500--77%--for their Cal State counterparts. And, with about two-thirds of UC students and about 85% of Cal State students staying in school more than four years, some educational analysts contend “super seniors” tap California for tens of millions of dollars annually.

“My gut reaction is this has to be reversed,” said state Sen. Quentin Kopp (I-San Francisco), a member of the Senate Select Committee on Higher Education. “It’s a problem both because of the effect on the individual [student] and the cost to the taxpayer.”

California is taking its first steps to speed up full-time students, whose reasons for staying longer than four years include working at part-time jobs, struggling to take overbooked required classes or fretting over joining the “real world.”

Three of the nine UC campuses and all 22 Cal State schools have begun offering a loose “contract” that guarantees students hard-to-get classes in exchange for graduating in four years.

Other states have been far more aggressive. Three years ago, Montana began halting state subsidies to students who pile up course credits well beyond graduation requirements.

Under a proposal expected to be approved in March, the Montana Board of Regents will lower the course credit threshold by 15%--a move that would save the state about $6.2 million per semester.

“Look, we don’t have the money,” said state Commissioner of Higher Education Jeff Baker, the top administrator for the 30,000 students in Montana’s public university system. “If you want more than [the new limit], then you are going to have to pay for it yourself.”

In 1994, North Carolina imposed a 25% tuition surcharge on students who amass excessive course credits. Florida’s Board of Regents recommended last week that lawmakers approve a similar surcharge.

Although critics question whether such measures will succeed given that many students hold jobs while they attend school, Arizona, Colorado, Indiana, Maryland and South Carolina are either scrutinizing graduation rates or considering financial incentives to improve them.

“The volcano is rumbling about slow graduation rates,” said Cheryl D. Blanco, policy director at the Western Interstate Commission of Higher Education, who has tracked the issue for two years. “States are under tremendous pressures.”

Though the issue may be just starting to simmer in California, some educational analysts believe it will come to a boil in the next decade. The state must contend not only with tight budgets but with a projected increase of 455,000 new students in the higher education system beginning in 2005. They will boost higher education enrollment statewide to approximately 2.4 million.

The issue does not affect private schools as much. Their students graduate in four years at somewhat higher rates than public school undergraduates and, of course, public subsidies are not involved.

But for the state system “this is going to be a major issue,” said Patrick M. Callan, executive director of the California Higher Education Policy Center in San Jose.

“When we get into the crunch of how to accommodate all those students, the issue will become how can you let some students stay five, six or seven years?”

The state will consider three major strategies to make room for the huge student wave, according to Charles Ratliff of the California Postsecondary Education Commission. It can build more buildings and campuses, expand classroom technology so students can learn from off-campus sites or graduate students more rapidly.

“The first two ways require lots of money,” said Ratliff, deputy director of the body that coordinates the state’s higher education policy. “Faster exit times should be much cheaper.”

But so far, California’s initial attempts to accelerate graduation rates have had limited success. Since a 1993 speech by Gov. Pete Wilson that urged universities to graduate students more rapidly, only three UC campuses--Davis, Santa Barbara and Irvine--directly heeded the call.

Davis opened the first UC program designed to hasten student graduation times in fall 1993. The program drew about 400 from its latest freshman class of about 3,000. At Santa Barbara, which started its “Go For Four” program in fall 1994, about 325 freshmen--out of 3,300--signed up.

Meanwhile, Irvine attracted just 25 freshmen out of nearly 3,000 in fall 1995.

Participation is low despite the fact the programs are free and carry no withdrawal penalty.

“This just isn’t a very high priority for most students when they first arrive,” said Jim Danziger, UC Irvine’s dean of undergraduate studies. “This is a decision that has to be made at a time in their lives when there is enormous uncertainty.”

Results from the Cal State campuses, which were required by the state to institute similar programs by fall 1995, were only slightly better. For example, at Cal State Dominguez Hills, 15 freshmen out of 510 enrolled.

While systemwide strains are showing, campus officials--long acquainted with lengthy student stays--have rarely seen the issue as a top concern. Though they may keep out a small number of new students, long-term students nevertheless contribute to full classrooms, studies show. And, whether a student is a freshman or a sixth-year senior, the university still receives the same amount of state subsidy.

Without outside pressure, “There’s just not a lot of incentive to speed things up,” Ratliff said.

While acknowledging that four-year graduation programs are revenue-driven, university officials say they don’t know how much long-term students may tax state resources. Officials say the fiscal impact can only be estimated because it has never been examined in California.

Still, there’s little doubt it’s a significant amount.

“It’s certainly safe to say it’s in the tens of millions of dollars,” said Alexander Astin, director of the Higher Education Research Institute in Westwood.

Many educators argue that a more revealing benchmark for state expenditures is course or credit hour accumulation rather than raw time to graduation. (A course usually equals three or four credit hours.)

Reducing excessive credit hours--the number of courses taken after satisfying graduation requirements--is the target of the financial penalties enacted by Montana and North Carolina.

California statistics for the average number of credit hours racked up by students at graduation were not available.

National averages, however, show a steady increase in credit hours, according to the latest figures from the U.S. Department of Education. The freshman class of 1972 earned an average of 126 credit hours, roughly two courses over what is needed for a degree at most universities.

Students who entered college in 1982 amassed 139.4 credit hours, or about a full semester more than is needed for graduation. (Statistics for the freshman class of 1992, most of whom have yet to graduate, are still being compiled.)

But some educators maintain that states banking on a budgetary windfall by pushing students out university doors faster will be disappointed. Many students today don’t graduate in four years because they are older and work outside school more than their predecessors, educators say. Part-time jobs detract from class and study time, while older students frequently have family commitments and other obligations that younger students do not.

In the Cal State system, students frequently have to take a leave for a semester to earn extra money. Sixty-eight percent of students held at least a part-time job, according to a 1994 Cal State survey. At UC campuses, about 53% took part-time jobs while in school, according to a 1994 UC report.

UC Irvine student Sehmi understands the frustration of trying to graduate on time. Between his part-time job and a demanding course load, he said, it’s nearly impossible to finish school in four years.

“There’s pressure from my family. They keep asking what’s taking so long,” said Sehmi, who expects to get his degree after five years. “But I tell them of about 50 friends I know, only three graduated in four years.”

Students, administrators and officials point out a host of other reasons that delay graduation time. In California, students over 25 make up about 43% of Cal State’s student body. Such nontraditional students account for 7% of UC’s population, according to 1993 figures.

Other factors include fear of entering the job market, lax academic advising or student planning, losing transfer credits, and double majors or switching majors.

The latter is to blame for holding up UC Irvine student Tom Grettenberg, who expects to graduate in five years. The 20-year-old San Pedro resident started college determined to be an engineer, like his father.

But after a year, he changed his major to psychology.

“My first year was really kind of a waste,” Grettenberg said. “But that’s part of the maturing process.”

Lost in the pursuit of leaner budgets and more efficient student processing, fear critics, is the spirit of higher education itself.

“You don’t want to turn learning into a footrace,” said Joyce Scott of the American Assn. of State Colleges and Universities. “A crucial part of learning and growing is time for reflection.”

University of Montana junior Molly Wood, who is majoring in journalism with minors in German and French, may represent the view of many students nationwide.

“Frankly,” she sad, “I don’t care about saving the university too much money. I just want to get the best education I can.”