Many University of Massachusetts students are becoming aware that our university is joining dozens of other academic institutions in offering a three-year degree program for specific majors. While proponents of the program feel that lessened student debt and quicker acquisition of degrees in specific fields are both extremely important, critics believe students should not sacrifice essential time in college for such reasons.

I support the program as an option, but strongly believe that it should not become a trend, as it forces students to rush through a very important time in their lives and does not leave much room for opportunities and flexibility.

While the three-year program will benefit students in specific situations, the concept of condensing college studies into three years should absolutely not become a trend followed by students in all majors. A Boston Globe article asserted earlier this year that, at UMass, “students in one-third of the University’s 88 majors will be eligible.” Before school officials offer this option in nearly 30 majors, they must seriously consider whether the program is truly beneficial for the specific major. This could lead to students selecting certain majors simply because they want to graduate ahead of time.

A biology major who wants to get on the fast track to medical school may decide to complete his/her degree in three years when the full four years may pique more of an interest in someone considering a career doing research. Given the fact that students are constantly changing their majors, the fast-track allows for little flexibility. Once you put yourself on the program, it will be difficult to make any changes to your plans. College is a time for self-exploration; students should not feel trapped in their academic and future career plans.

Proponents of the program do agree that the fast-track is not a good idea for students who want to study abroad, take on multiple majors/minors or do research. Four full years allow students flexibility to explore areas of interest, to learn to live independently and support themselves and to discover more about the role they want to play as individuals in the world. I have been able to study abroad, pursue two separate degrees, complete independent studies, work on campus and acquire a certificate, all in my four years. College is the time to take advantage of these opportunities. After all, UMass is a liberal arts institution that values a multi-dimensional, diverse education.

Keeping in mind that employers seek individuals who have undergone vast personal growth before entering the work force, students must remember that the full four years of college serve not only to expand their minds academically, but also to allow them to grow and mature as individuals in the world. Deborah Humphreys, a spokeswoman for the Association of American Colleges and Universities, is quoted as saying, “For most students entering college, they don’t necessarily have a full grasp of where they want to end up or what they want to study … Too narrow a focus will leave one ill-prepared to succeed.”

I argue against the fast track becoming a trend here at UMass and in other universities; however, I do support the program as an option, if it is contained to a few selected majors. Some students declare majors upon entering UMass and are pursuing focused studies towards planned career fields, such as business-related majors. Many argue that additional requirements, such as global education and foreign language requirements, are a waste of time and simply prolong the amount of time spent at school. Why should a philosophy major who wants to immediately pursue graduate work be forced to take an extra year to satisfy his or her foreign language requirement? The article in Amherst Bulletin asks, “Why shouldn’t those who are focused, high achievers be allowed to take the most efficient path possible to finish their studies?” If the students are willing and able to meet the challenges accompanied by the condensed program, they should be able to do so.

Fast track proponents also speak to its financial benefits. The cost for an in-state undergraduate student to attend the University in 2011 will be $20,546. As we know, tuition and fees steadily rise each year. Graduating with upwards of $80,000 in debt is not only overwhelming to us as young adults, but can heavily influence what we do after graduating. The Amherst Bulletin posted; “[G]iven the state of the economy and the spiraling expense of education … how can you fault a student for wanting to save money?” I agree that introducing the three year program and having students pay three quarters of what they normally would is a good solution; eliminating the payment of 20 grand could alleviate a portion of student debt and help to quell financial woes. I do acknowledge the fact that some students will opt for the fast track because of financial dilemmas, and this is an unfortunate aspect of higher education. My point is that while there are financial benefits, a full four-year experience at a university is important, and only in extreme circumstances should students pick the three-year track over the four-year track.

It is impossible to predict the future of the dynamics of this campus. Departments will merge, language requirements will be instated and removed and cutoffs to graduate with honors will increase and decrease. The number of schools offering three-year degrees is growing rapidly: UMass is making moves to keep up with other them. Nonetheless, the three-year degree program, while potentially beneficial to students in specific majors on determined career tracks, should only function as a special circumstance and should not become the norm, whether at this university or any across the country.

Samantha Ryan is a Collegian guest columnist. She can be reached at [email protected].