Spring Break
University should keep students in mind when making improvements
Quality of education should not be sacrificed to meet deadline
Monica Baltich
Issue date: 10/29/09 Section: Editorial/Opinion
The Blugold Commitment, as the school Web site defines it, is "a proposed initiative that would enable UW-Eau Claire to enhance quality through expanding value-added experiences for all students while also improving four-year graduation rates."
Now that's all well and good, and who wouldn't be supportive of a school trying to better itself? But I think the main concern for me as a student is that the university doesn't lose sight of the students in trying to improve the experience.
Yes, graduating in four years is ideal, but personally, I don't want to sacrifice the quality of my education to meet a deadline.
Before I did all my homework for this piece, the only thing I really knew about the commitment proposal was the tuition increase encouraging the students to get out in four years. This seems to be the highly debated part of the proposal, and rightly so.
However, it can also be an obstacle that blinds us from the true nature of the proposal.
Tuition is a big deal and, of course, no one enjoys seeing their payments go up. But the truth is the university needs more funds to cover the decrease in state funding. If the plan in fact works, it will save students money in the long run because they won't have to go extra semesters. I wanted to address the tuition issue only briefly because it is important but the price increase is currently just an estimate, and should be discussed more in-depth once things are finalized.
What I'm concerned with is that the school may be focused more on the issues coming from the school system than the issues coming from the student.
At UW-Eau Claire, the graduation rate for students who go four years is only 26 percent. So there clearly is an issue. But from all the students I know who have to go an extra semester or two, which by no means includes everyone, there have been very few complaints about class availability or advisors being the problem. In my experience, the delay comes from when the students declare a major or the nature of their major.
Now that's all well and good, and who wouldn't be supportive of a school trying to better itself? But I think the main concern for me as a student is that the university doesn't lose sight of the students in trying to improve the experience.
Yes, graduating in four years is ideal, but personally, I don't want to sacrifice the quality of my education to meet a deadline.
Before I did all my homework for this piece, the only thing I really knew about the commitment proposal was the tuition increase encouraging the students to get out in four years. This seems to be the highly debated part of the proposal, and rightly so.
However, it can also be an obstacle that blinds us from the true nature of the proposal.
Tuition is a big deal and, of course, no one enjoys seeing their payments go up. But the truth is the university needs more funds to cover the decrease in state funding. If the plan in fact works, it will save students money in the long run because they won't have to go extra semesters. I wanted to address the tuition issue only briefly because it is important but the price increase is currently just an estimate, and should be discussed more in-depth once things are finalized.
What I'm concerned with is that the school may be focused more on the issues coming from the school system than the issues coming from the student.
At UW-Eau Claire, the graduation rate for students who go four years is only 26 percent. So there clearly is an issue. But from all the students I know who have to go an extra semester or two, which by no means includes everyone, there have been very few complaints about class availability or advisors being the problem. In my experience, the delay comes from when the students declare a major or the nature of their major.
Be the first to comment on this story