The following column appeared in Forbes, where San Francisco Bay University President Nicholas Ladany is a contributor.

“Seven years of college, down the drain.”

This line from John Belushi’s character in “Animal House” was intended to be funny because it poked fun at how someone could be in college for so long and still not graduate (or have a passing grade, for that matter).

What’s not funny is that higher education has adopted Bluto’s approach towards time to degree. In 1990, 12 years after that movie came out, colleges moved the metric measuring the graduation finish line from four years to six years, partly in response to senators’ desire to accommodate athletic eligibility and partly to look better. The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) and other educational bodies use a six-year graduation rate as the norm for institutional reporting and a primary metric for measuring how successfully they prepare their students. Presently, the six-year graduation rate for the now misnamed four-year degree-granting institutions is 62%, and the four-year graduation rate is below 50% (a D and F, respectively). There are actually reports now measuring an eight-year graduation rate as well.

It’s time for colleges to adopt a more rigorous standard. We owe it to students to provide pathways for them to graduate in a reasonable and timely fashion.

A number of reasons explain why a six-year graduation rate became the standard beyond the need to accommodate athletic eligibility. One reason is that most university employees prefer to have the bulk of their work occur for nine months out of the year. Hence, significantly fewer courses are offered over the summer for students who may want to go to school year-round. Another reason is that the curriculum at many universities is bloated with professor-only favorite courses that students would be better off watching on MTV. And partly because of the bloated curriculum, required courses either can’t be offered in a given semester or may only be offered once a year, which limits the ability of students to take required courses. In addition, universities have long believed that a 120-credit undergraduate curriculum is right-sized with no empirical evidence to indicate that’s true. Most universities aptly note that scientific inquiry is essential to learning yet they fail to apply scientific principles and methodologies to curricular outcomes.

As educators, we don’t use this same logic on exams and course assignments because it would indicate a lack of rigor or a lowering of expectations. For example, we don’t allow students 150% of the normal time we expect them to complete their work in the classroom or offer faculty and staff pay increases for work that covers a year and a half rather than a year.

There's an inherent misalignment with the six-year graduation rate. College curricula are designed for a four-year timeline, and students and their families plan their finances accordingly. The expectation is clear — invest four years' worth of tuition and fees for a degree that will open up important career and income opportunities. Moving that goal post to six years increases the financial burden on students and families by adding extra years of tuition payments and the opportunity cost of lost income because it takes much longer to graduate and get a job.

Some argue that the six-year measure accounts for variability in student pathways, accommodating students who have jobs or change majors, for example. Taking those factors into account is certainly necessary, but we shouldn’t let those extenuating circumstances influence how we measure institutional success. If so many students are unable to graduate in four years, perhaps the issue is not them but a lack of necessary support from their college or university.

The six-year graduation rate has bred complacency in higher education, permitting a slower pace where urgency and efficiency in student support should be paramount. We need to conduct a closer examination of the student experience and institutional performance. Adjusting this standard would compel us to innovate, streamline operations and shift expectations back to a more traditional and efficient timeline.

Higher education can mitigate financial strain and bolster timely graduation by nurturing students' academic progression (e.g., stop thinking of students as numbers) with targeted support (e.g., adequate mental health services) and streamlined curricula linked to real-world needs (e.g., life literacy). As we innovate, the three-year degree plan should not be an outlier but a new benchmark, and the six-year graduation metric should retire as a standard of success. It's time for colleges and universities to recalibrate and embrace a model that reflects the urgency of our times and the realities of our students.

Follow President Ladany on LinkedIn. 

At San Francisco Bay University, bold ideas turn into reality. On June 20, over 100 students, staff and faculty members celebrated the grand opening of the Student Success Hub and Student Lounge.

The Student Success Hub and Student Lounge were created in response to student dreams for a centralized space where Bayhawks can gather, learn, teach and enjoy community. Guided by SFBU’s values of accessibility and innovation, the SFBU Campus Operations and Facilities team leaned into student requests and went above and beyond by designing two new spaces.

The Student Success Hub, located across SFBU’s main building, is now home to the Student Success Team. Students can go there to receive one-on-one career and academic advising, study and mingle in the communal work area and receive wellness counseling. Meanwhile, the Student Lounge is connected to the main building and is a communal space for students to play, rest and gather.

“The facility team has four members, and they've all stepped up to the plate and done a lot of renovations to help build this,” said Director of Campus Operations Maytheni Allen. “I want to give students a place to go on the weekends to hang out and be entertained beside their apartments. It's a nice experience for them to have, especially as college students.”

As the SFBU community gathered in celebration, President Nick Ladany kicked off the event with a call to continually promote student success by embracing innovation and community. This was followed by inspiring remarks from student body president Amrita Thapa and SFBU Vice President and Chief Operating Officer Lisa Millora. Everyone held their breath as Ladany and Thapa cut the ribbon before exploding in joyous celebration, ending the opening ceremony on a high note.

The following column appeared in Forbes, where San Francisco Bay University President Nicholas Ladany is a contributor.

In recent years, a national conversation in the United States about the value of higher education has intensified, with growing and legitimate concerns over whether institutions are providing sufficient value or return on investment. Critics point to a misalignment between the curriculum offered and the evolving demands of the job market, alongside soaring tuition fees that seem to have no ceiling. Compounding this issue, the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) has revealed that only about 41% of students graduate with a four-year degree within four years, highlighting a stark inefficiency within the system. Moreover, higher education purports to be rooted in scientific analysis and academic freedom, yet, when confronted with such inefficiencies, the tendency is to run, hide, and obfuscate rather than address with the intellectual prowess warranted.

The necessity for an open dialogue about the state of higher education is clear, yet such discussions are seldom conducted with the transparency and honesty needed. The challenges facing higher education are not insurmountable, but they require a willingness to confront systemic and historical issues head-on and to implement meaningful reforms that can rebuild trust and fulfill the educational promise to students.

To initiate change, it is crucial to understand the barriers that hinder student progress. The origins of higher education, rooted in the post-Enlightenment period, were designed to cater to a select, elite segment of society (almost exclusively wealthy white men) with a focus on generating knowledge. This historical backdrop explains why many institutions today sometimes prioritize research (loosely defined) over teaching, often at the expense of student-centric approaches. This disconnect suggests a deep-seated structural issue within higher education, where the emphasis on creating knowledge does not always align with the needs and aspirations of a diverse student body.

With that history and focus in mind, it is easier to understand why many of the industry's challenges stem from the very roots of higher education. Historically, education was not about the student; it was about the knowledge. That set the stage for the traditional college or university experience to be centered around the faculty and their role in the advancement of knowledge. Unfortunately, this has created a flawed framework that is not sustainable.

Why is it that the primary workforce in universities and colleges – the faculty – is not trained to do an essential job, that is, teach? You would be hard-pressed to identify another nonprofit or for-profit business that takes this approach toward hiring. The majority of university and college instructors are selected for their advanced degrees and specialized content knowledge, rather than their teaching abilities. Unlike K-12 educators, who undergo extensive training in pedagogy, higher education instructors lack formal preparation in teaching methods and curriculum design, yet “own” the curriculum within most institutions, deciding what to teach in class and how. This discrepancy contributes to a range of issues, including lower student success rates, prolonged degree completion times, outdated or irrelevant curricula, and increased student debt. Although some institutions are making incremental strides in addressing these issues, the lack of teaching preparedness remains a systemic flaw that requires urgent attention.

Faculty education is not the only challenge. Higher education is in the midst of a staffing crisis. The structural and support systems within higher education institutions frequently fall short of meeting the modern needs of students. Beyond not having the support framework to address individual student needs, students today face a myriad of obstacles that impede their academic and personal development, in part due to the inadequate governance models that stifle innovation at the institutional level and adaptation to a lack of financial support and planning.

Additionally, the broken financial models governing many colleges and universities are exacerbating the affordability crisis, limiting access to education and contributing to the ballooning student debt problem. Who made the decision that colleges needed more rock-climbing walls over more pressing needs such as mental health?

To move forward, higher education must engage in the productive dialogue that drives real change so the industry can undergo a profound transformation that involves rethinking its foundational priorities and practices. This includes a shift towards putting the student at the center of every part of the experience and teaching excellence and curriculum relevance are paramount in a meaningful rather than cursory fashion. Institutions need to develop robust support systems that address the holistic needs of students, ensuring that everyone, regardless of their background, has the opportunity to succeed. Moreover, governance structures and financial models must be reevaluated to promote agility and responsiveness to changing educational landscapes.

Follow President Ladany on LinkedIn. 

San Francisco Bay University is committed to ensuring all students can access a quality education and have the tools they need to thrive, no matter their background. That’s why SFBU President Nick Ladany was thrilled to join Excelencia in Education’s esteemed national network, Presidents for Latino Student Success (P4LSS).

Excelencia in Education is the nation’s leading authority on accelerating Latino student success in higher education. Since its inception in 2011 and the formation of P4LSS in 2014, Excelencia has fostered a community of institutional leaders dedicated to transforming higher education. The goal? To harness the contributions, skills, and talents of Latino college graduates to strengthen our country. Initiatives that succeed for Latino students often benefit the broader student population, enhancing the educational landscape for all.

The P4LSS network comprises presidents and chancellors committed to creating educational environments where Latino students thrive. As a new member, President Ladany will collaborate with Excelencia and other educational leaders to leverage collective expertise and resources, forge partnerships, and enhance efforts to boost Latino student success on a national scale.

“Institutional leadership focused on intentionally serving Latino and all students is the hallmark of the presidents and chancellors in this network," said Sarita Brown, co-founder and president of Excelencia in Education. “We are proud to catalyze and support them as they advance student success and grow talent for our country’s bright future."

Joining a network of over 150 leaders, President Ladany is now part of a group that, while representing only 5% of U.S. colleges and universities, enrolls 32% and graduates 34% of all Latino students in higher education.

“San Francisco Bay University is committed to providing diverse learners with the opportunity to pursue an inclusive, innovative, and inspirational education that sets them on a path to lifelong personal and career success,” said President Ladany. “I’m thrilled to join this network of like-minded leaders dedicated to putting transformative education within reach for more Latino students and I am eager to collaborate with them as SFBU works to disrupt traditional higher education so that it fulfills its promise to more students.”

Senior Director for Outreach and Cohort Student Services Evelia Villa leads the university’s recruitment efforts for its Startup Scholars program and will coordinate the work with the network. 

“Advancing Latino youth through education empowers them to achieve their full potential and enriches our society with their diverse talents, perspectives, and contributions, which helps drive progress and innovation for all,” Villa remarked. “We’re thrilled to join this network, join forces with our colleagues and share more of what we do best in pursuit of this mission.”

Excelencia is honored to collaborate with the proactive, trendsetting presidents and chancellors who have answered the national call to advance Latino student success in higher education and secure America’s future. 

Read more about the Presidents for Latino Student Success network and the leaders affiliated with Excelencia.