It takes most college students at least four years to earn a bachelor’s degree. Christie Williams finished in three months.
The North Carolina human resources executive spent two months racking up credits through web tutorials after work in 2024, then raced through 11 online classes at the University of Maine at Presque Isle in four weeks. Later that year, she went back to earn her master’s – in just five weeks. The two degrees cost a total of just over $4,000.
Since then, she has coached a thousand other students on how to speed through the state college, shaving off years and thousands of dollars from the usual cost of a degree.
“Why wouldn’t you do that?” Williams asked. “It’s kind of a no-brainer if you know about it.”
Many U.S. schools have been experimenting with ways to speed up traditional college programs to reduce the burgeoning cost and help students move into the workforce faster. Some offer three-year bachelor’s programs, reducing the number of credits needed for a diploma by one quarter. Many more allow students to enroll in college classes while still in high school.
But the breakneck pace of the fastest online programs concerns some academics, who say there is a big difference in what students can learn in weeks or months compared with three or more years.
The phenomenon – sometimes referred to as degree hacking, college speed runs or hyperaccelerated degrees – has spawned a cottage industry of influencers making videos about how quickly they earned their degrees and encouraging others to follow suit.
Supporters of the approach tout it as an affordable, convenient way for people to earn credentials they need for their careers. Others, including some online students and academic officials, expressed concern about what the super-accelerated students are missing, and whether a quick path devalues degrees.
I have several mixed opinions on this.
University is deliberately prolonged. They give you small snippets of knowledge and tell you that you need to wait a week for the next snippet, frequently with knowledge that makes sense only when you have all the pieces shown together referencing each other. And then exam at the end - it rewards people who laze through most of the course and only start learning in the last month or week before exam, turning most of the education into stamp-collecting game similar to watching a tv series (and people marathon/binge those too).
Most of the university education is also worthless on job market. 90% of knowledge you will be using in a company will be company-specific (processes, rules, tools, people) and thus not possible to gain at the university. Employers require university degree as a proof that you are able to come to the same boring, tedious place and waste your time for eight hours a day, five days a week each week. Online courses would be better off tied to specific companies rather than to degrees.
Then again I firmly believe no skill can be attained through theory alone. Not every university has practical exams, but no online course has them at all. This is, I guess, the only advantage of universities. Perhaps a hybrid system would be best? Theory can be learned at your own pace from online course, but then exams - both theoretical and practical, must be done at the physical location.
Online course generally implies online assessment.
The level of academic misconduct in those is insane; I caught 35% of my cohort cheating (using a method (one we never taught) they could not replicate in an in-person test) one year, and those were the ones I could prove. Online assessments just test what a search engine/AI knows really.
(For those about to tout “lockdown browsers”; it’s called “a second laptop” or just “my phone”)
When young people face a system explicitly designed to extract as much wealth out of them as possible, nerfing their economic potential well into adulthood via crushing debt, is such a response really that unexpected?
My only concern would be a question of retention.
It’s easy to pass an exam if you’re writing it almost immediately after taking in the information. But remembering the information at the end of the school year when you’re writing your final exam and it’s a topic you learned in the first week takes a different kind of study skill.
It boils down to the old Cram for midterms question. How much do you retain?
My take is that retention comes from revisiting a topic multiple times over the course of a year. One and done studying to pass an exam doesn’t leave an imprint on the memory that’s going to last.
To be fair, when job listings require any university degree to apply, regardless of its relevance to the job in question, it becomes obvious the actual knowledge and education are secondary to simply checking a box. No wonder so many people are allowing AI to do their thinking for them. Any system defined by its technicalities is going to have loopholes.
That is very true. However (at least from what I was always taught) the reason employers “require” ANY degree is less about what you learn and more about showing them that you have ability and commitment necessary TO learn.
An employer isn’t generally interested in what you know; they’re always going to teach you their way of doing things anyway.
Employers want to know that you have the focus to actually learn their systems.
So the end result of “fast degrees” will be the opposite of what job hunters think. It’ll just devalue degrees in the eyes of employers because it no longer signifies the very metric they were measuring, which was the ability to pay attention
This should be your call to read communist theory. Education should be about learning and creating knowledge, not cramming and being put off from pursuing your passsions!
…I’m pretty sure reading about psychology or neurology would be more relevant than reading about communism. Communism might be interesting in a historical context, but it’s not science.
Appealing to psychology when the root of people’s problems in this article is the economy, and more specifically societal organisation is exactly the mistake of chasing appearances without getting to the root of issues that Marx criticised.
When you are poor you become mentally ill due to poverty. When people are abused they are abused because they cannot afford to get away from people, they are abused because they are bound up in economical units like the family. When you are relatively rich or don’t have to work to survive you can afford to study phenomena in their isolation detached from the material realities that people face, you are able to psychologise and cut off science as a method of exposing causalities off at a specific point where you create cordoned off areas like physics, economy, biology, maths, engineering, an so on.
Communism may not primarily be a science in the way you think as it is a form of societal organisation, but communism is built on satisfying needs and therefore doesn’t deal with abstractions such as money and debt or phenomena understood to be internal when we can show that they are not. Communism is the society that gets together and consciously plans like an organism would in a concrete way that gets to the essence of things, i.e. is radical. As a result of this its study is inherently bound to a close pursuit of science.
But come at me again with your history when company towns make a comeback due to the shit housing market and you survive to work fulfilling the needs that are not yours, spending ten hours a day working a monotonous profession, two getting to and from work, another two for chores and maybe one hour of quality time and another hour for consuming a piece of media of your choice.
This is as real as it gets. Your psychology has psychoanalysts admitting that their work isn’t within the realm of science and your neurology can’t grapple with the fact that most research on consciousness, upon which a stupid amount of bioethics and therefore medical practice hinges, is not falsifiable.
What happens when education becomes commodified.
I’ll consult a historian.
The part of me that hates credentialism loves this but the part of me that knows how fucking stupid people are hates it.
I went back to college because I felt inadequate profrssionally and left feeling college was inadequate.
It is a pay to win, group orojects to drag everyone over the line
Yeah, I wonder how much of this is actual learning vs just gaming the school’s systems. And how much of it was just getting an LLM to fake it even more.
This is what happens when you tie education to the job market
If you can complete a masters degree in five weeks, it’s a degree mill and not a real degree. The average in-person masters degree requires 30 credit hours with 24 credits being above 500 level (graduate classes). Let’s do the math:
If you take 15 credits per semester (5 classes typically), that would be 15 hours of class time for 12 weeks. For a 3 credit class this would be 3 hours per week of class time. If you condense this down to 5 weeks, that would be 36 hours of class time per week for five weeks.
But remember, this is only half the required credits. So you have to multiply this by 2, leading to 72 hours per week of just class time.
This does NOT include any outside work. Typically, 500 level classes give homework that can take 5-10 hours per week since it is a graduate level class. Let’s assume five hours to be generous.
That would mean for a full semester (15 credit hours at 5 classes) one would be looking at 15 hours of class work per week plus 25 hours of homework/projects per week (5 classes x 5 hours of work per class). For a total of 40 hours per week.
Condensing this down to 5 weeks would multiple this number by 2.4 (5 weeks instead of 12 weeks). And then multiplying it again by 2 since you would have to do both semesters in five weeks. That would be 192 hours of work per week for five weeks. There are 144 hours in a week. These places are degree mills.
I did a summer “mini-mester” for my undergrad Fluid Mechanics class where the class was condensed into 4 or 6 weeks but you met every day and it was FUCKING BRUTAL even though I was only doing that one course. I can’t imagine doing that for a full 15hrs of coursework. This smells more like a click through the classwork once randomly, figure out the right answers from the online quiz when they pop up at the end, then click the right answers the next time type of situation but for a whole program.
How this got accredited (if it actually is) is beyond me.
You did an intesive for fluid mechanics?! Are you insane, or a masochist?
He just really likes pressure.
I go with the flow.
You seem like a dynamic person
To make it worse, I was working full time at the time. It was the only way I could get to the next course in the schedule since certain classes were only offered in certain semesters so if I had missed that window, I would have been set back a year. It was awful.
Agreed, I did something similar where I did 3 courses in 7 weeks and that was by far the worst and most stressful time of my entire degree. Anything more probably would have caused a nervous breakdown.
The problem is that many “legit” colleges are already degree mills, albeit at a slower pace. In the US at least, colleges are run like businesses. More students means more money. As long as they can maintain an okay reputation, they’ll churn as many students through as they can. The places that let you fast-track like this are just taking the next logical step, and letting the mask slip a little further. The whole system is broken; this is just another symptom.
Not every institution is this way. In my area, there are one or two schools that consistently produce people who actually know something. But it’s a pretty small percentage, all things considered, and I expect the overton window will gradually lessen expectations at those places over time as well.
Certainly not untrue. Many schools have gone the way of business. I wouldn’t go as far as to say it’s only a small percentage that are real degrees these day but it’s definitely lower than it should be.
I’m guessing some areas/industries are better or worse. Mine seems pretty bad, at least in my area. Being involved in hiring co-ops and new grads has given me a good taste for what the expectations are like, and it’s not great. So my view is probably a bit dismal.
That is a good point. You are probably right that it is area based. My degrees were in physics and to my knowledge, there aren’t too many online degrees for it. It’s pretty hard to fake your knowledge in this area. Even if you could, you’ll be found out quickly once starting a job.
I wouldn’t go as far as to say it’s only a small percentage that are real degrees these day but it’s definitely lower than it should be.
I agree. I think a lot of degrees are still real degrees, but the entire ecosystem has been degraded to the point that quality across the board has diminished. So, the most “rigorous” degrees now are equivalent to a run-of-the-mill degree a generation ago and so forth. Ultimately, the run-of-the-mill degrees of yesteryear are now just diploma mill degrees.
I hate to say it, but a lot of it is e-learning and online degrees. It’s a lot harder to engage with material, with a class, or with the professor themselves behind a screen hundreds of miles away. Even when you put everything into the work, it still just is not as engaging because you don’t have the same dynamic because you can’t just drop by your professor’s office for office hours or get the same level of help or group learning. In undergrad, I used to help others in my classes, and vice-versa, while also going to office hours to clear up details. Online, if it’s not impossible, it’s at least orders of magnitude more difficult. So, the quality of learning drops a ton.
If I go back for another Master’s or a Doctorate, I will only do in person classes.
I largely agree, but one situation I can think of where condensing the work makes sense is experienced professionals who already meet the learning outcomes. Their goal is to prove that they know the material, then have a degree to show as proof, not to actually learn the material.
Kind of, but that would be a fault in the system that ideally would be charged. Maybe with some sort of verification to ensure they have the skills already. Maybe that’s even what this is abusing and they’re not examining enough / tolerant of LLMs yet. But agreed that is something a flaw with credentials
Corollary: if you have the capability to complete the requirements in a short period you should be allowed to.
I always say that if you rely on metrics (like does the applicant have a degree or not), you will get people who have optimized for just the metric. It’s a lot like paying programs for the bugs they fix. It just doesn’t go the way you planned.
Exactly
I returned to university a decade ago to get a degree. I’m not sure I would trust many of the younger graduates to really understand what they studied. They were very good at memorization and most exams had enough MC questions that they could pass but if they were confronted with written long answer questions, the class average went down dramatically. I can only assume that fully online degrees are of this calibre student. Great at memorization, poor at understanding.
The long answer questions were always my favorite in school because I suck at memorization. I can explain a concept well, but never pick the correct answer out of a list because it wasn’t my version of the answer.
Yes, but also on the flip side, I have sat thru classes where the teacher did not know the curriculum and I had to explain things to the students. I also built the infrastructure for a computer lab and then had classes in that very lab. When the teacher couldn’t set up the conditions for a test, they consulted me to troubleshoot it (in this case, the teacher was not at fault, it was the equipment).
I tried to CLEP, but most of the time (for me) i failed many because I was either bad at the test, covered material that I was never taught, or the course could not be CLEP. The annoying thing is that in almost every case, there was stuff that wasn’t in the CLEP that I was taught, or vice versa after taking the course.
If the course doesn’t teach you to understand, then the metric being measured is not “understanding”.
As someone with severe ADHD. This is the only way I could deal with college. And even this might not work.
I’ve seen some of the videos online. Some degree mills will let you CLEP (and adjacent services) your way to a degree in General Studies (or Liberal Studies, or Multidisciplinary Studies, or whatever). A lot of the time, it’s a degree in nothing in particular from a school nobody’s heard of. It’s not particularly useful, but better than nothing.
You get what you pay for. I’m not sure who is cheating who: the students, who think they’ve found a way to beat the system, or the schools, who make a quick buck in exchange for a degree of dubious value.
I’ve already spent more than 4 years in college with little to show for it. If speed-running college to get that piece of paper at the end is what it takes. more power to them.
I can see that, if you think that just getting the paper is enough. It is contrary to the idea that university was a place to learn how to learn and gain knowledge that could then be used in your life. Undergrads didn’t lead to employment, they led to further career or education opportunities. If all a diploma mill generates is slips of paper without the student gaining knowledge, even $4000 is a gross overpayment.
it’s not that getting the piece of paper is enough as much as it has become a minimum standard for gaining jobs that frankly-shouldn’t require it. The guy that has “some college experience” looks the same in the eyes of the employer as the guy who never went to college, because they don’t have a piece of paper.
I’m of two minds about this. So many jobs out there require a college degree when the work itself doesn’t really require a college degree to do. People who can’t afford to go to college but are able to do the work are locked out of that more comfortable life. This makes it easier to get that foot in the door.
At the same time, you learn A LOT about life and people in those 3 or 4 years at college. It’s a shame for someone to miss out on that experience. Also, this speed run absolutely could not work for a STEM degree.
