By Lauren Joffe for The Real College Guide

Heads up, traditionalists! A radical new idea promotes kissing the four-year academic program buh-bye and saying hello to a three-year system.

As accustomed as we are to its infrastructure, it would take some serious shaking up to rattle the U.S. education system. Yet Robert Zemsky, chairman of the Learning Alliance for Higher Education at the University of Pennsylvania and author of

Zemsky argues that given today’s economic, political and technological climate, it’s time for Americans to minimize cost, unnecessary resources and wasted time repeating coursework. His proposed plan would cause a drastic uplifting of the current system, impacting high schools as well. But it is Zemsky’s hope that reform ultimately would spawn a more streamlined institution. While the government might not be ready to back such lofty plans, the real question is: Are you?

How will students benefit from such reform?

According to Professor Zemsky, shifting to a more sequenced, regimented three-year program will save students time and money — cutting tuition costs by a whopping 25 percent. This is less moolah out of your pocket, not to mention additional interest that builds up as you work to pay off hefty loans. At the very foundation, students would pay for 90 credits over the typical 120.

In a contemporary society where minimizing time and financial expenditures ranks high on to-do lists, it seems almost given that a new system should be put into place. Right? Not necessarily. For one, the program basically assumes all undergrads will go on for a post-grad or masters degree. “If you want college to help vocationally, you have to go beyond the undergrad,” says Zemsky. Under the new system, college would be a breeding ground whereby students learn the basics of a particular trade. It is then in graduate school that learning would become truly vocational.

So how would high schools be affected by this change?

High school seniors are infamously plagued by “senioritis” and finding ways to sidestep mundane assignments. Zemsky proposes doing away with wasteful course schedules during senior year and instead modeling it after the current freshman year of college. He suggests pre-college seniors take some of the basic humanities and sciences normally taken by college freshmen.

Zemsky tells us in a phone interview, “High schools would need to make assessments at a ninth-grade level as to whether a student is making progress to be ‘college-ready.’ Remediation would take place at this time rather than at the first year of college. The 10th and 11th grade levels would look the same, and the 12th grade would become equivalent to the first year of college. There would be an alignment so that senior year of high school sets students up for freshman year of college.”

What is the downside of a three-year college program?

Some students feel it’s unreasonable to be expected to choose a major and commit at age 18. And indeed, the pressure is really on if the typical college career were condensed. “I don’t know what I plan on majoring in,” says U Penn freshman Brett Levine. “In a three-year program, undecided people have less time to explore new subject areas.

“Even with people who know what they want to study, a three-year program would surely be more demanding if requirements for majors or graduate schools admissions stay the same. A lot of pre-meds and engineering students have difficulty satisfying graduation requirements as is. For undecided students like myself, the variety of course options is incredible. It allows me to explore new subject areas unavailable in high school.”

Says Zemsky: “Students are given endless choices, but it’s expensive. It confuses lots of people, and it takes longer to graduate because they get lost. Redesign the curriculum so it is not a smorgasbord of options.” Say goodbye to elective courses too, because in this system, there’s no room for classes that do not directly relate to your plan of study.

How would such lofty goals be implemented?

Zemsky doesn’t kid himself into thinking this would be a minor undertaking: “To really kick off reform, it would take an invitation from the president. I can’t imagine this happening without presidential leadership.” And, yes, he’s referring to the president of the United States.

In a recent Newsweek article, Zemsky argues his position by stating, “Everything around us — technology, medicine, politics — has changed … and [higher education] will too have to rethink what we are about.”

Still, Levine questions the practicality of Zemsky’s proposal. “A three-year program would essentially make college an even more stressful period. It would probably restrict options for traveling abroad, which many students value. It has many potential benefits for

And furthermore, Levine adds, “Socially, it obviously restricts the amount of time commonly dubbed ‘the best years of your life.’”

The MPAA and RIAA caught in a battle with legions of PIRATES!

“Sharing is caring!” — A Barnyism

Never had so much been shared with so many by so few. We assume Barney the purple dinosaur would be pleased, but he couldn’t be reached for comment. The year was 1999. And Napster had just gone live.

Since then, “sharing” music, movies, expensive software like Adobe Photoshop, or inexpensive software like Grades has been common-place. Thousands of persons have “shared” Grades with illegal app downloading sites. As a result, I’ve become very interested in how these disciples of Barney get caught. Here’s the 101.

Summon up all your mental power and throw your mind all the way back to 2007. In those days (ancient and barbarous) the Radio Industry Association of American (RIAA) and the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) prosecuted students individually. They monitored file-sharing websites, caught a few students, sent them letters, and sued the pants off ‘em.

In 2009 a Boston University student was forced to pay $675,000 for “sharing” twenty-four songs. If my math doesn’t fail me, that comes out to over $28,000 per song. He could’ve bought a good chunk of the iTunes music store for that.

These sorts of lawsuits have provoked protest from students and Barneyites everywhere. A 2008 article in the Cornell Sun argued that “sharing” doesn’t even make a dent in MPAA profits; it implied that the MPAA is just a bunch of fat-cats and scrooges yelling “bah! Humbug!” at innocent students. Some of the file-sharing-(read: stealing)-networks rigged up their pirate ships and launched cyber hack-attacks against the RIAA and the MPAA.

Why all the rage? Many in the tech universe couch their arguments in terms of “freedom.” Websites such as this one argue that the RIAA and MPAA are oppressive, totalitarian, and ruled by execs who snipe students from their gold-studded helicopters. These people often claim that “sharing” is a fact of the digital world and its opponents are old-fashioned and reactionary.

Seeing that they were losing the PR-battle, the two organizations changed tactics last year. They stopped suing students directly. Instead, they made universities an offer they couldn’t refuse: “it’s your head or the heads of the sharers.” They began pressuring colleges to monitor and prosecute. Most universities complied.

They installed programs such as Ares, which allow them to monitor illegal activity. Once student computing catches a “sharer,” they then have the option to either shut down the sharer’s internet, put them on internet probation, or fine them. Different universities take different courses.

The government has created a list of the top-ten best universities for cracking down on illegal downloading. But even if you’re not at one of those colleges, the party is over. Universities all over the country are monitoring their networks more rigorously. The “sharers” and digito-anarchists may moan that we are entering a brave new world of Orwellian gloom. But just remember: not all the cats that were ripped-off were fat cats.

“I drink coffee, therefore I am” — Not Renee Descartes

In a previous post, I ranted and raged against Starbucks, calling it StarBUCKS because only the rich and famous can afford it without the installment-plan.

On January 18, 2011 A.D. Starbucks inaugurated a new size of drink: the trenta. Trenta means “thirty” in Italian. Actually, the Trenta will, allegedly, involve 31 ounces of Frappuccino, not thirty. Customer, meet diabetes; diabetes, customer.

This assault on the human pancreas will begin in selected states, including Virginia and Georgia. It will then spread to California on February 1. In May, all U.S. Starbucks will have it.

Now, this size will be available only for cold drinks such as frappuccinos, teas, and smoothies. Starbucks claims that this new Frappuccinozilla will involve less than 230 calories. Well.

The new cup will feature a new logo. The mermaid remains, but the words “Starbucks Coffee” are biting the dust. The result: a much fishier, maritime feel and the tragic loss of that beautiful font that brought joy to the hearts of millions. So much for all that.

What does this mean for the college student other than lighter wallets and rounder bellies? It may usher in a new golden era of the one-nighter. But, from the Pollyanna perspective, perhaps students will be slightly better hydrated.

As you can see, New York City was really hit hard by the 2011 blizzard

“Minneapolis has two seasons: Road Removal and Snow Repair” — Steven Brust

Last week it snowed in 49 of the 50 states in the union. Even Hawaii got the white stuff. Yes, it snowed in paradise. Florida alone was deprived of opportunities for sledding, snow-men, and snow-days (the alligators didn’t mind).

And so many of us spent the first week of “class” outside of class in snow. Few students complained.

Some schools, however, force students to rough it in the face of blizzards. Harvard, for instance, has traditionally adopted the stance that unless the earth cracks, the firmament shatters, and the very fabric of spacetime is torn asunder, Harvard classes will continue as usual. In the words of one Harvard dean, “Harvard will close only for an act of God, such as the end of the world.”

Nevertheless, such was the severity of 2011’s wintry wrath that even Harvard temporarily suspended graduate school activity and operated on a limited capacity.

Sadly, the ice ensured that when classes began students would have to navigate a rather low-friction version of their campus. Like the rest of us, students at Ohio State were slipping and sliding to class. Employees salted the grounds, but to no avail.

So this semester school began with a bang. On the head.

“Brilliant deduction, Watson!” — Not Sherlock Holmes

It is sometimes claimed that you can tell a student’s GPA by their backpack. This is hotly disputed by some. But here is the theory, such as it is.

Extremely heavy, large backpack. Some students have backpacks so heavy it seems they could be transporting the materials to build a high-powered spacecraft. When you meet these, after asking “How much uranium you got in that pack” you might ask their GPA. According to the theory, they would answer “4.0.” Their packs are heavy because they have several textbooks and, probably, a laptop. This means they’re hardcore studiers.

Medium weight, medium size backpack. According to the theory, these are B students. They care enough about ease and comfort to not want to carry more than one textbook at a time. But they also care enough about school to bring a backpack and a textbook. This means they study, but not obsessively.

School bag or large purse. Some female students eschew backpacks for a large purse. And some students use those flexible school bags that you can sling over your back. Neither the purse nor the bag can hold a textbook. The theory states that these students are very socialish. They want to avoid looking like a “nerd.” This is why they wouldn’t be caught dead with a backpack. They want to project a “devil-may-care” attitude towards academics. These tend to be C students.

No backpack or bag. There are two kinds of students who do not bring any sort of carry-on. There are those who only bring a notebook and pencil; these are rare, but it does happen. These are D students. Then there are those who schlepp only a pencil to class.

Now, there are two primary disadvantages with the pencil-only method. First, one’s own skin makes a rather poor surface for writing upon. Second, school-desks aren’t portable; this makes reviewing your notes somewhat challenging. This method is not recommended. What sort of grade do these students get? You don’t have to be Sherlock Holmes to figure that one out.

Excellent advice, courtesy of Mr. William Shatner

Because school is over, Winter Break’s blogposts are going to be primarily fun and, later, related to getting ready for next semester (expect a lot of posts on textbooks in January). Anyway, I sometimes include a quote from a famous person before my blogposts; so I thought that today I’d give away a bunch of quotes containing good advice from famous people (caution: one of these is not good advice; I leave it to you to figure out which one).

“All you need is ignorance and confidence and the success is sure” — Mark Twain

“Before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves” — Confucius

“Do not worry about your difficulties in mathematics. I can assure you mine are greater” — Albert Einstein

“Be slow to fall into friendship; but when thou art in, continue firm and constant” — Socrates

“Neither a borrower nor a lender be” — William Shakespeare

“Buy land, they’re not making it anymore” — Mark Twain

“If you’re going through hell, keep going” — Winston Churchill

“Forget injuries, never forget kindnesses” — Confucius

“Dost thou love life? Then do not squander time, for that is the stuff life is made of” — Benjamin Franklin

“Never give in — never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honor and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming force of the enemy” — Winston Churchill