Forum Post
Our faculty recently reviewed the proposed changes to academic regulation 114 regarding the 90-credit bachelor’s degree, and several concerns were raised.
While some of these points were discussed last week in our Faculty Senate meeting, I wanted to provide them here in writing to demonstrate that these concerns are shared across multiple departments and still ongoing.
Our first concern relates to academic value and degree integrity. A number of faculty questioned whether a 90-credit bachelor’s degree maintains the same academic meaning as the current 120-credit structure. Comments included that it feels like “something less than a BA and more than an AA” and that it could “reduce the value of our degree and harm the reputation of WSU.” Another raised the broader question of whether the goal of a four-year institution is workforce preparation or developing informed global citizens. One faculty member stated it “undermines the very concept of a liberal arts degree.”
Next, an issue was raised regarding competition with existing programs. One faculty member expressed concern that even offering the option could place pressure on departments to follow suit. The comment noted fear that “creating a pathway for 90-credit degrees will result in pressure being brought to bear on programs,” and that “the traditional 4-year BA suffers as a result.” The worry is less about a single program and more about a gradual shift in expectations across campus.
Similarly, issues related to equity and a two-tier system were raised. The response highlighted the possibility of unequal student pathways. One faculty member wrote, “I worry we’re creating a two-tier system, and that the 90-CB will be for lower-income or working students and the BA/BS will be for students who can afford it.” The concern is that what is framed as flexibility may instead sort students by financial circumstance.
In addition, questions repeatedly surfaced about how graduates would be viewed by employers and graduate schools. Faculty asked, “Would these students be able into a graduate program with this degree?” and shared the sense that this “would place graduates at a disadvantage,” particularly with “less time for things like internships, extracurriculars, and so on.” Advising was described as likely to become “very complicated.” Questions were raised about which majors would qualify, what “narrowly specialized training” means in practice, how transfers bringing 60 credits would be handled, and who would be responsible for creating and maintaining new assessment structures.
Response
The proposal to change the Academic Regulations (50, 53, 114) to allow for the development of proposals for reduced credit bachelor’s degrees was met with strong debate in the recent (1-29-26) faculty senate meeting. The faculty forum posts above highlight some of the concerns with proceeding down a path that would make a reduced credit degree, one requiring only 90 credits, possible.
Given the strong reaction to these proposed changes, the Faculty Senate Executive Committee, in partnership with the Vice Provost for Academic Engagement & Student Success, has prepared a FAQ document that explains in detail what this proposed 90 credit bachelor’s degree is and what it isn’t, and how it compares to the current bachelor’s degree. The FAQ has now been sent to faculty by email, along with a link to a Qualtrics questionnaire seeking broader feedback from faculty and departments across the university. The Faculty Senate Executive Committee will compile this feedback and communicate the results at a future Faculty Senate meeting. This will better inform our discussion in the Faculty Senate and any future vote on changes to our Academic Regulations.
Comments