Since many students are reconsidering the traditional four-year degree, some colleges and universities are proposing shortened bachelor’s degree programs. Is this a good thing?
September 21, 2026 by Tionna Ellis 
The debate over the value of a college degree continues. Rising costs, time to completion, and demand for faster pathways into the workforce are prompting many to reconsider the traditional four-year degree. Colleges and universities are following market demand by proposing and implementing shortened bachelor’s degree programs that require 90-119 credits to graduate instead of the once standard 120 credits. So, college students could potentially graduate in three years instead of four.
Discussions surrounding college affordability have sparked renewed interest in streamlining the time to completion. For students who are able to complete the program in three years, a 90-credit degree could save a year’s worth of tuition costs and college living expenses. Lower costs could reduce how much students need to borrow, or eliminate the need to borrow altogether, making college more accessible and allowing graduates to begin their careers without the burden of heavier student loan debt. It’s no secret students want to enter the workforce faster. For thousands of young people, this imperative is real due to ever-growing financial responsibilities outside of their collegiate journey. This truncated timeline allows students to enter the workforce sooner. With targeted accelerated programs, institutions could create more direct pathways into high-demand fields.
Which coursework and experiences can be removed while ensuring students still develop the knowledge, critical thinking, and skills expected of a bachelor’s degree, and who gets to decide which courses are most critically valuable and skills building in the course catalog?
At the state level, efforts to advance three-year bachelor’s programs are at varying stages. States like Tennessee, Massachusetts, Oklahoma, and Louisiana have established frameworks for these reduced-credit bachelor’s programs. For example, in Massachusetts and Louisiana, degree programs at a handful of schools, like Merrimack College, Suffolk University, and Louisiana State University-Alexandria have already been approved. These programs include healthcare administration, criminal justice, business administration, and information technology. Texas recently announced they will convene a working group to develop a statewide framework for three-year bachelor’s degrees. Ohio has also taken legislative action, directing the state to study the feasibility of reduced-credit bachelor’s degrees, though the legislation did not itself broadly approve or require institutions to implement them. Virginia, meanwhile, is at an earlier, exploratory stage, with the State Council of Higher Education convening public and private university leaders around three-year bachelor’s degrees. Notably, both the momentum and skepticism are bipartisan. Enthusiasm and concern emerge across political affiliations rather than aligning with any single party.
However, state approval does not automatically mean that a program is accredited. While accreditors have taken different approaches, most now provide pathways for institutions to propose reduced-credit bachelor’s degrees, if they can demonstrate academic quality and strong student outcomes.
The WASC Senior College and University Commission (WSCUC), Higher Learning Commission (HLC), and Commission on Colleges and Universities (formerly SACSCOC) have established formal review pathways allowing institutions to propose reduced-credit bachelor’s degree programs, moving beyond the traditional 120-credit model while maintaining an accreditation review process.
Meanwhile, the Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities (NWCCU) started with piloted programs at Brigham Young University and later expanded its substantive change process to allow institutions to propose bachelor’s degrees based on specified learning outcomes rather than a prescribed number of credit hours.
Notably, before the New England Commission of Higher Education (NECHE) formally recognized reduced-credit bachelor’s degrees, they created an innovation framework with safeguards around academic quality and transparency that allows institutions to propose alternative approaches to traditional accreditation.
While proponents are optimistic about the potential advantages of reduced-credit bachelor’s degree programs, these programs also raise logistical concerns and important questions about quality, value, and equity.
The American Association of University Professors (AAUP) is concerned that three-year degrees (particularly at Suffolk and Merrimack University) prioritize speed over intellectual development. They argue that reduced-credit bachelor’s degrees do not actually address the root causes of the college affordability crisis and threatens academic integrity simultaneously. Faster degree completion also does not guarantee that graduates will enter careers aligned with their degrees.
The AAUP professors are not the only ones concerned with degree quality. The Massachusetts Teacher Association is concerned that a two-tiered education system will arise. Financially vulnerable students may be disproportionately funneled into a potentially lower quality degree, consistently marketed as the affordable option, widening the opportunity gap and furthering inequities.
As these conversations continue, higher education decision-makers will need to ask themselves what makes a bachelor’s degree valuable, including whether students achieve the same learning outcomes and earnings, and how a growing emphasis on workforce alignment may influence how that value is defined. The four-year bachelor’s degree is not the only model for rigorous undergraduate education, as many other countries offer three-year degrees that are internationally recognized.
These questions are particularly important as gaps in postsecondary education readiness persist nationally. Reducing a bachelor’s degree from 120 credits to 90 requires more than identifying 30 credits that can be eliminated. Which coursework and experiences can be removed while ensuring students still develop the knowledge, critical thinking, and skills expected of a bachelor’s degree, and who gets to decide which courses are most critically valuable and skills building in the course catalog? That question carries added weight as states increasingly use their authority to restrict or reshape coursework, including content they consider related to DEI and other contested areas of study.
Institutions could reduce general education, major-specific, or elective coursework, but each choice carries tradeoffs. For example, cutting electives may limit flexibility for students enrolled in reduced-credit bachelor’s degrees seeking to transfer, change or add majors, or pursue stackable credentials. As institutions streamline degrees, they should consider not only what can be cut, but how those choices affect students with different levels of academic preparation and their ability to move across educational pathways.
Colleges are already making these decisions. For example, Ensign College in Utah now offers a three-year option for all its Bachelor of Applied Science degrees alongside the four-year format. At the same time, higher education systems and states are making these policy decisions and approaches to accelerated/reduced-credit degrees, often without a common framework.
A quick scan of accelerated bachelor’s degree programs also reveals that there is limited information on outcomes for these programs, especially longer-term outcomes. As these programs mature, the field will need to look beyond whether students can complete a bachelor’s degree with fewer credits and ask whether these programs deliver on their promise. Do students actually pay and borrow less? Who enrolls in and completes these programs? While a bachelor’s degree remains one of the most reliable pathways to higher earnings and economic mobility, outcomes among graduates vary considerably. Do students achieve comparable employment, earnings, and access to further education?
Answering these questions will require tracking outcomes at critical intervals, such as one, five, and ten years after completion, to understand not only students’ immediate transitions but whether the benefits of these programs persist over time.
Reduced-credit degrees have the potential to make a bachelor’s degree more affordable and accessible. But as states and institutions continue to experiment, affordability should not come at the expense of quality, choice, or long-term value. The real test is whether these programs expand opportunity and close equity gaps or simply create another pathway that leaves too many students behind.
Photo by Allison Shelley/Complete College Photo Library
August 26, 2026 by Aileen Ma Skilled trades are legitimate careers and a worthy target for college and career success. However, the idea that any child in grade school should be placed on a specific career pathway is absurd
July 10, 2026 by Beatriz Villarreal We send our children to Houston ISD schools every morning, hoping that when they graduate, they'll be ready for what comes next
June 10, 2026 by Gabriela Montell High school seniors discuss life after graduation — including selecting colleges, managing costs, and the support systems that have prepared them.
