Interesting! It looks like MIT, Swarthmore, and Wellesley are the well-known ones so it has precedent.
While I still think it's a disservice to the student, I'd be curious to hear from those that lived through this: Both those that attended and graduated and those that had to drop out.
For the former I'm guessing there's not much to report. I'd be curious about the latter.
I've never cared about where the degree of someone comes from. You really think and employer is going to look at UofM and say "Oh, they gave their students a 1 semester reprieve, obviously they are of lower quality"?
> Hiring practices expanding to include multiple take-home exercises to prove competency.
Why would the policy of UofM change the hiring practices of companies that are not UofM? Where's the connection?
> Students not fully learning foundational knowledge they’ll need later because the class is an easy pass.
This may be a real harm, but ultimately they'll have to learn the foundational knowledge to continue going to UofM. Plenty of students fail to learn foundational knowledge outside of UofM, I know because I had to tutor them.
> You really think and employer is going to look at UofM and say "Oh, they gave their students a 1 semester reprieve, obviously they are of lower quality"?
Yes. This will be evident on the transcript. It won’t reduce a student from “must-hire” to “do not interview.” But it could make a marginal difference when two students are compared.
One has all A and the other has all P. If the all A is Ohio State and the all P is Michigan, if I’m otherwise indifferent I might hire Ohio State.
Hiring practices expanding to include multiple take-home exercises to prove competency.
Students not fully learning foundational knowledge they’ll need later because the class is an easy pass.