The idea of whether we still need four years to complete a bachelor's degree in today’s rapidly evolving educational and technological landscape is one that deserves serious reflection—especially in the context of mathematics education.

From my perspective as a scholar in mathematics education, the answer isn't simply “yes” or “no.” Instead, it depends on how we define the purpose of a bachelor’s degree. Is it purely about acquiring technical skills? Or is it also about developing critical thinking, problem-solving abilities, intellectual maturity, and the capacity to learn independently?

In mathematics, in particular, deep conceptual understanding doesn’t happen overnight. It requires time, practice, and guided exploration. Moving too quickly through foundational topics like calculus, linear algebra, abstract algebra, or real analysis can lead to superficial learning—students may pass exams but lack the robust mental frameworks needed for advanced study or real-world application.

That said, I do believe the traditional four-year model can—and should—be reimagined. With advancements in personalized learning, competency-based education, and digital resources, we have opportunities to make degree programs more flexible and efficient. For some students with strong prior preparation (e.g., through dual enrollment or rigorous high school curricula), completing a degree in less than four years may be entirely feasible—especially with well-structured pathways.

However, shortening the timeline across the board risks exacerbating inequities. Many students—particularly those from under-resourced backgrounds—need the full four years (and sometimes more) to balance academic demands with work, family responsibilities, and developmental growth. In mathematics education, where confidence and identity play crucial roles in success, rushing students can deepen existing achievement gaps.

So rather than asking if we need four years, perhaps we should ask: How can we design mathematics-rich undergraduate experiences that are both efficient and equitable, allowing students to progress at their own pace while ensuring depth and rigor?

Innovations like modular courses, flipped classrooms, mentoring in mathematical thinking, and interdisciplinary projects can help us get there. But let’s not sacrifice depth for speed. As educators, our goal should be mastery—not just completion.

Keep questioning, keep reflecting. That’s what mathematics—and meaningful education—is all about.

I think it needs only 2 years.