WP3

Published in

WRIT340_Summer2021

11 min readAug 4, 2021

Try it before you buy it: why there’s no refund policy on your college degree

Motivated by my own experiences, my purpose in this project is to provide alternatives to the current higher education system that would allow for increased student fulfillment and satisfaction. Students shouldn’t be spending tens and even hundreds of thousands of dollars to feel dissatisfied or unprepared for the “real” world, and it’s time to rethink the way we view education by putting students in the driver’s seat. This new system would be adaptive to accommodate individual student needs above all else, promoting flexibility, exploration, and opportunities that the current rigid, four year curriculum cannot.

According to the computer system that tracks my academic progress, after I complete this course, I will have accumulated the credits needed to finish my undergraduate degree. But why is my education based on some calculation and not my own feelings of preparedness? My education should be complete once I feel that I have gained the skills, knowledge, and experience necessary to thrive in my choice of career, not just as soon as I have satisfied all of the arbitrary requirements mandated by the registration system.

Though I am incredibly grateful for my education and the opportunities it has provided, I think my life would be very different if I had not felt pressured to pick a conventionally successful career path and stick to it before I even got to college. Personally, it took some deep digging into my past to try to pinpoint why I chose the pre-law path so long ago, but during this process, I realized that it was not necessarily a choice, but a result of internalized expectations from society and those around me. Like many other people, I thought that I had to find and commit to a well-respected, financially smart career track, even if it did not bring me excitement or fulfillment. That’s because we’re all a product of the same system, one that teaches us that our choice of direction at age 17 could have an impact on the rest of our lives.

Colleges and universities, particularly in the United States, serve to reinforce these expectations through strict major selection and degree programs that make it incredibly challenging (and costly) to change direction. Many students graduate with degrees in their chosen field without ever spending a day in it, but that has just become a sad reality for all but the lucky few.

When you Google something along the lines of “how to pick a college major” you will likely get bombarded with generic advice that all boils down to “how to pick the major that will make you most money and you hopefully won’t hate”.

Though many of these lists do mention that students should follow their own interests, they all seem to indicate that factors like career potential, future salary, and job availability are the most important. We are taught from an early age that we can’t always get what we want in life — that most of us will have to settle for a “good” job we might not like, or risk insufficient income to pursue a true passion. Clearly, this teaching is working. Hell, every lawyer I’ve talked to has told me that you can either be a lawyer or be happy, but not both. I just thought that was the way it is.

If you poll college students on what job they want after graduation, it is almost guaranteed that a couple of them — at least the brave ones — will tell you that they have a better idea of what they don’t want to do than of what they want to do. The “dislike” category probably includes jobs related to the student’s least favorite disciplines, but for some, it also might include jobs that they have actually tried out. It should come as no surprise that real life experience helps students decide which path they want — or don’t want- to be on. Unfortunately, work experience often doesn’t receive the prioritization that it deserves; we have been taught to care more about academic success markers such as SAT scores and GPA’s. In reality, GPA has not even been conclusively linked to financial success after graduation, suggesting that other “soft” skills might be a better indicator of success.(1) Quoted in an article on organizational & employee development, David Lammert articulates this mis-prioritization well — “hard skills will get you the interview — soft skills will get you the job.”(2) Employers use easy metrics to determine who they think is qualified for roles, often without regard for any other initial screening for factors that could make someone an asset to their organization.

Though overlooked as primary success indicators, factors such as emotional intelligence, grit, and passion about one’s chosen studies provide a more holistic perspective than numbers alone. Sure, most people need grit to get a high GPA, but are they motivated to take the material they learned for those grades and apply it to the real world? Maybe not. Change is difficult, especially when it seems as though you are already doing well on your path and are afraid of the uncertainty that comes from taking a detour.

A focused, four year college program that feeds straight into a career has become the coveted standard for higher education, and we have been convinced that this is the most financially practical return on our investments. This is a common misconception, however, considering that “a single major switch was associated with a higher probability to graduate compared to students that never change their major, and switching majors multiple times did not have a significant relationship with the probability of graduation.”(3) If your purpose in higher education is to acquire a diploma, it might make the most sense to have a fluid, rather than rigid, approach to your path.

Depending on the university, though, it might not be easy to change majors or have such a fluid approach; this is especially true when there are program requirements and prerequisites that prohibit students from easily changing their focus.

This is in part why we see universities offer options such as “liberal arts” or “social studies” — the breadth of these majors gives the illusion that students have a range of choice and control over their studies. However, these generalized options can actually serve the opposite purpose, isolating students from diverse perspectives and practical skills. An extreme example of this is St. John’s College, described by one author as “the most forward-thinking, future-proof college in America” due to its curriculum that focuses on “the most important books and ideas of western civilization.”(4,5) That’s a bold statement, especially considering that the one and only degree offered by St. John’s essentially ignores modern history and geopolitics despite claiming to be the most well rounded education possible. I see the appeal of one generalized degree that everyone receives from the same university, however, having such a one-sided education lends to closed mindedness much more so than open mindedness and fluidity. If there’s only one major, you don’t have the option to switch, meaning that more so than at any other institution, students who are not invested or passionate can easily fall off track. It’s no wonder that their six-year graduation rate is only 42% — students have one option if they don’t like their classes: get out.(6)

Unless someone reading this happened to attend St. Johns, it is likely that you are more familiar with the more typical approach universities take to standardized education: requiring students to take a certain number of “general education” courses. At USC, there are ten general education requirements, falling into the category of either “Core Literacies” or “Global Perspectives.” Students have options within each category and the ability to waive some requirements based on AP exam scores, but the number of requirements in addition to the two mandatory Writing classes can make it challenging for students to have time to take courses of their choice. Unlike some schools, such as UChicago, where students take these requirements before declaring their intended major, USC allows students to take these any time; some students (myself included) wait until the end of their four years, never getting a chance to use them to explore other areas of interest.

For UChicago, exploration is the main goal of the general education requirements. Here’s what they have to say about their “core curriculum.”

“Not everyone takes the same classes, but everyone studies similar disciplines and tackles similar intellectual challenges, which provides each student in the College a common vocabulary of ideas and common skills of analysis and argumentation. It provides a shared, unifying experience for all students in the College, as well as background for any major and habits of mind that last a lifetime.”(7)

This is a far cry from USC’s stance on general education, which makes it clear that their intentions are less about exploration and life-long skills, but more about making students seem more appealing. According to USC’s registration site, “the university’s general education program is structured to provide a coherent, integrated introduction to the breadth of knowledge you will need to consider yourself (and to be considered by other people) a generally well-educated person.”(8) Instead of using general education as an opportunity to foster curiosity among students, it is used as a means to tailor their knowledge into what is deemed desirable by society.

Additionally, the vast majority of universities do not incorporate mandatory work experience or internships into their degree requirements, and there can be many barriers that prevent interested students from gaining the experience they need to determine if they are on the right path. For example, many universities encourage students to take unpaid internships over the summer, without accounting for the financial strain that this may place. Attending a college or university in the first place is a massive privilege that comes with large financial responsibility, but being able to attend without earning any income throughout is a vastly unreasonable expectation to have for students. Some schools have programs that incentivize students to take these unpaid internships through university- sponsored stipends, which allows many more students to have an opportunity to try out their future career without the financial risk that comes with working for free. Many students struggle throughout their education to afford their classes and cost of living, sometimes working multiple jobs while attending school full time. This is not a sustainable solution, and can have a massive negative impact on the amount of time and focus students are able to put into their learning.

Since only 27% of college graduates even work in a job related to their major after graduation, giving them a chance to try out a job related to their major (and get paid while doing it) can make an enormous difference on their feelings of satisfaction after graduation.(9) According to a BestColleges poll, 82% of college graduates think that their BA was a good investment, but 61% said that given the opportunity to go back to school, they would change their major.

If given more chances to explore whether their major is the right choice for them, such as opportunities to work in a related field, it is likely that far more people would feel satisfied with their initial choices. According to a study done by the National Counseling Group and Clemson faculty, “Students’ feelings of satisfaction or dissatisfaction with their college major resulted from reflection on the information they had learned about themselves and careers. In fact, some participants referred to engaging in extensive self-reflection after gaining more career awareness and exposure to various occupations.”(11) If we are looking to combat this seemingly large disconnect between majors, jobs, and satisfaction, it is clear that there need to be changes to the structure of higher education to allow students more opportunities to reflect on and revise their plans.

I’m not saying that there is no place for specialized education and focuses such as majors and minors, but agree with Peter Cappelli’s analysis on this, which he calls the “Danger of Specialization” — that “it may be worse to have the wrong career focus in college than having no career focus — because skills for one career often can’t be used elsewhere.”(12) To have a truly well rounded education that provides a multitude of career options, it is important to provide a baseline of knowledge and skills.

In my opinion, the sweet spot — the way we get to the root of the current failures in our education system — is through a mixed approach. Though definitely the minority, some colleges and universities are already implementing this type of hybrid education system, often called the co-op model. At Drexel University in my hometown of Philadelphia, students are given two different co-op options, both permitting them to break up their coursework with real work experience in six-month intervals. One option allows students to graduate in the standard four years, with one six-month work block in their third year, and the other (pictured below) leaves opportunities for three distinct work experiences.

This program “enables undergraduate students to balance classroom theory with practical, hands-on experience prior to graduation” and gives them plenty of opportunities to explore their interests and revise their path if needed.(13) Similarly, Northeastern University uses a coop program to help them immerse themselves in their studies and career potential. If students at Northeastern choose not to get a traditional job during their co-op blocks, they are required to do an equivalent amount of research or service based learning, two things that will also give them insight into their options. Both programs connect students with the resources to find and succeed in their co-ops, and they have advisors ready to discuss the experience and how it may impact the rest of their education. The best part about both of these programs is that they emphasize the student experience and allow students to take an active role in their education, rather than following some predetermined path.

Since many students already work while going to school, take time off from school to work, or quit school entirely to work, why don’t we incorporate this into their education in the first place? Alternatives to college such as certificate programs and trade schools typically require many hours of practical training or apprenticeships, so why isn’t that a part of mainstream higher education? The stress of choosing a major, and essentially, a career at an early age combined with having little to no chance to actually see if you’ll like your choice is a recipe for disaster, or dissatisfaction at a minimum.

Schools like Drexel and Northeastern are setting their students up for success by making it attainable before graduation, while there is still time to grow and prepare for post-grad life. Ideally, students would receive a year of general education, followed by a year of a chosen specialization, and then cycle between 6 months to a year of work and the same amount of time in school. There is no need to put a restriction on the amount of time or cycles a student completes — it should be up to them to “complete” their degree once they feel that they have found a career that they have tried out and want to pursue full time. In this model, the power is switched from the institution to the individual, and isn’t the goal of higher education the individual in the first place? No one but you can decide what works best for you, and it is important to take the time to, as cliche as it sounds, find your true calling.

Works Cited

WP3

Try it before you buy it: why there’s no refund policy on your college degree

Written by Catie Cummings