Several experts insist: “Too many Americans are going to college.”

The question, “Is college right for me?”, is a relatively simple one to pose. Unfortunately, while it is easy to construct the question, the answer is extremely complicated.

First, there is the ongoing message from a number of government officials (including President Barack Obama), that to compete in a global marketplace, we need to have an educated populace. Given the recent economic downturn, that idea translates to a more distinct message, to find meaningful work you must have a college diploma.

Backing that assertion is a great deal of data. From higher wages over one’s lifetime to greater job security during economic recessions, those with a bachelor’s degree consistently fare better than those with only a high school education.

But more and more we are learning that the above statement fails to carry the whole message. Today we know that many of those employed and earning higher wages are also struggling immensely because of the significant debt they took on while earning that degree.

Worse yet is the group that made the attempt to follow the American dream but could not complete the coursework along the way. These individuals, many also saddled with enormous college debt, now find themselves without the means to pay off the debt they accrued.

The problem with the college assertion is that officials consistently point towards the traditional, four-year bachelor’s degree program as the answer. The result is that many students who are unprepared for and thus unable to handle the academic rigor associated with such programs are pursuing access to that specific form of higher education.

Given that college has become big business, these students always find some school willing to accept them. These individuals then often borrow vast sums to pursue a degree that is not only well beyond their financial means, it is questionable as to whether they have the academic ability to be able to earn that coveted diploma.

The bottom line, according to a number of experts, is that too many Americans are going to four-year colleges to pursue a bachelor’s degree. That statement is often shortened to a more generalized assertion, “Too many Americans are going to college.”

The Experts

There are a number of critics of the assertion of college for everyone. One of the most outspoken is Charles Murray, a political scientist and scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. In a recent discussion with The Chronicle of Higher Education on this issue, Murray offered this telling assessment.

“It has been empirically demonstrated that doing well (B average or better) in a traditional college major in the arts and sciences requires levels of linguistic and logical/mathematical ability that only 10 to 15 percent of the nation’s youth possess.”

The focus on the need to handle the academic rigor associated with higher education is often overlooked. The fact of the matter is that most college majors are extremely demanding, far more challenging than anything a student faces in high school, and thus many students, once admitted, are simply unable to match the curriculum demands of their program no matter how hard they try.

Murray went on to add the right piece of information, that education in total is not the issue. He further stated:

“That doesn’t mean that only 10 to 15 percent should get more than a high-school education. It does mean that the four-year residential program leading to a B.A. is the wrong model for a large majority of young people.”

Yet another cautionary realist is Marty Nemko. The career counselor based in Oakland, CA was a recent participant in the same Chronicle discussion:

“Students with weak academic records should be informed that, of freshmen at ‘four year’ colleges who graduated in the bottom 40 percent of their high-school class, two-thirds won’t graduate even if given eight and a half years. And that even if such students defy the odds, they will likely graduate with a low GPA and a major in low demand by employers.”

Nemko believes that most students are not provided with in-depth counseling regarding the higher education decision. Prior to application, acceptance and matriculation into a collegiate program, Nemko asserts: “All high-school students should receive a cost-benefit analysis of the various options suitable to their situations: four-year college, two-year degree program, short-term career-prep program, apprenticeship program, on-the-job training, self-employment, the military.”

This sane voice not only cries out amidst the rather simplistic assertions of college for everyone, he is willing to task those institutions wrongfully accepting students.

“A college should not admit a student it believes would more wisely attend another institution or pursue a non-college, post-secondary option,” states Nemko. “Students’ lives are at stake, not just enrollment targets.”

And as for those who insist that the failure to earn a diploma results in a lifelong sentence to unemployment, Richard K. Vedder, director of the Center for College Affordability and Productivity and professor of economics at Ohio University, had this to say to folks at The Chronicle:

“The number of new jobs requiring a college degree is now less than the number of young adults graduating from universities, so more and more graduates are filling jobs for which they are academically overqualified.”

To which Bryan Caplan, associate professor of economics at George Mason University, added: “Most college courses teach few useful job skills; their main function is to signal to employers that students are smart, hard-working, and conformist.”

Shadow versus Substance

Unfortunately, we Americans have consistently sold the shadow in place of real substance. As Murray so aptly puts it, the bachelor’s degree has “become an emblem of first-class citizenship” in our country.

It is a completely misguided focus according to Murray who goes on to add, “We have a moral obligation to destroy the current role of the B.A. in American life.”

Meanwhile, everywhere one turns there is a growing consensus that America is facing a real shortage of skilled tradesman. Whether it is a reliable automotive mechanic or a competent plumber, there are a number of jobs that offer excellent wage potential without the need for a four-year degree. Yet these positions go wanting in today’s push for college for all students.

What has disappeared, likely for good, are highly-paid, low-skill jobs. To be successful today, one does need core academic skills such as the ability to read, to write, and to think. One also needs to have a strong work ethic. But one does not need to attend four years of college to obtain these basic core skills.

In addition, other skills are highly valued, but such skills can be learned in a variety of settings. In addition to the four-year bachelor’s degree option, higher education includes the vocational trades. Instead of blindly following others on the path of the four-year institutions, students should consider viable schools that teach one of the many trades. Becoming a beautician, truck driver, carpenter, mason or plumber involves learning specific skills that are available at these trade schools, often at a fraction of the cost.

Within the medical profession there are also a number of entry-level positions that offer solid career potential. Medical office personnel are in extremely high demand as are personal care assistants and other patient support personnel. Here again, a four-year degree is simply not required though students may need to pursue a two-year associate’s degree for access to the better-paying options.

Who Should Attend College?

We started with the basic question, “Is college right for me?” To answer that question, we note there are a number of students who should bypass the wrongful emphasis on a four-year degree.

First, the figures from Nemko are very telling – if you had trouble with the academic expectations set forth in high school you are truly at risk for not being able to complete a four-year college degree. As Murray notes, the level of difficulty associated with college coursework is a full shelf or two above anything the average high school student faces.

Second, you need to understand your preferred learning style. Traditional colleges rely extensively on book learning, i.e., reading and writing, to introduce material to students. While some schools have shifted to e-learning, higher tech models that offer more in the way of visual and auditory stimulus, the bottom line is much of what you learn at the university-level is done in abstract formats.

If your preference is to learn by doing or by using your hands, then you may want to consider something other the traditional four-year, higher education model. Otherwise you could become frustrated and disenchanted over time by the book learning process. The last thing you want to have happen is to become one of those negative statistics, five and half years of higher education, tens of thousands in debt, yet still without a diploma in hand.

Most importantly, unless you or your family possesses unlimited means, you owe it to yourself and to them to carefully think through the concept of college. The fact of the matter is that too many students are mortgaging their future by borrowing huge sums to be able to pursue that bachelor’s degree.

Today the average school-related debt for college graduates tops $20,000. That figure does not include other debt students might soon incur, whether it is in the form of a credit card, the purchase of that first automobile or ultimately buying a home.

If you are one of the people who will need to borrow such sums, then you must take the time to do the cost analysis described by Nemko. Taking on such a debt level requires a full cost-benefit analysis based on potential future earnings you can expect to receive upon completing your diploma. In too many cases, students have taken on debt levels that require such large repayment schedules that they essentially crippled the very future they were hoping to secure.

College Is Not for Everyone

There is a growing consensus that college, specifically the traditional four-year bachelor’s degree option, is not for everyone. There are many other viable options of higher education that can lead to promising careers, options that feature solid earnings potential and job satisfaction.

As a student, it is imperative that you do not get caught up in the rhetoric or the idea that the only path to career success in America involves a four-year degree program. Instead, assess the various options according to your skills, your interests and your means, then select the path that is right for you.

On Wednesday, America will pause to recognize our veterans. Given the recent events at Fort Hood in Texas and the ongoing wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, it is only right that we all find some time to recognize our military brethren this week.

In accordance with that day and the chance to get you thinking about the sacrifices these individuals make on our behalf, we offer a few poignant tributes.

This touching video is the perfect kick off – the back story is at our sister site but the basis is quite simple – honoring a moment of silence is not easy for some:

A reminder of the reason why we went to Afghanistan in the first place, sung by Alan Jackson and featuring a mashup of some of the most powerful images recorded:

Sadness and pain so easily tossed aside unless you are witness, yet another mashup featuring the haunting voice of Sarah McLachlan.

While there was a time when many of us may have been without a connection, today most of us have been touched and this is a great reminder that these military folks are our family:

And the amazing Marine Corps cadence, featuring the likes of “if I die in the combat zone, box me and ship me home.” It gives you a sense that these soldiers understand just what is asked of them:

And despite the demand, “mama don’t you cry cause the Marine Corps motto is do or die,” she couldn’t help herself. And neither could you. If you have attended a funeral of a loved one that served, it is virtually impossible not to shed a tear during the presentation of the flag amidst the most moving 24 notes imaginable:

Please, take some time to remember on Veterans Day.

A college degree can be affordable

Justin Pope, writing for the Associated Press, pulled no punches regarding the ongoing increase in college tuition for 2009-10. With costs rising anywhere from 4.4 percent at private schools to 7.3 at community colleges, Pope stipulated that colleges were handling the recent recession by simply passing “much of the burden of their own financial problems on to recession-battered students and parents.”

Those ever-increasing costs, consistently higher than the rates of inflation, have a number of folks questioning the value of a college degree, especially as students pile up exorbitant amounts of debt in their pursuit of a diploma. While we agree that absorbing significant debt while earning a diploma is a bad idea, we do still believe there is great value in obtaining your degree.

One only need examine the recent numbers from the economic downturn to find the necessary support for our assertion. While millions of young people are out of work, the percentage of those unemployed who have a bachelor’s degree is about half that of those without a degree.

But the ultimate key is to find a way to earn that sheepskin without mortgaging your future in the process. Scholarships and grants can certainly help students on the funding side immensely, but for those with a mindset, there are a number of ways to dramatically reduce the overall costs of earning a college diploma.

Reducing College Costs

The first aspect of controlling your college costs is to simply examine the cost of tuition by school categories. Here are the numbers as reported by the College Board:

• Average tuition at two-year community colleges: up 7.3 percent to $2,544.
• Average tuition at four-year public schools (in-state): up 6.5 percent to $7,020.
• Average costs at for-profit institutions: up 6.5 percent to $14,174.
• Average tuition at four-year public schools (out-of-state): up 6.2 percent to $18,548.
• Average tuition at private four year institutions: up 4.4% to $26,273.

These numbers are definitely the first ones to analyze, but when looking at ways to reduce this cost, there are two critical elements to these figures.

First students must look at the cost per credit hour. When examining the published cost, students must look carefully at both the published tuition per credit hour and the latest college invention, fees that are generally listed as added costs that can raise the price burden per credit hour significantly.

Second there is the credit hour issue alone. Most degree programs require 60 hours of study for an associate’s degree and 120 for a bachelor’s. If you can reduce the number of credit hours you must pay for you can significantly reduce your cost of overall attendance.

Step One – Reducing Costs per Credit Hour

For 2009-2010, the tuition and fees at public two-year community colleges would produce a per credit hour average of about $85.00 ($2,544 in total costs divided by the average course load of 30 credits). In contrast, we see that the average cost per credit hour for in-state students would be $234 for public schools and $876.00 for private.

So the first step to controlling costs per credit hour is to examine the best way to obtain your desired degree. Simply-stated, unless you have unlimited funds for school, a well-to-do uncle or grandparent, forget about those expensive private schools.

While private schools may boast of providing a better product, it is important for prospective students to understand that college is what you make of it. In fact, many of today’s top business leaders graduated from public institutions: Warren Buffett, CEO of Berkshire Hathaway attended the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. H. Lee Scott, the CEO of Wal-Mart Stores, attended Pittsburg State University in Kansas while James Sinegal, the CEO of Costco Wholesale attended San Diego City College.

Therefore, the first way to manage you college costs is to attend a public college, generally a campus of your state university system. I know: that just might not sound so exotic when you are discussing the topic with family and friends. But it is important to realize that exotic costs bigger bucks.

Second, if you truly want to minimize costs yet obtain a diploma, the most cost-effective road would be to earn your first 60 credit hours (years one and two) at a local community college, then transfer to a public state university school for your final 60 hours (years three and four). Even attending community college for one year would represent an enormous reduction in college costs.

There would no doubt need to be some initial homework to determine which community college credits would be transferable upon matriculation at a state school. You might even have to do some negotiating, but many of the mundane course requirements of any degree program could certainly be addressed at a community college. And if you find a course will not transfer, don’t take it. Save your funds for later. All total, with a little effort you could knock off more than a year’s worth of the higher-priced tuition costs.

Step Two – Reducing Credit Hour Costs

The second way to dramatically decrease your college costs is to reduce the number of credits you must pay for at the required tuition rate. There are almost an unlimited number of ways to reduce the number of credits that you must shell out funds for, but a good many of them must be accessed while you are still in high school.

For example, taking Advanced Placement courses can result in potential college credit. Such courses are often available at your local high school either by direct instruction or through the school in online format.

Students gain access to college-level curricula and upon completion of the material may take an exam to determine mastery. Passing that exam can provide college credit at a large number of colleges across the country.

Students may also take the College-Level Examination Program® (CLEP) tests in 34 different subject areas. These exams, at $72.00 per test, can provide anywhere from 3-12 credits at certain colleges at a fraction of the cost.

Today, many local colleges also offer courses to high school students in their area free of charge (referred to as early college). Again, given the cost per credit hour, students should investigate such options extensively and take advantage of what is available.

In all instances, including the possibility of seeking life experience credit for a work portfolio, the key is to do one’s homework up front. That means sitting down with college officials to review what credits the school will accept when a student does enter that respective institution.

For example, some schools will not accept AP classes whatsoever. Others will allow credit only provided students score a four or five on the exam (even though a three is considered a passing score).

While in college, another very distinct option to reducing credit-costs is referred to as the co-op or internship experience. Here again, the concept is dependent on the school one attends.

Co-op and internships provide students practical learning skills in a specific field through the use of work placements. In such programs, students may receive either pay or course credit for their time. If the experience is in your field of study, the work-related insight one gains is incredibly valid for one’s future career.

At the same time, many such experiences also offer college credit when students combine the proper reflection and academic review to the work experience. In certain instances, these experiences serve as a triple benefit, providing some cash to help pay the bills, some college credits to reduce the number that must be paid for, and even the possibility of potential job placement opportunities that can form as a result of the connections one makes while performing their service.

Reducing Miscellaneous Expenses

In addition to the tuition costs, students face a number of other related expenses while working towards that diploma. Such costs include room and board, books and supplies, and travel expenses.

The bottom line is these costs cannot be categorized as mere incidentals, certainly not when repeated over a four-year period. Once a school is chosen, tuition costs are set but students still have decisions that can greatly reduce the incidentals that accompany tuition costs.

Step Three – Eliminate the Room and Board

One way to reduce your four year college outlay is to rethink the idea of room and board. While many cringe at the thought, it is imperative that students understand the current going rate for room and board is now $8,193 at public colleges and considerably more at some private, elite schools.

Examine that number carefully – it is more than the average cost of tuition at four-year public schools. And it is more than triple the average tuition costs at a two-year community college.

Now spread that out over four years – a total of more than $30,000!

The simplest way to reduce this expense is to live at home. Such a decision becomes a possibility if you consider the community college/state university combined four-year plan we mentioned earlier. It certainly becomes viable if you consider community college for the first two years at a minimum.

If your home residence is simply too far away, you also need to carefully assess the school rates for both the housing and the meal aspects.

It could well be far cheaper to lease an apartment or house, especially if you can find others to share that cost.

In regards to meals, most school plans represent a significant cost per meal. In addition, missed meals seldom produce anything in the way of refunds if you do not access them. So when purchasing any meal plan, be sure it is a plan you will access.

There is no doubt that living at home limits one of the indirect benefits of college, the activities available and the connections made on-campus. To obtain those experiences, students will have to work harder at this element. But the experiences are available to all students, even if you are not residing on campus.

Step Four – Distance Learning Courses

Once available primarily at for-profit institutions, online learning is now available at a multitude of schools including state university systems. Completing one or a number of online courses can greatly impact your miscellaneous expenses.

We noted earlier the need to take into consideration fees when calculating tuition costs. Online courses often allow students to be exempt from a number of facility and campus-related fees such as student activity, campus access and technology fees. At one Florida school that lists tuition costs as $50.00 per credit hour for in-state students, those costs move to $150.00 per credit hour when all the fees are factored in.

In addition to potentially eliminating these on-campus fees, online courses also eliminate travel expenses and room and board entirely. They also can be a key component of our final savings step.

Step Five – College in 3.5 or 3.0 Years

While tuition costs are per credit hour and programs mandate a specific number of credits, miscellaneous expenses occur each semester. So one of the simplest ways to reduce total outlays is to reduce the number of semesters you are at school.

That reduction can of course come from the aforementioned reduction of credits needed. It is for this reason that AP courses, CLEP tests, Co-Op programs and Internships compound your savings, reducing costs at both levels.

But it can also come from taking additional courses each semester. Taking one extra course, either via online methods or simply taking another traditional class, for just five semesters will reduce your program from 4 to 3.5 years. Taking two online courses each summer and one extra traditional class each semester could reduce your college program to 3 years. Prerequisites can make this a challenge but with a little effort you can reduce the standard four-year program.

Remember, such steps would carry tuition costs per credit hour, but they would greatly reduce the costs of room and board and those incidental traveling expenses associated with attending school.

Control Your Expenses and Earn Your Degree

While costs are growing substantially, it is important for students to know that out-of-pocket costs have trended down in recent years. In fact, while tuition and fees have risen as much as 20% since 2004, the average net price of college has dropped over the last few years.

The reason is the greater availability of grants, financial assistance and tax benefits.

Of course such developments make it all the more enticing to consider our steps to cutting the costs of college. According to a recent Time article, the increased aid development means that the “average student at a two-year college or university pays nothing in tuition and fees and collects about $500 toward living expenses.”

Of course, marketing is what drives the business world – if you package your product well enough, people will seek to acquire that product at all costs.

Generally speaking, all colleges have taken advantage of this concept. But some, specifically those elite private schools, have done so to the extreme.

The result is far too many students are being enticed, taking on ridiculous levels of debt as they attempt to obtain a diploma from a school they simply cannot afford. It is time that students, as well as their parents, went back to the old school adage, finding a quality product at a price they can afford.

With a little work and a certain level of sacrifice, students can earn that coveted diploma without mortgaging their entire future in the process.

Five reasons why the aid act may be bad for students.

There has been a pause in Washington as all eyes focus in on the healthcare debate. But very soon the Senate will be taking up an important measure related to college students and financial aid that was previously approved by the House.

TheMiddleClass.org offers the following summary of that bill, The Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2009:

The Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act terminates the Federal Family Education Loan program, which provides subsidies and guarantees to private lenders that make student loans. Instead, the federal government would issue student loans directly to borrowers. Ending the subsidization program would save the government $87 billion over ten years. The Act ensures that interest rates on student loans remain affordable. Additionally, the legislation increases the maximum Pell Grant, a need-based grant designed for lower-income students, from $5,350 in 2009 to $5,550 in 2010 and $6,900 in 2019.

The Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act includes funds for programs to encourage completion of college and subsequent employment, particularly for students from underrepresented backgrounds; for Historically Black Colleges and other minority-serving institutions; for early-childhood education; and for school modernization and repair. The bill also provides funds for improving the community college system. The legislation simplifies the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA), which determines eligibility for student aid.

Such a summary has most folks taking the stance that the recent approval of the legislation by Congress is a massive step forward for students and families. As but one example, the Seattle Times offered extremely high praise, noting that “Congress’ overhaul of the college student-loan system offers welcome relief to students at risk of drowning in debt.”

College students backing SAFRA recently put together a YouTube video:

Certainly the legislation borders on the historic. Terry Hartle, senior vice president at the American Council on Education, indicated that the legislation “is the biggest change in federal loans for higher education since 1965, when the original program was created.”

But those following the issue realize that support for the legislation is falling along party lines: Democrats in support, Republicans in opposition. Therefore, one can quickly surmise that the new program conflicts with certain conservative principles.

Perhaps even more importantly, as the legislation becomes clearer many others, irrespective of party affiliation, have begun questioning this massive change. Indeed, after listening to those critics, we too have begun to wonder aloud.

Is the legislation really a positive step for students and their families?

Issue One – Categorizing the Middle Man as a Corporate Monster

One highly touted aspect of the legislation is the move to make the federal government the direct lender to students. In taking this step, the goal is to remove the so-called ‘middlemen’ from the loan process.

Banks are certainly pushing back, after all college loans have served two purposes. The interest on the initial loan is but one positive element for banks. A second and perhaps larger segment has to be the opportunity to create new customers.

But while most equate banks and profits with the middlemen term, the fact is there are many local agencies handling the loan process for students. Most are nonprofits, working to ensure that the loan process, from borrowing through repayment, goes smoothly.

The legislation as currently enacted eliminates all agencies handling these funds including some highly-valued nonprofits. For example, one such nonprofit, the New Hampshire Higher Education Assistance Foundation (NHHEA), works with nearly 30,000 New Hampshire students and parents each year, offering free college planning and information related to financial literacy and financial aid.

But under the proposal, intuitions such as NHHEAF would also be eliminated.

Issue Two – A Potential Increase in Loan Defaults

As noted previously, these local nonprofit centers focus on educating students in all financial matters. They not only offer financial literacy programs for student borrowers and financial aid preparation for students and their families, they also offer programs that promote early college awareness.

Such training goes a long way in terms of developing greater student understanding of the loan process. As but one example again, NHHEAF can claim one of the lowest default rates in the nation.

Needless to say, this loss of local services could well mean far more in the way of potential student loan defaults.

Issue Three – No Savings for Students or Families

Clearly there is major support for “eliminating subsidies to lenders,” particularly after what has transpired over the last year in the financial world and the role banks have played in it. But upon hearing of the elimination of these subsidies, the public immediately assumes the result will be a reduction in program expenses.

It appears instead of passing along savings to students, the current proposal may well cost students more. According to the Chronicle of Higher Education, the “federal government isn’t providing any breaks to the students” and ultimately will be making more off the program than lenders ever could.”

It may well be that the money raised will be doled out in the form of increased Pell Grants, but those grants will essentially be funded from students paying off other loans, not necessarily from increased support from the federal government.

In addition, those schools currently utilizing other loan programs will need to invest staff, time and money to change systems and processes. This would need to take place at the same time that schools have axed budgets to the bare bones.

The costs associated with implementing the program will likely be passed on to students through increased tuition and student fees.

Issue Four – Handling the Increased Demand

The legislation by Congress assumes that the government can effectively and efficiently step up and run the new program. According to Martha Holler, a spokesperson for Sallie Mae, in order to implement the proposal, “about 4,500 schools would have to convert lending systems. It’s not like putting a different disk in their PC; the whole system has to be reworked.”

The result, “The U.S. Department of Education will be tasked with converting an average of nearly 500 schools a month over the course of a nine month period,” notes Tara Payne, Vice-President of Corporate Communications for NHHEAF. “Since the Direct Loan program’s inception in 1993, roughly 1,600 schools have been converted over a 16 year time-frame.”

Issue Five – Increasing the National Debt

According to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), under budget proposals that include the switch to 100-percent Direct Lending, the debt held in the Government’s various Direct Loan accounts is expected to rise from $632 billion in FY 2009 to $1.58 Trillion in FY 2019, an increase of more than $900 billion. Therefore, nationalizing the direct loan program will add substantially to the national debt over the next decade.

This means that those who benefit from the loans will actually pay twice, once when paying off the original loan and a second time when he or she pays the taxes necessary to eliminate the ever increasing national debt.

Of course some insist that the basis of the proposal is to deal with the larger budget issues, that any savings created by program changes will be used to plug budget gaps instead of providing additional funds for higher education.

Questioning the Change

These five issues have us and others questioning the government take-over of a public-private program that has seemingly supported students and schools, especially those who have borrowed judiciously in the past.

How College Sports Continues to Sell its Soul.

I cannot remember the first time I heard someone suggest Division I athletics bordered on a form of prostitution. Though previously I had deemed such a suggestion excessive hyperbole, this past weekend we became witness to why that ugly word is used to describe college athletics.

On Saturday, Delaware State, a small 1-AA FCS football program, had the unenviable task of traveling up to Ann Arbor to take on the 1-A FBS Michigan Wolverines. As expected, the game, which should never have been played, was a rout of monumental proportions.

The Wolverines (5-2) set several team records including 442 total yards of offense in the first half and 727 for the game in a 63-6 rout. Michigan matched a school record by scoring 28-points in the first quarter and their 49 points by halftime were the second-highest in school history.

But truth be told, such routs happen quite often in the world of college athletics, particularly in football when teams with disparate resources get together to ‘compete’ on the field. Therefore, in most instances, the Michigan-Delaware State game would simply be relegated to the NCAA hinterlands if not for a back story that demonstrates the sometimes vile world of college athletics.

Two Losses the Same Day

Sports sites noted that Delaware State actually lost two football games on Saturday. In addition to the pasting they received at the hands of Michigan, the team forfeited a game against fellow Mid-Eastern Athletic Conference foe North Carolina AT&T, a game that had been scheduled prior to the agreement to play Michigan.

In fairness, the initial mistake of two games being scheduled on the same date came while Delaware State was searching for an athletic director. But the choice of what game to play, and subsequently which to forfeit, demonstrates why so many are down on the world of college athletics.

Seems that Delaware State was offered $550,000 to go to Ann Arbor and play the role of football fodder for the Wolverines. And administration at the school decided that sum of money was just too much to pass up.

The Decision

According to reports, given the opportunity, Delaware State signed a contract to play the game in Ann Arbor despite having already committed to playing AT&T on the same date. The contract did allow Delaware State to cancel for a fee, the amount of which was not made public.

Of course, once everyone realized a mistake had been made, Michigan could have done a classy thing and released Delaware State from the contract. But then again, if Michigan could afford to pay Delaware State $550,000 just to appear, one can gather that the lost revenue from a home game would represent a sum of money that made the half-million payout seem inconsequential..

At the same time, Delaware State officials could have done the right thing and honored their league commitment against AT&T. Of course, given Michigan’s stance, to do so meant State would have had to pay the required fee for backing out.

Instead of either school honoring the spirit of amateur athletics, i.e. handle a loss with dignity and class, both opted for the opposite. Both put large sums of money in front of integrity and, as a result provided a sorry message to the athletes on their respective teams.

Many Fumbled the Ball

Beyond the physical mismatch that constituted the so-called ‘game’, the decision by Delaware State to take the money also meant it put the integrity of its league at risk. The choice to forfeit could well impact the final league standings and ultimately, the status of numerous other conference teams in the process.

Given that both levels of football have a supervisory agency, the NCAA, one would think that leadership beyond the two schools would have taken issue with the decision to allow money to alter the integrity of the sport. Apparently, not so.

Today we understand why some would use the word prostitution to describe college athletics. Yes, such a statement borders on the outrageous.

But what these two universities did in the name of college football could only be described in such terms.

We have frequently highlighted the roll of social media in college, even when it turned out to be a bad fit. Some professors have taken a liking to it, particularly note passing on Twitter. Going one step further, College Scholarships is incorporating Twitter into a scholarship now. Students may enter the 140 Scholarship by Tweeting their answer to the following question “how we Twitter be used to improve the world?”

When we get together with the older folks (we will be smart and not place an age on them), there often tends to be more than a wisp of nostalgia. They seem to recall with great sincerity the bittersweet feelings of days long ago.

At times yearning for the things and the situations they experienced in the days of their youth, their notion is that the good old days are behind us. And when it comes to building reliable machinery, well, we simply do not build them “like we used to.”

Automotive Accidents

Of course, in some ways, nothing could be further from the truth. While we have every right to get frustrated when an item fails, it is important to realize just how far we have come.

Such evidence is on clear display when one examines the recent results from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety tests of car safety. To get a sense of the improvements, the Institute filmed a head-on collision between a 1959 Chevy Bel Air and a 2009 Chevy Malibu.

The collision was an example of a “frontal offset” collision, driver to driver, at a speed of 40 m.p.h. Crash test dummies recorded the carnage that would have been wrought on each driver.

Of course, the 1959 Bel Air lacked seat belts and a neck restraint. In addition, the passenger cabin was unable to withstand the impact, crumpling inward.

The data revealed that a real driver in the Bel Air would have suffered severe injuries in the neck, chest, and both legs.

The Malibu, complete with air bag offered a dramatically different final appearance. In addition, the crash test dummy escaped unscathed.

“It was night and day, the difference in occupant protection,” stated Institute president Adrian Lund. “What this test shows is that automakers don’t build cars like they used to. They build them better.”

Not So Fast

When it comes to safety, it seems that it is a good thing that they do not build them like they used to. But the same agency gives cars much lower marks (pdf) on the cost of repair after they experience a collision.

In fact, when it comes to the 2009 Chevy Malibu, the IIHS ranks the vehicle very poorly when it comes to the assessment of how well bumpers resist damage in everyday fender-benders. Using four different types of collisions, front and rear full-width impacts at 6 mph and front and rear corner impacts at 3 mph, cars are given a rating of acceptable to poor.

For those interested, the Mazda 6, Ford Focus, Scion xB, and Smart Fortwo obtained vehicle ratings of acceptable. The average repair costs for the Mazda 6 were a shade less than $900 after the 4 tests at 3 and 6 mph.

On the flip side, the Malibu’s rear test resulted in almost $3,500 in damage, the highest among the midsize cars evaluated. Such a shocking repair bill came as a result of a 6 mph strike in the rear, the typical speed of a common parking mishap such as backing into another vehicle.

As for the front, avoid the Ford Fusion. In the full front test, the Fusion had $2,529 in damage, topping even that of the Malibu ($2,092).

Other ratings were marginal for the Mitsubishi Galant and Toyota Camry and poor for Chrysler Sebring, Nissan Altima, Pontiac G6, Saturn AURA, Subaru Legacy, Volkswagen Jetta, Volkswagen Passat, and Volvo S40 earn poor ratings (the Volvo S40’s poor rating comes more from the high prices on parts and labor).

So when it comes to this question of nostalgia and the question of the good old days, well, it seems that they were.

And they weren’t.

It is deemed to be one of the “most popular courses in Harvard’s history.” And now, thanks to WGBH television and Harvard University, every American has an opportunity to examine the moral and ethical issues that form Michael Sandel’s course “Justice.”

In opening this classroom to the world, Harvard gives us a taste of the future of higher education. With the proper preparation and a gifted-instructor, the course is proof-positive that high quality education can be delivered online.

In fact, one might honestly ask, what is the advantage of actually being seated in the auditorium where Sandel teaches. The incredible numbers of students eliminate any intimacy and any real possibility of discussion within the “classroom setting,” i.e. stadium-style lecture halls.

That said, the critical components of the twelve-part series are the content and the complex moral questions being posed. Addressing the hot topics of our day (affirmative action, same-sex marriage, patriotism and rights), Sandel offers a constant stream of provocative questions that provide for outstanding discussion opportunities.

As but one example of how to use content to drive instruction, in episode 2, How to Measure Pleasure, Sandel offers video clips from three distinct and different elements of the entertainment world: clips from Shakespeare’s Hamlet, the reality show Fear Factor, and The Simpsons.

The course also features opinion polls, pop quizzes, in-depth readings and discussion guides offering two levels of debate, beginner and advanced depending on your current background.

As for one rationale for the online version exceeding the traditional classroom model, online classes now offer literally endless possibilities for rich discussions with viewers from around the world. Not only are such discussions impossible in the auditorium where the class is presented, online discussion forums remove the need for students to gather collectively on a single campus.

The two drawbacks? First, there is that same mentality that features the typical time constraints of all education, materials are being released weekly.

Second, the method for earning those all-important credits that can be collected to earn a college diploma.

But as for the model of what could be, Justice is the real deal!

“What a wonderful life I’ve had! I only wish I’d realized it sooner.” Colette

Louis C.K., number 98 on Comedy Central’s list of the “100 Greatest Stand-ups of All Time,” is seeing a lot of air time for a bit he did on Conan O’Brien a few months back. The Emmy Award-winning writer certainly has some strong words for today’s digital generation:

“Everything is amazing right now and nobody’s happy…. We live in this amazing, amazing world and we are wasting it on the crappiest generation of just spoiled idiots that don’t care.”

As with all great humor, it is entirely based in reality – the moaning and groaning as we wait for a signal; our complete frustration with any flight delay; etc.

Of course, with technology comes expectations, eh?

And when expectations are not met, well, just what are we to do?

As for total irony, perhaps you could download this clip and watch it on your next flight via your laptop or iphone.

By all accounts, the job placement data for the Class of 2009 was exceedingly dismal. While everyone is hopeful of a better future and most signs point to an economy on the rebound, career experts insist that the Class of 2010 could well see similar job placement challenges.

The reason is quite simple – it seems that the poor 2009 job placement rates came in great part because a large number of 2008 graduates had been unable to secure a job in their field. Now, the Class of 2010 faces a double whammy, the cascading effect of two consecutive poor placement years.

Therefore, even as the economy turns the corner, next year’s grads will be competing with a number of currently unemployed folks for the few additional jobs that become available.

Becoming a Recession Proof Graduate

Given this sobering scenario, today we turn to Charlie Hoehn, the author of the interesting SlideShare ebook, “Recession Proof Graduate.” A 2008 graduate of Colorado State University, Charlie holds degrees in marketing and media studies.

Currently touring the country with Tucker Max during the screening of his new movie: I Hope They Serve Beer in Hell, Charlie continues to work with Ramit Sethi, a partnership that led to Sethi’s recent book becoming a NY Times and Wall Street Journal best-seller, and with Tim Ferriss, author of the NY Times best-seller, The Four-Hour Workweek.

Charlie provides some pretty radical advice in Recession Proof Graduate. After reading his recommendations, we wanted to give Charlie some time to discuss his job search process, particularly his decision to throw out the traditional search model after seeing conventional techniques produce dismal results for him.

In your book, you talk about your initial job search upon graduating and the difficulties you had. At some point you came to the realization that the recession was not the issue, it was your use of conventional job-hunting methods and your expectations related to that search. Which realization came first, the need to change your expectations or your need to try a new search technique?

The need to change my expectations definitely came first. After I got turned away from a company I’d interned with for three months (and they LOVED me, by the way), I kinda knew the odds of me finding a well-paying, fun job were pretty slim. I changed my job hunting tactics later on out of sheer desperation, after trying the traditional methods for a few months and seeing godawful results.

You certainly turn one standard goal of the job search process on its head. Can you explain why the goal for graduates should not be focused so much on making loads of money?

I’m all for making a lot of money, but I knew that I didn’t necessarily deserve a big paycheck right away. I had to earn that right. So I think the goal for graduates should not be to immediately find a high paying gig, but rather to figure out how to maximize their potential future earnings. This can be done by learning in-demand skills, doing free work for specific people, etc. This way, you’re setting yourself up for making more money in the long run, while also making yourself more valuable as an employee and building your network.

Another reason I don’t think grads should be too focused on money is because it will REALLY force you to figure out what your priorities are. I have a few friends who jumped into industries they don’t like because they were tempted by the promise of $60-80K in the first year on the job. Even I played with the idea of being a landman for an oil and gas company because I would have made $70K straightaway. But I also would have quickly grown to hate my life. And after a certain point, I would have been so emotionally and financially dependent on that big paycheck that there’d be no turning back. It’s far better, I think, to do free work for a few months. You’ll figure out what you truly want to do.

And really, should a student consider throwing away their resume?

Maybe not literally, but I do think resumes suck. Just from an aesthetic standpoint, I think resumes are awful. They all look the same — plain and boring — and when you consider that you’re in a pile with dozens (and sometimes hundreds) of other resumes, you have to realize that it’s nearly impossible to stand out. The average graduate will not have any remarkable credentials under his belt, so how is he going to beat out all these other faceless resumes? He won’t. So I say throw away your resume. A one-page document shouldn’t represent your past, present, and future. A blog or a portfolio are superior alternatives, and they can vividly illustrate a person’s thought process and skills.

The idea of working for free to obtain critical experience and skills isn’t really new is it? Is this not just the concept of an internship? And, didn’t you get the skills you needed in college?

Free work is very different from an internship, as Seth Godin pointed out. Free work allows you to work on your own terms: you get to work with the people you want to, on the projects you want to work on, in the industry you want to work in. The relationships with the people you work for will develop organically, and they won’t look at you as just an intern — they’ll actually want to help you learn and grow.

Did I get the skills I needed while I was in college? Yes and no. Yes, because all of the skills I’m currently hired and paid for were things I taught myself while I was in college. No, because college didn’t really teach me any new skills that employers would want to hire me for. College gave me a degree, a GPA, and four years of fun memories. None of those hold much weight in a recession.

In your ebook you explain that many folks insist that you have this new job search process all wrong – one honest fear of some of the folks I have talked to is that once you work for free that will become the ongoing expectation – how do you respond to folks who raise this concern?

I briefly addressed this at the end of the e-book. It’s all about managing expectations. If you don’t lay down a deadline for when the free work transitions to paid work (or introductions to other people, new opportunities, etc.), then you’re setting yourself up to be taken advantage of. Most people who take you under their wing to do free work will be more than willing to reciprocate and help you out if you do a really great job, but you need to make that clear upfront. I’ve done free work for a bunch of people over the last year and a half. I only felt like I got burned once, and that was when I did work for a struggling entrepreneur who was working on his first startup (which is why I recommend that graduates work for successful entrepreneurs).

I also try to work with people who are dependent on maintaining a strong, healthy personal brand online. I’ve built up enough credibility and have enough followers that it’s a bigger liability for them if they take advantage of me. This is not to say I would ever hold this over their head, or threaten them with it if things started to go poorly. Rather, it’s just to point out that it’s in their best interest to take care of me (which they do).

One key element is the suggestion to seek to do this free work virtually – why is this a point of emphasis in the process?

Doing work virtually really frees you up to work with anyone you want — you’re not limited to whatever local opportunities are available. You can work with people in other states, or other countries. Virtual free work is probably the best dynamic for graduates, because you can take on a bunch of projects all at once and choose which ones you want to continue pursuing. There’s very little risk involved for the employer (no money spent, no time wasted training), and there’s very little risk for the graduate. What’s the employer going to do if you screw up? “Fire” you? Probably not — you’re not eating up their payroll and you’re not using much of their time either. Even if you do end up parting ways, it’s not the end of the world.

You not only talk about the importance of a person’s online presence, you honestly inform folks that your initial online presence did not portray you in a very flattering light. Can you explain to readers what your initial presence looked like and the process you used to bury the negative elements to the Google hinterlands?

What shows up in Google when you search for someone’s name is a little different from having an online presence. A few years ago, I had a Facebook and LinkedIn account — technically, that’s an online presence. But when you searched for ‘Charlie Hoehn,’ a CollegeHumor video of my friend riding his bike drunkenly down a flight of stairs (and crashing) was one of my top 5 results. Another one of my top results was an online article from CSU’s newspaper where I was quoted talking about abortion. My old Google results didn’t really give any employer much to work with in terms of figuring out what I’m like or whether I’d be worth hiring.

I had to start a blog for the virtual internship I did with Seth Godin (I never planned on having one). Eventually, people started to link to me and actually write about me, for whatever reason. And all of those posts started to accumulate and bury my negative Google results. It wasn’t actually an intentional process to put me in a positive light online — it just sort of happened on its own.

How long did this process actually take?

I’m not entirely sure, but I want to say it was between 2-4 months before I had control of the top 5 search results for my name. It took a few more months to really get a stranglehold on the top 10 results. I have a fairly rare last name, so I’m sure it will take a lot longer for some people.

Your advice about starting a blog to help define your online brand comes with a couple of cautions – talk a little bit about those cautions.

A lot of people, especially graduates, make a huge mistake when they start blogging: they’re honest to a fault. They treat their blog as a personal diary, where they can talk about their alcoholism, or their inability to talk to women, or whatever other shortcomings they have. If you want to do that, go find an anonymous forum or something. Don’t do it on your personal blog if you’re legitimately trying to use it as a tool to get hired. You want to paint an honest yet flattering picture of yourself, so be professional.

Quality of content is also HUGELY important. If you write up something half-assed and you know it’s not very good, don’t post it. I think it’s more of a liability to have a bad blog than it is to have no blog at all. You can talk your way out of mediocre search results, but if the writing on your blog sucks, you can’t really dig yourself out of that hole.

Two really key elements of your philosophy are to choose the right person to work for and to choose projects you really care about. Can you talk a little bit about the characteristics you focus in on when deciding which person or industry to target?

I have several questions I ask myself when deciding whether I want to work with a person or not:

• Does this opportunity excite me?
• Is it going to be fun, challenging, and intellectually stimulating? i.e. Will it help me grow as a person?
• Will more opportunities open up to me when this is over?
• Can I learn a new skill set if I work with them?
• How flexible will my schedule be if I take this? This is important, because if it’s a huge time-kill, I won’t take it.
• Is this person a successful entrepreneur? If no, proceed with caution. Entrepreneurs who have never succeeded are a big risk, and are usually too poor to ever pay much. They’re fun to work with, but it’s usually not worth the time.
• How well does it/will it pay?

There aren’t many criteria for deciding which industry to target. Basically, I just go after the ones that look the most fun.

When contacting potential targets, you rightfully note the need to do some intense homework on the target. You then note that that the student should suggest specific examples of free work he/she could do that will have a measurable impact on the targeted business. My fear is that this would come off sounding a bit presumptuous to the recipient?

It’s hard to approach an employer with some vague description of what you can do for them or, even worse, saying you’ll help out however you can. It’s too broad and vague, so it’s hard for them to visualize how you’d be an asset. But if you lay out in specific terms how you think you can help them, and give them a few suggestions, it helps them fill in the gaps. You won’t force them to rack their brain on how they can use you. Instead, you’re helping them visualize how you’ll fit into the picture. Trust me, they’ll be very impressed that you brought a list of ways in which you could help.

Can you give our readers a sense of a how you used this strategy to land some critical first opportunities?

Everyone I’ve approached for work in the last year has hired me because I laid out how I could help them specifically. Ramit Sethi was the first person I used this strategy on, and he eventually introduced me to Tim Ferriss. I gave Tucker specific examples of how I could help him, as well. Giving suggestions shows your initiative, and your willingness to emotionally commit to a job before you even get it. Try it, you’d be surprised at how effective it is.

Photos courtesy of Charlie Hoehn.