Once more, with feeling!

That’s right, I’m back for one more installment of the Teach For America (TFA) series—first we took a look at the overall organization and all sides of the related controversy. Next, I talked to a former TFA teacher to get her take on her experience working for the organization. Now I’d like to share the perspective of Molly Burke, who studied sociology and education at Occidental College, where she also earned her master of arts in teaching. She has taught children in a variety of environments and now works for Share Our Strength in Washington, DC.

Like many other education and children’s welfare professionals, Molly’s primary concerns about how TFA works stem from its recruitment of young teachers new to the field and how this and their often short-term classroom commitments affect their students.

“TFA’s goals are noble, but the way those goals are achieved is not. Young adults are sent into the toughest of classrooms, and those students need capable, strong teachers. A paltry amount of training does not a good teacher make! However, it is an attempt to get teachers into the neediest of areas, which is a need we as a society are facing,” she said.

Herein lies the crux of the principal TFA controversy: TFA places enthusiastic and energetic, young and brand-spanking new teachers in the neediest of America’s classrooms. They are also responsible for teaching in some of the country’s most challenging schools and many are concerned that the summer “crash course” and same-time education training that TFA teachers receive is insufficient to meet these schools’ needs—and, most importantly, the students’ needs. Molly, like many other professionals in the field, does not fault TFA for its mission, but would like to see a different approach to solving the tremendous problems facing the American public school system.

Molly supports an approach based on “pay incentives for qualified, trained teachers to head into these neighborhoods so that the students are with qualified, dedicated educators” instead of the short-term commitment that TFA facilitates.

The proof that TFA will continue to be a popular and successful organization is in the numbers: it continues to expand its locations, and its applications have hit record numbers in the past few years. The controversy that we have unpacked over this series is thus not meant to be fodder for argument, but rather an explication of an issue very relevant to many college students interested in education. As the debate continues to develop, perhaps the criticisms of TFA will be useful for broader education reform.

As Molly said, “teaching is a service. However, the way TFA does it makes it feel like a service project. These are children’s lives we are thinking about here. That is not to be taken lightly … We should make teaching coursework and training accessible to all interested parties, and we should incentivize individuals who have the training necessary to work where children need good teachers.”

What do you think, BetterGrads blog readers? Where do you stand on Teach For America’s mission and practices?

(Read Part 1 and Part 2 in this miniseries.)

November brings crisp autumn weather, pumpkin spice everything, Turkey Day, and…millions of college students submitting applications for post-graduation endeavors! This time two years ago I was burning the midnight oil on grad school and fellowship applications. Eeek, glad those days are over.

One such post-graduation endeavor might be Teach For America, the program that places recent college grads as teachers in areas of the U.S. that need more educators in their classrooms. Since it’s such a popular program (35, 000 applied in 2009, about 15% were accepted), BetterGrads is exploring the organization and the broader policy issues it brings up in a blog series.

As I shared before, I ended up not pursuing TFA after my initial interview. So I talked to my friend and Oxy classmate (and sorority sister!) Jessica Cornick, who taught 7^th grade science in Los Angeles as a TFA member, shared some insights into her experience with me.

Unsure of what she wanted to do after graduation, Jessica said that she pursued TFA because she thought it would provide her with a job opportunity while allowing her to see if teaching would be a good career path. Prior to starting TFA, Jessica had taught sports at summer camp and worked in a variety of tutoring jobs during college.

I asked Jessica about one of the central criticisms of TFA, which is that it puts young and un-experienced teachers in high-need classrooms. Jessica replied:

“Although many of Teach for America participants do not have prior teaching experience, they go through an extensive training program before they teach that provides them with the tools and knowledge necessary to maximize their teaching potential. It is true that there is a steep learning curve in the first few months of teaching, but watching other more seasoned teachers go through the motions in their classroom day to day is heartwrenching. While TFA teachers may not have the experience, they have the drive to really make a significant impact with their kids. I also have found that my lack of previous classroom teaching experience allowed me to be creative with my teaching approach which often resulted in the majority of my favorite lessons.”

I found this argument to be quite compelling. As someone who has pretty much stayed on the fence regarding this TFA criticism, this line of reasoning really sways my own opinion of this matter.

Seattle public schools, for instance, have recently been abuzz with debates over whether or not the city’s school district should sign a contract with TFA. The experience factor seems to be one of the biggest points of contention, which is completely reasonable—of course we want the best teachers possible for our children.

But Jessica’s points also make perfect sense to me. Energy, dedication, and enthusiasm matter just as much as formal training for success in the classroom. It is thus difficult for me to sway one way or the other on this debate—what do you think, where do you stand and why? Share your thoughts below.

And Jessica? She earned her teaching credential (concurrent with TFA) and currently works as a student loan specialist at Everest College. Even though she is no longer teaching in the middle school where she taught for two years with TFA, she has kept in touch with her former students as they enter high school.

And when they accept their high school diplomas in a few years, Jessica says that she hopes to be in attendance.

Next up: I’ll talk to some young education professionals who studied education in college and earned their MATs about their perspective on the TFA debate.

In the fall of my senior year of college, I sat down with a recruiter for a preliminary interview–not for big private investing firm or a political campaign, but for Teach For America.

TFA is a national nonprofit that recruits recent college grads to teach in schools in low-income communities. TFA volunteers teach for two years and are part of a program that involves training, professional guidance, and other enrichment tools (depending on the location, some TFA volunteers are able to concurrently earn a MA in education and teaching at a nearby university).

Besides education, many TFA alumni go on to careers in law, public policy, social services, medicine…the list goes on and on. I’ll be honest–I was never interested in teaching as a career, but I love kids and felt passionate about the problems that TFA tries to ameliorate, so I agreed to the preliminary interview when the recruiter was making appointments on campus. He wasn’t surprised at all when I admitted that I didn’t see myself pursuing a lifelong career in teaching–in fact, he jumped on that and emphasized what a great placement record TFA have with things like law school admissions.

Herein lies one of the big controversies with TFA–is it totally great that it’s providing teachers for low-income schools or not so much because its volunteers are not necessarily interested in teaching long-term? Most of TFA volunteers are not certified when they are accepted–there’s an intensive “crash course” training the summer before they begin teaching–thus, many critics of TFA argue that placing young, inexperienced teachers in needy areas is counter-productive. On the flipside, a friend of mine who completed two years with TFA contended that the organization places the most energetic, dedicated, and least cynical teachers in the schools that need them most.

Hmm. It’s a tricky dilemma. Ultimately, I knew for numerous reasons that TFA wasn’t for me, but I continue to think about it, especially since a number of my friends are pursuing careers in education. Over the next week or so I’m going to get their perspectives on this issue and share it with you. In the meantime, what do you think about Teach For America? Has anyone else interviewed with a recruiter or otherwise explored the program?

Tattooed Lady by Linda James

The ankle butterfly. A Chinese symbol (which may or may not mean what you think it means). Everybody’s favorite barfly bulls-eye: the tramp stamp.

You know you’ve thought about it. You’re 18, you’re out of the house and now that a tattoo is a legal option, it seems like a good one. That’s college. The world is laid out before you, waiting to be claimed. Surrounded by optimism, idealism and freedom, it’s easy to feel invincible. It’s a time when we begin making plans for the rest of our lives to define who we are and where we want to go.

But the paradox of the college experience is that we are expected to know who we want to be before we really know. Society gives us the impression that at this age we should know, so we often convince ourselves that we do. We make choices that later on, we may regret. For the most part, these are choices we can look back on and cringe or smile wistfully about those “crazy college days.” But sometimes, those choices stay with us for the rest of our lives.

Especially if they involve a tattoo chair.

The Best Case Scenario

Maybe your interest in a tattoo is driven by someone you love. A new passion discovered through higher education or a risk-taking crowd that breaks you out of your comfort zone. The independence that comes with being a co-ed can inspire us to stretch our wings and the boundaries of who we want to be.

So what if you decide that now is the time to get a tattoo?

You may love it. You may choose an image that perfectly encapsulates how you see yourself and where you are in life. Perhaps getting a tattoo of your fraternity insignia is a decision you will look back on with happiness. Or a memorial tattoo for someone you lost.

A tattoo can become an outward snapshot of who you were in that moment, depicting a short story from your journey to who you have become. But that’s the best case scenario. The fact is, a tattoo can just as easily become a regrettable disaster.

The Worst Case Scenario

It was one night in college, maybe some tequila was involved… who knows? But now, you have a portrait of Bob Marley on your arm because somebody kept playing “Jamming” all night. Are you SURE you should have agreed to get the barcode for Chunky Monkey tattooed on the back of your neck?

Many people who get tattoos early in life run the risk of buyer’s remorse down the road. In our late teens and early twenties, something may seem risky and exciting. But in our forties, it may feel just foolish.

And if the possibility of having regrets “someday” doesn’t faze you, there is always the potential for instant backlash. For example, perhaps your family will be horrified that you’ve branded yourself. The stress of trying to hide a tattoo can be intense and rarely works.

Picture this: you’re home for summer vacation, and a family trip to the beach turns into a family fight because your bikini bottom slips low enough for your little brother to ask (loudly), “What’s that?” Okay, maybe don’t go swimming with your parents… but tattoos have a habit of being discovered.

Body Art vs. Employment

The other thing to consider about a college tattoo is related to one of the primary purposes of college in the first place: your career.

If you decide to get a tattoo, I really hope your major isn’t business. Visible tattoos violate the dress code for many occupations, from offices jobs to law enforcement. Many college grads are already facing the cold hard truths of a recessed economy. Simply put: jobs are scarce. And usually, post-college debts are high. College is as much about self-discovery as it is about planning for the future, and a big part of that plan should be making yourself as marketable as possible. It doesn’t mean you have to suppress your creative urges or “sell out to the man,” but it’s important to think about how your decisions could damage future job prospects.

Ultimately, getting a tattoo is a very personal decision. But oftentimes, it is done on an impulsive whim. It shouldn’t be. Just because tattoo removal exists, it isn’t cheap, easy or painless.

If you’re thinking that a tattoo is the perfect way to capture the way you feel right now, think really hard about how you will feel tomorrow. Carrying around an unwanted tattoo can feel like a walk of shame that lasts the rest of your life.

Janet Peterson
Houston, Texas

The author is a writer for New Look, a Houston laser tattoo removal clinic. She holds a bachelor’s degree in communications from State University of New York at Brockport and has worked as a freelance writer, blogger and marketer for the past several years. Janet has the astrological sign for Libra tattooed somewhere on her body… just don’t tell her mom.

A recent USA Today article titled “Colleges not training students for careers that are growing” can be summed up nicely in with following illustration:

I mean, if you really want to, read the article…

© image by Nick Schwartz

It’s graduatin’ season once again, and all over the country newly-minted bachelors are making that terrifying leap from College (wahoo, col-lege!) to Real World (gulp). Not because they want to, but because, well, they have no choice. And with the job market the way it is these days, leaving the cozy confines of campus is downright terrifying. Some prominent academics, aware of employment trends and today’s job market doldrums, are calling for the development of more viable alternative pathways to college. In schools across the country, a trickle-down effect is at work too, as the tribulations of new college graduates are making waves with the next generation of students, leaving high school students to wonder “what’s the point?”

But higher education is not about money, not at the heart of it. Higher education is about learning to think, and while the ability to think is not as tangible as a cold, hard paycheck, saying “No way!” to college is saying “No way!” to a lifetime of both financial and cultural growth.

This is not an easy pill to swallow amidst today’s recession: many economic indicators show that college may not be the savviest financial investment for the immediate here and now. Average starting salaries for college graduates have dropped, down nearly $1,000 from a year ago. Student loan debts are ever growing. To top it off, employers are increasingly reluctant to tap into the recent-college-grad talent pool when hiring, from 79 percent in 2007 to a projected 44 percent this year. And that talent pool is supposed to be more talented, no? So jobs are in short supply, and the jobs that are out there aren’t paying as well as they could or should. Factor in the overall cost of obtaining one’s degree, and the odds of being instantly gratified post-college (financially speaking) are less than favorable. For one, this writer’s first job out of college was waiting tables for not even minimum wage.

Yet the most telling statistic still remains in the pro-college camp: those with higher education are more consistently employed than those without. What’s more, workers with bachelor’s degrees earn an average of $26,000 more per year than those with only high-school diplomas. So while the wounds of debt are still fresh after graduation day, with some patience, a bachelor’s degree does in fact promote financial growth.

Still, financial growth is not the point. What I learned from college was not that waiting tables doesn’t pay—who doesn’t know that?—but that there is further to go, always. There are symphonies to be written, theorems to be proved, histories to be learned and taught. Cultural growth. As Rebecca Mead writes in The New Yorker last week, higher education exists to “nurture critical thought; to expose individuals to the signal accomplishments of humankind… ”

Anyone can be programmed to wait tables—no fancy degree required. But the ability to think critically is what separates man from machine. The ability to think critically is what promotes, what Mead calls, an “engaged citizenry.” It’s the difference between waiting tables indefinitely (as the listless, unengaged citizen) and waiting tables transitionally. So while that medieval philosophy class I took never came in handy as I was wiping down counters, at least not in the What-Do-I-Use-On-This-Mustard-Stain kind of way, it challenged me to engage the world, to question the world, to grow.

No, the gratification may not be instantaneous. Far too many overqualified college graduates are waiting tables in ill-fitting aprons, or stocking bookshelves for minimum wage, or selling hot dogs to tourists, working to pay back student loans. But when it comes to financial and cultural growth, college is still the best bet out there. Because in the end, the ability to think is far more profitable than the ability to be programmed, no matter how much it may cost.

Peter Sheehy
San Francisco, California

The author earned his BA in English and Music from Fordham University, and more recently his MFA in Creative Writing from the University of San Francisco. His short fiction has appeared in several literary magazines across the country, including The Chicago Quarterly Review, The Madison Review, Inkwell, and Storyglossia. He now lives and writes in San Francisco.

“Why College?” is a series of op-ed articles written by Better Grads staff and guest contributors about why we chose to continue educa tion after high school, how we got there, and glimpses into what we learned. To begin at Part 1 in the series, click here.

This article is in response to “Plan B: Skip College” by Jacques Steinberg, which was published on May 14 in the New York Times.

“Plan B” details many reasons why some high school students may be better off pursuing a vocational course or apprenticeship rather than a college degree. Included among these are the high cost of time and money that goes toward college education, the urgent need for workers in many fast growing industries like nursing and customer service that require specific skill sets but not a college degree, and the fact that some students are “unlikely to be successful pursuing a higher degree” or “may not be ready to do so” and would benefit from more “credible alternatives.”

Professor Richard K. Vedder, an economist at Ohio University who advocates for the need for multiple pathways to college and career, likes to ask why 15 percent of mail carriers have bachelor’s degrees. He offers this interesting tidbit as evidence that a B.A. or B.S. may not be the best investment for many individuals based on their current profession.

I believe that the transformation of vocational education from the perceived domicile of the under-achieving that many in our parents’ generation grew up to know, to the rigorous and skills-focused Career Technical Education of today is one of the benchmark achievements of public education in the last twenty years. The multiple pathways approach is the right one, and I applaud all efforts toward creating “credible alternatives”.

But what the article misses, alarmingly, is that many students who veer toward a more vocational path are not necessarily desiring to do so. The article assumes occupational destiny where it does not exist, and exonerates colleges from their share of the responsibility.

Let’s be real: a sizable percentage of those ‘over-educated’ mail carriers had a difficult time finding jobs after graduation or did not find a suitable profession that connected to what they studied in college, found an opportunity to carry mail, realized that the money (and fresh air) was pretty good, and stuck with it. Were these students less qualified, ambitious, or knowledgeable than their peers? If there is evidence for this, it is not presented in the “Plan B” article.

And so the question becomes: what happens between graduation and now that would shift the immediate occupational focus of the average 3.2 GPA liberal arts student from writing or marketing to carrying mail or waitering/waitressing?

Life happens. We all need to earn money and make a living somehow. And after a few years on a job, whatever the job, and finding that you have a knack for it, the value of security and self-worth may overshadow the more uncertain career path. We find meaning in other places, like raising a good family and giving to our communities. And soon, $50K a year as a mail carrier sounds pretty good over the idea of starting out at $50 per article as a writer.

Is this a bad thing? In one sense no, as I believe the successful life is better measured by character and impact on the people you love rather than career. However, I believe hordes of 20-somethings leave their alma maters, find difficulty in the job market, and settle professionally, putting their career dreams on the shelves for the next generation to consider.

This can be ameliorated, at least in part. The onus is on colleges to better understand the needs of students after graduation and in transition. The undergraduate years mark the shift between schooling and career for most of us. It’s not enough to equip graduates with “transferable skills” and wish them the best. College could do a much better job supporting their students’ professional aspirations.

Alumni networks tend to fill the gaps and serve as makeshift and pragmatic career centers. But even the most robust network is not enough. Focused and realistic career planning, translating each major to a set of skills and professions, instructional support about how to utilize online professional sites like LinkedIn, and teaching students how to leverage relationships with faculty and alumni into career opportunities would go a long way.

Teaching students how to apply for jobs and how to market themselves to potential employers after graduation should be included as part and parcel of the college education. It’s at least as important as understanding Plato’s Forms and why Marxist experiments have failed.

Yesterday was Mother’s Day, the special second Sunday in May when we thank our moms for being our moms and celebrate moms everywhere.

I am lucky to have had the best mom I could have asked for: warm-hearted, bright and cheerful, a friend of my friends, willing to stand up against any foe or obstacle for my younger brother and I, so funny in that silly mom-kind-of-way, graceful, tender, college-educated, an older adult teacher and friend to the elderly and disabled, compassionate and caring for all people and animules (as she would say it), always supportive, always by my side, and always, always loving.

I took a moment on this day to thank God for my mom, who, aside for life itself, I consider my life’s greatest blessing. And while she is no longer with me but in spirit, my good fortune of 23 years and one month with my mom Joan set me on my life’s course.

The apple often doesn’t fall far from the tree. We all know that adage. For better or for worse, our moms (and dads) make a big difference in our college and career success. According to a 2001 report from the National Center for Education Statistics, college enrollment rates vary considerably with parents’ educational attainment, even when other factors are taken into account.

In 1999, 82 percent of students whose parents held a bachelor’s degree or higher enrolled in college immediately after finishing high school. The rates were much lower for those whose parents had completed high school but not college (54 percent) and even lower for those whose parents had less than a high school diploma (36 percent).

In “Getting a Boost Up the Ladder of Success,” the economist/comic/writer Ben Stein cites the influence of his parents and their social coterie of movers and shakers as the preeminent reason for his professional and personal success: “almost everything I have I can trace back to my father and mother. To their efforts, to who they were, to their character.” With refreshing candor, Stein draws a straight arrow from his background to each one of his achievements:

And because I had grown up around economics, I just assumed that I could learn it and assimilate it, and so I had confidence in my abilities in the field. This led to my getting good grades and helped me get into Yale Law School and Yale’s graduate school, where I studied with still more friends of my parents, like Henry Wallich and James Tobin.

How did I get my start as a performer in front of the camera? Well, here we go again. It was from a chain of connections I made starting in 1973 at a Yom Kippur breaking of the fast at the home of William Safire, then a Nixon speech writer and fast friend — and later pallbearer — of my father’s. His wife, Helene, was a close friend of my mother’s.

Stein, as I have also done thus far, flits without mention between the importance of the resume of your parents and the actual parenting quality of your parents. It should be noted in unambiguous terms that whether your parents are well-educated professionals or not does not determine whether they are wonderful, whether they instilled you with the work ethic, confidence, character, etc. you need to achieve any dream. Social connections and the letters P, h, and D after your parents’ names far from guarantee that you grew up in a happy, supportive, or loving home.

Nevertheless, having well-educated, well-connected parents who are high up on the professional ladder clearly helps a lot in many regards. So what to do if you lack this type of brute luck?

What if you don’t have a well-connected father? What if you don’t have a well-connected mother? What if you don’t have a father at all? What if you are an immigrant without any connections, with parents who barely speak English, if at all? What do you do? What if you are a young man or woman who has some talent and ambition but little or no idea of how to get onto the ladder? To tell you the truth, I am not at all sure what you do.

Yet all is not for naught.

But I do know that there is a large class of baby boomers who have done well in their financial lives. They are retiring now and looking for things to do to help the community that gave so much to them.

In other words, Ben Stein knows the importance of mentors, and the opportunity for working or recently-retired professionals to make a tangible difference in the lives of many of us. You need a good mentor. I need a good mentor. Most of us could use a good mentor (or two). Whether or not you won the parent lottery, chances are you aren’t as disposed to follow in your parents’ footsteps as Stein was. Are we to believe that the host of Win Ben Stein’s Money would have skipped economics altogether had his parents been musicians or lawyers? Regardless, there is a value for all of us to have a mentor or two in our near-to-peer group or chosen profession.  Fortunately, there are many good men and women – educated, successful in their professions and marked by strong characters – who are willing to help.

So, reach out. Find a mentor. A recently retired baby boomer. A college student or young professional (as we offer through BetterGrads). Introduce yourself. Send an email. Make a call. Be brave, and go for it. For as we know, for better or worse, the apple often doesn’t fall far from the tree. But on this day after Mother’s Day – the day after you counted your blessings, thanked your mom, and celebrated moms everywhere – show your mom your thanks by finding a mentor or being a mentor for someone in need. Do this and I’m sure your mom would be proud.

Today, Parade Magazine announced their selections for their annual High Boys Basketball All-American Team. According to  Parade, Jared Sullinger, the magazine’s 2010 Player of the Year will be headed to Ohio State next, likely to shore up an offense who will miss AP College Player of the Year, Evan Turner, as he is likely to bolt Ohio State for the glory of playing in NBA.

Ohio State’s Evan Turner, Kentucky’s John Wall and Demarcus Cousins, are part of a growing class of exceptionally talented first-year players who otherwise would have made the jump after their senior years of high school to The Association (the nickname for the NBA).

The only rule that stopped them from doing just that was one enacted in 2005 by current NBA commissioner David Stern. Concerned with the number of recruiters and agents making their way into high school gymnasiums, and the notion that many of these young athletes viewed the NBA as a financial security blanket, Stern believed that something had to change. Even the past successes of current Boston Celtics star Kevin Garnett and Los Angeles Lakers icon Kobe Bryant, who both made the leap from high school to the NBA in 1995 and 1996 respectively, could not sway Stern from establishing new NBA eligibility rules.

Basically, Stern’s new rules stated that players must be 19 years of age and one year removed from high school before they could be eligible to play with the Pros. And so began a trend of players (see Kevin Durant, Greg Oden, Derrick Rose, etc…) who were labeled “One-and-Dones.”

This title was handed to players who otherwise would have made themselves eligible for the NBA draft after their graduation from high school, and instead were required to play one year of college ball.

However, this trend might reverse. One impetus is the possibility of an NBA lock out next season (translation: We can’t watch basketball on television as the players go on strike). As result, first year college players would be incentivized to stick around for another year or so, taking classes toward the completion of a degree.

Additionally, the NCAA is mulling over the idea of expanding March Madness from 64 teams to 96, that’s right, 96 teams. And while this decision certainly impacts the class time college athletes will miss while on the road to the Final Four, such a decision may persuade many first-year players who would otherwise depart for the grand life in the NBA, to play for all four eligible years.

Think about it: A 96 team tournament would make some student athletes believe that their team has a chance to compete for the NCAA championship during their four years of school. Why leave for the NBA when the probability for glory in the collegiate game is greater?

So, to those Parade All-American and other highly-touted, soon-to-be graduating high school b-ball student-athletes: Please consider your college careers beyond one season. And if you are looking for more reasons to do so, please read any of these BG articles.

For me the question of “Why College?” is something I have considered very seriously in the course of completing my degree. I am technically an alumnus of University College London. When I finish the degree I started in 2005 I will also be an alumnus of the University of Westminster. One degree, two universities: I have asked the question “Why College?” not once, but twice.

The first time I asked myself that question I barely had to think about it. I was already going to college and I was going to a good one. I got into UCL, described as a “British Ivy League university.” I met interesting people, I had a great time, and through it all I even had time to study and write essays, which are the basic elements of a History degree. Why ask “Why College?” when things are proceeding as people expect and life is good? I did not feel the need to answer that question at any length.

The second time around was different. I thought about the question “Why College?“ a lot – I had to.

Due to a unique convergence of personal circumstances, I left university in London on my own terms. When I came back to the UK a year later, I landed in the middle of a tough recession with half a degree. Despite my alumni card and warm recommendations from well wishing professors, I was under-qualified for positions that a graduate should have been able to get, as I had not graduated.

I was deemed over-qualified for almost everything else. Try putting that you did two thirds of a degree from a leading college on your resume and then apply for jobs at a hedge fund or think tank – or for the contrast, your local Wal-Mart or gas station. Such a state of limbo closes many doors everywhere.

And so I learned one of the very important answers to “Why College?”: a college degree opens doors that are otherwise shut, and can help you reach your professional aspirations.

Of course, college is not just about the degree: studying and spending hours in the library, extra-curricular activities, gaining wide-ranging transferable skills like effective communication and analytical skills, and meeting new people, making connections, and building insurmountable friendships are just a few of the wonderful aspects of the college experience. Still, as I painfully learned from my brief occupational malaise in between university stints, a college degree is an incredibly valuable asset to possess in your quest to achieve your career dreams – or, really, just to get a job.

Dominic Tarn
London, United Kingdom

The author is a history major at the University of Westminster. He is the Editor of The Orient News, a Middle East focused publication, and currently works for Santander Bank. He studied at UCL from 2005 to 2007.