FINALLY we have consensus, and I agree with all of the above. What were we arguing about again?

Uh, yes, it was hard to sound grave and serious with just "Pam" -- the name is far too pleasant to say and lacks the rhetorical sensationalism we all know I'm prone to. Hence "Pamela", which is much more authoritarian.

I am on G+ if you require my opinion, although I feel I am not nearly close to being qualified.

And why must you always be the peacemaker? We were having so much fun....

....Well we all agree. What are we arguing about again? My response was also intended to be blunt Geoff, and it wasn't cynical in the slightest; it's a realistic response to my and other grads frustration. There are people in this college (students, professors, administrators) who fail to recognize that the reason people attend college is for mainly for economic reasons, and the college should cater to its paying customers with that in mind. I'm not saying they compromise their education, forgetting about Socrates and instead writing resumes, but they do everything that we have listed above and below. And its not about promising students a job -- although certain recruitment literature from the university pretty much say that already. Where we disagree is over whether or not the College or University provides the tools for students to succeed professionally. I say they do not, or if they do it's not accessible to the general student population.

The elitism comment was also meant to be blunt in order to illustrate the theme that everyone has equal accessibility to these programs, and if they are unsuccessful it is on them and them only. I vehemently disagree with that statement. Sometimes forces outside of the students control prevent them from investigating all of these options -- they have to work a part time job, they have extracurricular out the wazoo, they are transferring from a branch campus or another college, they are an adult learner with a family, or they're a naive freshman to senior who think everything will work out in the end -- to name a few. These are the people we need to include in this discussion, not those who regularly read this blog (judging by the comments on the other posts not to many -- how many kids even know this exists? I didn't until Dr. Long asked me to write). And the fact that students don't even know what questions to ask their advisers when they go to them illustrates a fundamental problem we have in this College. The CLA needs to do more; platitudes about personal responsibility sound hollow at this point.

I think you really provided some spectacular perspective, and I think that a Career Enrichment Network would help to bridge the gap from academic advising to career advising. It's obvious that the two are very much related, and to keep the two in such distinct and separate categories is doing a disservice to students. Students come to college to learn, not for pure intellectual growth but so they can land a job after graduation. Why the division, why not intellectually grow students into their chosen careers, making them better professionals and people in the process? Students know which departments have the best advising; CLJ/SOC is one of the best and has a really good reputation among its grads (so good that Alumni from say, the DOJ, come back to recruit). That's where we should start.

Geoff you're coming off as condescending in your response, which I am sure was not your intent. Pamela never said that these opportunities weren't available; it's just inaccessible to students who don't even know where to start. Obviously this is a problem judging by Pamela's entry and the response below from Ms. Perry (in fact my sister-in-law, a Penn State grad, had trouble with the advising too at Penn State and strongly dislikes Penn State as a result). The typical response is “oh students are just lazy and are blaming the college for their problems.” I assure you that I am not lazy, and I know for a fact that Pamela, who is in the honors college and has three majors, also is not lazy. It angers me to see that so much elitism exists in this college, and I grow weary of people covering up a problem under the mantle of “personal responsibility.” That’s just an excuse to do nothing while thousands of students suffer at a rate of $40,000 a year. And that’s just cold man.

Just wait until I bring up piety....

Effective advising can only be achieved if the advisers are familiar with the students they are advising; if they know their interests, there academic abilities and general personality. I'm going to give major credit to my Penn State Schuylkill adviser, Dr. Harmut Heep, who was invaluable to my early academic career. It helped that he scheduled to meet me numerous times throughout the semester, was knowledgeable of Penn State programs that fit my interests, and had me for three classes throughout my three semesters at Schuylkill (Two classes of German and a COMM course). This relationship did not exist for me at University Park, a sentiment shared to me from many branch campus students (many of which transferred back to their branch or out of the University altogether). I understand that this is difficult in a University of this size, and it may just be the nature of the beast. But I really think this could be achieved in each respective college and major in a realistic way, if professors take more time for students and less for research (this is my perspective as someone who was not in the Honors College, which I understand is much more hands on. Why can't the whole university be an Honors College? Why the select few? Last time I checked we pay the same amount in tuition...).

If I were building a Career Network, I would try to make it as individualized as possible for each student. It should be a requirement for every student, before registering for their first classes even, to become registered in this network. The network would serve to narrow down a student's interests and provide them targeted information on how to succeed in their career endeavors, perhaps even directing them with a member of staff who is knowledgeable in that area and can assist them. Then, it will be up to the student to follow up on these leads, and if they never use it again then so be it, their loss. These all exist at Penn State, but they're scattered all over the Penn State servers. We need to consolidate this information into one place and make it more user friendly/accessible.

We would also need this career network to be completely immersed in social networking. Part of this should be an online forum and blog where students can interact with one another in a constructive way. Facebook, twitter, Google+,Skype even Penn State ANGEL should be able to plug into this network. And it should be Liberal Arts specific. The College would also have to attract employers to this site to participate and interact with students (and should be screened and separated from spam, see the NLCN for how not to do this). Think the professionalism of LinkedIn mixed with the accessibility of Facebook. Perhaps large amounts of this network will be built and maintained by students, who will be given some freedom on how the network looks and operates?

Priorities are easy: targeted, individualized information for careers for liberal arts students. Success would be the amount of active users and whether or not this network led to any sort of employment. My vision is very ambitious, and I understand that among the staff there is a lethargy to the student body they think we will not be able to overcome. But I think this lethargy is a symptom of a student body that is not properly stimulated and frankly overwhelmed with their options. Freedom of choice is a wonderful thing, but too much choice does not increase satisfaction; it leads to paralysis and indecision. And that should be avoided at all costs.

I am also asserting Sam that the work force is much different than how you're portraying it. And I assure you the general student body, not myself, you or Geoff, thinks about these questions much much later. Bombarding students with mass emails is no way to advise them on future career goals. The systematic problem does exist, enough so that many people are beginning to ask the dangerous question of "Is College worth the cost?" This is a disturbing and significantly limiting to a person's potential future income (I invite you to peruse the links and book I recommended at the bottom of the page). We have a significant education problem in this country, and our graduates need every advantage they can get. Again, my original point of this posting is to say that a bit more guidance from our own college would be helpful in a university of this size so that we don't get lost in the crowd. Unorganized email bombardment is not the answer.

You also mischaracterize my college-jobs argument. I am saying that it is naive to suppose that people come to college for some sort of personal educational fulfillment. They come so they can get a good paying job. Let's not kid ourselves here. I love knowledge as much as the next guy, but there are cheaper alternatives to $40,000 tuition (plus we wouldn't have to take all of those gen ed classes). Employers look for that education and experience when they hire, granted. But how much of that article talked about Liberal Arts kids, and not engineering, business and science kids? Let's disaggregate this data a bit; I bet not all colleges are made equal. We know that liberal arts kids are slow in the career department and do eventually catch up. But why the slow start? Why can't they jump into the workforce as quickly as other majors? That's the question I want answered and the question we should be asking.

Again, parent is the wrong word. And I don't know the details of CEN, but it appears to remedy some of the problems we all agree exist. And its not about hand-holding as much as giving students individualized attention, not being one of thousands of students on an adviser's schedule. I don't think it's too much to ask that they at least know the student's name.

And as someone who came from a branch campus (Schuylkill), I assure you my adviser there was spectacular, much better than anyone at University Park.

Well okay, perhaps "parent" was the wrong word to use. I only meant that it's not beyond the scope of the College of Liberal Arts to provide for their students post-graduation. And to say that college kids are "independent" and therefore left to their own devices is a sell-out to our students. That's the easy answer, one complicated once you factor in student debt, especially those poorest students who need the education and economic boost the most.

And as a student who came from a branch campus (Schuylkill) trust me when I say that it's not enough. I didn't even know that Link UP existed.

Also Sam did a wonderful article that offers a counterpoint to my own ideas: http://www.psu.edu/dept/laus/2011/06/the-liberal-...