This deliberation
was really relevant for me (and most students) because we discussed the issue
of college debt. This issue is almost purely financial, so I didn't expect
there to be much emotional discussion going on, but I was wrong. Of course,
there weren't really any moral dilemmas surrounding the topic, but there were a
lot of strong emotions tied to the issue.
I thought it was
very effective of this group of RCL students to use an anecdote to open up
their issue brief; it's the diary entry of someone who's elated because they
were accepted at their dream school. Unfortunately, though, that celebration is
tainted with stress because of the almost insurmountable problem of the high
cost of post-secondary education. There were a lot of people at this
deliberation who are where I am, in the middle of the middle class; we don't
qualify for aid, but we also don't have enough money to pay our way through
school. The first approach of the deliberation addressed the issue of high
entrance costs.
![]() |
Relatable ecards are the lifeblood of 40+ Facebook moms, but this one is actually relevant to this post (and there's no minions so it's fine). (src) |
The biggest thing people talked about was FASFA, a beast we all have
struggled with; my estimated family contribution (EFC), which determines the
aid you’re eligible for, was $40,000, meaning that the government thinks my
parents are paying my tuition every year and then buying me a really nice car
to put my diploma in. If you didn’t catch that, it was sarcasm; they’re not
going to do that. We don’t have that money. So this was a pretty heated issue.
The second approach, which I thought was the most interesting, was
destigmatizing non-4-year post-secondary education. I’m not a perfect person
and I know I’ve judged people when they said they’re going to a technical
college or a community college; I think it’s probably a universal thing, at
least in America, to treat your local community college as a joke, as a place
where dumb kids and poor kids go because they can’t cut it at a 4-year
university. (I know that sounds terrible, but stigmata aren’t usually
positive).
![]() |
memegenerator.net is where dreams go to die. There's so much wrong with this. I'll let you unravel its majesty on your own. (src) |
Someone at the event talked about how their state has a 2+2
program where you can go to a community college for two years and then finish
at a university. I thought that sounded like a good idea. I would’ve gone to a
branch campus for at least a year if it weren’t for Schreyer money.
The third approach talked about reducing exit costs, which
basically means getting rid of debt after you have a degree in your hand. This one
hits home for me because my mom and dad both got their debt reduced or
eradicated through loan forgiveness programs, whether that meant working for
the military or working in economically depressed areas. I think there should
be more loan forgiveness programs out there.
Overall, this deliberation was really interesting, even though I’m
still not totally used to a deliberation-style discussion when we are usually
driven to debate.
Though I don't
want to end on a dismal note, I think it's kind of a shame that a lot of the
deliberations were almost fully populated by students. I was hoping the
deliberation would be a big opportunity for community involvement, but everyone
that I've talked to said their deliberation events were heavily attended by
students. Some of the deliberations didn't even have more than one person who
wasn't a part of the project in attendance. What do you think? Do you wish
there was more community involvement? Why do you think there wasn't a lot? Is
it just that most of the State College community is students? Or possibly that
there's not much motivation for civic engagement among non-student State
College residents?