Book Review of Hacking College: Why the Major Doesn’t Matter—and What Really Does

While higher education continues to face rising tuition, student debt anxiety, and questions about its value, there has to be a change if institutions want to exist into the future. Ned Scott Laff and Scott Carlson’s (2025) book Hacking College: Why the Major Doesn't Matter—and What Really Does challenges the conventional college journey. The authors draw on decades of combined experience—Laff in student affairs, Carlson in higher education journalism. Together, they offer a compelling vision for students to “hack” their college experience. While ambitious at times, Hacking College delivers a framework for student success. This review explores their approach, suggests actionable measures for higher education professionals, and considers the potential impact this approach could have on the future of higher education.

 

About Me and Positionality

I am a second-year PhD student in Higher Education and a university staff member. My encounter with Laff and Carlson’s work began last year as part of a group exploring the college major and brainstorming how to incorporate their approach in higher education. I was given an opportunity to read the book pre-publication and again in a graduate course, where we were able to discuss the book with Laff and Carlson face-to-face. I also lead a learning community that read and discussed the book, as well as generated ideas for implementation of the authors’ ideas and directions for future research.

I acknowledge my privilege as a white cis-gender woman with some social and cultural capital shaped by my family, which aided my college success. I grew up in the era of the “you can’t be successful without a college degree” of the 90s and early 2000s. Much like the students in the book, I had challenges with navigating the system, confusion over what classes to take, and a lack of supportive advising. It was my social and cultural capital that helped me in the long run, and thus, I carefully and reflexively considered my own privileges and access as I constructed this review.

 

The Field of Study Framework

Laff and Carlson argue that the traditional college major often results in “empty college degrees”—referring to coursework that is disconnected, hodge-podge, and simply fulfills requirements rather than aligning students’ personal or professional goals (p. 7, 18). They contend that mixed messages from the media and poor advising lead students to merely clear hurdles. Advising is often transactional, focused on degree audits instead of deeper goals (p. 5, 62-64). Career services are criticized for focusing on specific industries and missing the vast “hidden job market” (p. 9, 66-67). Students often lack awareness of institutional opportunities and support to build social capital, crucial for networking and accessing jobs. During our class discussion, Laff emphasized, “It’s not about the major, it’s about crafting what you do.” He talked about his own daughter, who majored in modern dance and choreography but is now a prosecuting attorney. She has combined her ability to perform with her passion for social justice. 

Strengthening social capital is important for student success, yet first-generation, low-income, and underrepresented students often lack it, contributing to wealth and racial disparities (D’Agostino, 2022). The Institute for Higher Education Policy found that Black Americans face higher unemployment, lower wages, and greater labor-market discrimination than White Americans, yielding further evidence to these disparities (Sanchez et al., 2024). A degree means little if a student doesn’t have the social capital to get them in the door for many of the jobs that are out there. Estimates suggest that over 70% of jobs are never posted anywhere, and 85% of jobs are filled through networking (Business Insider, 2017). The student stories in the book highlight their path through the Field of Study method despite significant life obstacles and their successes from this approach. 

The Field of Study method begins with the discovery of a student’s hidden intellectualism and vocational purpose, which helps them to learn about the hidden job market. This is also where they figure out their “wicked problem”. A wicked problem is a complex and difficult-to-solve issue that has no single, clear definition, and no clear solution (Rittel & Webber, 1973). From this, they engage in a research investigative inquiry to learn about the hidden job market, learn from experts, and find faculty and staff at their campus who have similar interests as experts in their hidden job market. From this, they can identify their learning opportunities, on and off campus. Lastly, they design an educational plan to fill their “blank spaces.” These refer to general education and elective credits that are required as part of the degree but are not specific to a student’s major. The lack of direction in navigating the “curricular maze” leads to disconnected choices. Filling these spaces with courses that complement their interests, rather than just checking boxes and can help prevent “empty degrees”. The concept of “empty degrees” comes from Gerald Graff’s (2003) Clueless in Academe: How Schooling Obscures the Life of the Mind. There, Graff argues that educators should leverage students’ existing passions (e.g., sports, fashion) as starting points for intellectual inquiry. This, Laff and Carlson note, is how students connect their interests and the intellectual resources available to them at their institution. From their exploration and inquiry, they can develop a plan to solve their “wicked problem” in which they build social capital and select courses and experiences that align with their interests, skills, and vocational purpose (p. 78-87). 

 

Hacking College and Self-Authorship

During our class discussion, Laff critiqued Perry’s model theory and others because there’s no description of how students are getting from one stage to the next in these student development theories. I contend that there’s evidence of Magolda’s self-authorship theory through the Field of Study method. Students enter college perhaps not knowing what they actually want from their major. The research investigative inquiry guides them into unlocking their hidden intellectualism, fulfilling the first stage of self-authorship theory: absolute knowing (Magolda, 2008). As they build social capital through experiential learning, students start to realize there is a hidden job market they can tap into, leading them to and through the second stage: transitional knowing. As they engage in this process, they become independent thinkers who recognize the complexity of the world’s wicked problems, understand how to navigate the job market and find a job to solve their wicked problem, and master independent knowing (stage 3) (Magolda, 2008). This progression leads to contextual knowing as they engage themselves in the future workforce, fostering innovation and tackling the big challenges in society (Magolda, 2008). In the process, they come to understand their role in the world around them. Integrating self-authorship could provide a clearer theoretical framework for the Field of Study method. 

 

Critique and Conclusion

Overall, Laff and Carlson (2025) pose an interesting approach that has the potential to transform the face of student success and workforce readiness. Some of the ideas are ambitious; changing transactional advising may require significant institutional change, which, given the volatile climate, may be more challenging than ever. Implementing this in large research institutions may be harder due to rigid requirements, complex course structures, and institutional resistance to change. It may be most successful in programs with flexible degree requirements, allowing for data collection and analysis to yield support to the Field of Study method. The lack of hard data supporting the Field of Study method could hinder institutional buy-in. Longitudinal studies tracking student success after implementation would be valuable and lend further credibility to the Field of Study method. 

As an elder millennial (aka xennial) and a parent, the rising cost of college is deeply concerning. I want my children to avoid the path many people in my generation took: being told college was the only path to success, being unsure about their degree, changing majors, taking longer to graduate (if at all), and accumulating significant student debt along the way.

Demographic shifts are also relevant; since 2012, non-White births have outpaced White births, meaning that in just five years, we may see a significant shift in undergraduate student demographics (Cohn, 2016). So how are we preparing for this changing demographic? We certainly cannot rely on the traditional academic model to get us into the future. The world is changing and higher education is not keeping up with that change. Bold ideas like Laff and Carlson’s are needed for higher education to be accessible, equitable, and provide a high return on investment. 

Higher education professionals must holistically support students’ needs while preparing them for future societal and workforce needs. I encourage readers of this blog to explore Hacking College and consider how their institutions can help students “hack” their college experience. Change is hard, but it is essential to the future of higher education. The model of learning, networking, and career development must evolve to prepare for a bold and innovative future workforce. How will you contribute to this change? 

 

References

Magolda, M. B. (2008). The evolution of self-authorship. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Knowing, knowledge and beliefs (pp. 45–64). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6596-5_3

Business Insider. (2017). At least 70% of jobs are not even listed — here’s how to up your chances of getting a great new gig. https://www.businessinsider.com/at-least-70-of-jobs-are-not-even-listed-heres-how-to-up-your-chances-of-getting-a-great-new-gig-2017-4 

Cohn, D. (2016). It’s official: Minority babies are the majority among the nation’s infants, but only just. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2016/06/23/its-official-minority-babies-are-the-majority-among-the-nations-infants-but-only-just/ 

Graff, G. (2003). Clueless in academe: How schooling obscures the life of the mind. Yale University Press.

D’Agostino, S. (2022). Leveling the playing field for social capital. Inside Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/08/05/how-colleges-can-level-playing-field-social-capital 

Laff, N. S. & Carlson, S. (2024). Hacking college: Why the major doesn’t matter–and what really does. Johns Hopkins University Press. 

Rittel, H. W., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy sciences, 4(2), 155-169. https://www.cc.gatech.edu/fac/ellendo/rittel/rittel-dilemma.pdf

Sanchez, C., Peters, E. E., Cheng, D., & Tierney, S. (2024). Breaking the cycle of racial wealth inequities and higher education outcomes: How data-driven insights can inform policy solutions that address the racial wealth gap. Institute for Higher Education Policy. https://www.ihep.org/publication/breaking-the-cycle