This summer, we worked closely with the campus administrators and now it’s time to launch OrgSync to the student leaders! Last week, our team visited Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem State University, Grant MacEwan University (Canada), Illinois Mathematics & Science Academy, and Penn State Altoona.

At Winston-Salem State University, OrgSync RockStar Vivian Spencer created OrgSync t-shirts to hand out at trainings. Check out the Student Engagement staff in their t-shirts below (bottom right)!

Wake Forest has re-branded OrgSync as “WakeSync” and there are magnets all over campus with the logo.

This week, we’ll be at Texas Christian University, Ferris State University, East Carolina University, Wichita State University, Washtenaw Community College, and Colorado State University-Pueblo. Our campus partners have been doing an EXCELLENT job marketing OrgSync to their students and getting the buzz going and we love seeing the results of their hard work when we arrive on campus.

We are excited to see what this week’s campuses have in store for us!

Let’s talk about Limits.

On June 28, 2010, in the case of Christian Legal Society v. Martinez, the U. S. Supreme Court voted 5-to-4 to uphold the right of the University of California’s Hastings College of the Law to deny official recognition to a student organization, the Christian Legal Society (CLS). Hastings’ action had barred CLS from access to state funding and use of school facilities.

Albert Einstein recommended, “Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler.”  So here’s the issue in a simple non-lawyer’s nut-shell.

Hastings has a nondiscrimination code for student organizations.  The national Christian Legal Society requires members to sign an agreement to refrain from “a sexually immoral lifestyle,” which includes having sex outside of heterosexual marriage.  The upshot is that this requirement excludes gays and lesbians, ergo discrimination.  When Hastings refused to recognize the local CLS chapter, the organization took Hastings to court.

The Supreme Court could have ruled in favor of the CLS’ right of free association.  Or it could have ruled in favor of Hastings’ written nondiscrimination policy.  It did neither.  Rather it punted, which is why the ruling’s fall-out may go on and on and on.

Instead the Court ruled in favor of Hastings on much narrower grounds –- that it had an “all-comers” policy, meaning that recognized student organizations had to accept all students who wanted to join, which CLS was not willing to do.  To the court majority, this policy was OK because it was “viewpoint neutral.”

Principles in Collision

I’m not a lawyer, so I won’t comment on the legal issues involved.  Obviously they are complex enough to provoke deep division within the court.

But as a diversity specialist, I find this case to be extremely significant precisely because it pits hallowed diversity principles against each other.  And it exposes a slippery-slope topic studiously avoided in many diversity discussions –- the issue of when, how, and why to set Limits . . . to almost any diversity principle.

I’ve been addressing the Limits Dilemma for two decades in my diversity talks and workshops.  Yet it’s also something that I find many diversity advocates unwilling to face head on.

Things were simple back in the good old days of the Civil Rights Movement.  Our moral compass was clear.  Eliminate racism.  Down with sexism.  End segregation.  Simple enough.

But over the decades, diversity stuff has become more complicated, particularly when diversity principles collide.  The Greek philosopher, Epictetus, argued that you must go beyond developing a moral compass.  You also need to learn how to apply that compass to the map of the world, with its messy complexities.

Consider some of the general principles espoused by diversity proponents like me, principles that collided in the Hastings-CLS situation:

• support for full inclusion.
• opposition to discrimination.
• the richness of multiculturalism, including the right –- even the benefit –- of people creating and maintaining affinity groups based on common identities.
• respect for groups with varied sets of beliefs and values, sometimes referred to as cultures.
• the importance of multi-perspectivism, such as learning to understand (not necessarily accept or tolerate) the perspectives of others, including group perspectives with which you may deeply disagree.
• the need to be responsive to group differences, not just individual ones, rather than championing one-size-fits-all “solutions.”

The Limits Dilemma

Because these principles clashed in the Hastings-CLS case, whatever the Court did, its decision would have inevitably set Limits by elevating some diversity principles over others in this specific instance.  Most post-decision reactions, however, have tended to gloss over this dilemma.

Backers of the decision tend to laud the Court’s support for Hastings’ “neutral” all-comers position, even as some rued the Court’s unwillingness to address the written nondiscrimination code.  This reminds me of Mark Twain’s comment, when talking to a friend who claimed that he was “neutral” on a controversial issue.  Responded Twain, “Then whom are you neutral against?”  The Supreme Court supported neutrality against the Christian Legal Society, a victory for “one size fits all.”

In contrast, some opponents have framed the Hastings decision as the approval of a secular institution that was stomping on people of faith.  Wait a minute!  People of faith didn’t form a united front on this case.  For example, while the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and Orthodox Jewish organizations supported the CLS, the Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities and Reform Jewish organizations supported Hastings.  Absent some tortuous logic that manages to exclude Jesuits and Reform Jews from people of faith, that framing doesn’t hunt.

So the Hastings-CLS case involves competing diversity imperatives: anti-discrimination vs. respect for cultural differences; full inclusion vs. support for affinity groups.  Platitudes and moral pieties won’t help us engage the complex ethical challenges that arise when diversity principles clash and force us –- as institutions and as individuals –- to determine organizational and personal Limits.

Challenges for Student Affairs

Here are a few considerations for Student Affairs professionals.

• The Court’s decision was narrow, particularly its refusal to rule on Hastings’ more-elaborated written nondiscrimination policy, including the Limits it placed on individual organizations.  This means that we’ll have to await future nondiscrimination code cases, some of which are already coming down the pike.
• An “all-comers” policy might “work” in a law school, but it’s trickier at the undergraduate level where, for example, fraternities and sororities select their members.  What about a women’s choral society or a Muslim student association or a sports club for those with disabilities?
• Some campuses might wish to form work groups involving Student Affairs professionals, diversity experts, and legal counsel to conduct an ongoing review of current practices and written policies, while also discussing their future implications and possible unintended consequences, including the Limits Dilemma.
• When discussing complex diversity issues, we all need to be wary of holier-than-thou posturing.  That also means refraining from demonizing people with whom we disagree and positions which we oppose.

Student Affairs professionals are going to need to strengthen their analytical “multicultural muscles” –- their ability to think through and make tough decisions in situations where laudable diversity principles collide.  Traditional awareness training, multicultural abstractions, and rhetoric about privilege and social justice won’t suffice.  We need a new generation of applied diversity training that helps professionals address the Limits Dilemma by testing conflicting diversity principles through complex real-world issues.

So let’s thank Hastings, the Christian Legal Society, and the Supreme Court for, however unintentionally, bringing us to this important multicultural crossroads.  Let’s also hope it leads to more nuanced, less strident, diversity discussions.

I’d like to hear your thoughts about this case and about Limits.

OrgSync just returned from its first Campus Technology conference in Boston, MA. The conference was a great chance for OrgSync to meet with IT professionals from across the country. The buzz around Campus Technology was all about ePortfolios and finding new ways to integrate the latest technologies into campuses.

The conference offered our team a great opportunity to unveil our new Budget Management System which enables colleges and universities to manage organizations’ budgets, funding, and payment requests. We were also excited to show off our new design for our upcoming ePortfolio that we partnered with the University of Wisconsin System to create after receiving a grant as part of the University of Wisconsin System Growth Agenda.

The feedback we received was very positive and we look forward to continuing to showing other campuses what we are currently working on. If you are interested in learning more about our ePortfolios or Budget Management System, please email Cayce Stone (cayce@orgsync.com) or visit our website at www.orgsync.com.

Let’s talk about labeling.

Nevada Senator Harry Reid put his foot in it when he referred to Barack Obama as “light-skinned” and having “no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.” These quotes surfaced this year in the book, Game Change, which dealt with the 2008 presidential campaign.

Some of the flap focused on Reid’s choice of the word, “Negro.” But that flap also raised a larger issue, the labeling of societal groups.

Well, since group labels can be so problematic, why don’t we just stop using them?

I’ve heard speakers, including diversity trainers, recommend such an approach. Get real!

We can’t live without group labels — for people, for other animals, for things. Labels are vital to communication. We couldn’t speak or write about groups without using labels.

• We don’t just buy cars. We buy Fords and Toyotas and Volkswagens. And we use group labels to talk about them.
• We don’t just write “fruits and vegetables” on our shopping lists. We use group labels to specify apples or bananas or beans or broccoli.
• People don’t just have dogs. They have Dachshunds, Cocker Spaniels, and German Shepherds.
• Tigger isn’t just our kitty. He’s an Ocicat.

We couldn’t talk about a group’s history or culture if we didn’t use a label to specify what group we’re talking about. When we discuss intergroup relations, we use labels for the groups that are interacting.

Group labels are integral to life and communication. On college campuses we use them constantly, such as:

• when describing the demographic make-up of our institutions.
• when talking about generations – Baby Boomers, Generation X, Millennials.
• when referring to some student groups or student centers.
• when titling courses and academic programs.

Group labels inevitably give rise to controversies, often heated ones.

Some labels are clearly wrong, mainly historically-grounded epithets used to disparage and insult a group of people. But the opposite of wrong isn’t always right. It may just be preferred, and preferences change, constantly. These changing preferences should be respected. Yet sometimes multiple labels for the same group may end up co-existing, often without any single label emerging triumphant.

Group labels change. In 1969 my campus, the University of California, Riverside, established the Mexican-American Studies Program, with support from UMAS (the United Mexican-American Students). UMAS then became MeCHA, Movimiento Estudiantil Chicanos de Aztlán. After I became Program Chair in 1972, a group of students came to me, demanding that we change the name of our program from Mexican-American (passé) to Chicano (more in vogue). I told them they didn’t need to demand, just ask. We voted to change the label and the university approved.

Label preferences change and negative epithets become labels of pride. When I was growing up in Kansas City, Missouri, during the 1940’s, you could insult people by calling them “queer.” Although that term is still controversial, we now have college courses on Queer Theory, Queer History, and Queer Literature.

Change happens. Handicap gives way to disability and, in some situations, to special needs. Each label reflects a distinct way of envisioning the group and the changing world around it.

Multiple labels for the same group sometimes co-exist. Students take Native American History classes while using books published by the American Indian Historical Society. I attend Latino conferences, read Hispanic and Hispanic Business magazines, and contribute to the National Council of La Raza.

Labels can be a puzzlement. Don’t become disoriented if the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People celebrates Black History Month by holding an African American Unity Dinner to raise money for the United Negro College Fund. One of Harry Reid’s blunders was being asleep at the switch, linguistically. But we all make labeling mistakes. It’s inevitable.

So what should student affairs professionals do? A few suggestions.

• Don’t be afraid of group labels. They’re necessary for communication.
• Avoid historically-grounded negative group epithets, unless they have morphed into labels of group pride.
• Remain alert to changing group preferences and respect those changes. But don’t expect to find a permanent, change-resistant right word.
• Cut other folks some slack. None of us can be up-to-date on changing preferences for every group. We’ll make “mistakes.”
• Don’t play group label “gotcha,” because constantly correcting others throws cold water on communication.
• Pick your moments to explain label changes. Usually it’s better to do it one-on-one, not in group discussions to embarrass others and show off your supposed labeling superiority.

Group labels are inevitable and necessary. Try to use them in ways that connote respect rather than disparagement. But realize that nobody ever achieves labeling perfection.

You won’t always be right. In fact, you can’t always be right because sometimes there isn’t any right. We’ve got to learn to live with that dilemma.

I’d like to hear your thoughts about labeling.

Exactly three years ago, my co-founding partners and I moved into a 5-bedroom house in Avery Ranch (northwest Austin) with the intention of bootstrapping the start-up of our company, OrgSync.  We did not have any money beyond what our credit cards would hold, and so we decided to move in together and live off the company.  Rent was only $1,650 and with all our bills and food, the five of us figured out how to live on roughly $2,500 per month.

We followed the Rainbow to the OrgSync House in Avery Ranch

We had heard of other entrepreneurs bootstrapping their companies out of their houses and apartments, so it seemed like a good idea.  I’m pleased to tell you, three years later, that it was the best decision we ever made!  In fact, I would go as far to say the past three years literally living OrgSync have been the best three years of my life.  We did run into challenges along the way, but at the end of the day, we strongly believe it was that intense level of devotion that enabled us to self-fund and grow our company as fast as we did.  Austin was absolutely the best city with the most supportive community to do something like that.  I recommend to anyone thinking about starting a company to consider doing it in Austin, out of a house.

Hard at work inside OrgSync HQ

Beyond bootstrapping, the Austin community has been extremely friendly providing my team and me continual support and encouragement.  Everything from the Austin Tech Happy Hours to South by Southwest (SXSW) to all the social media meet-ups; the opportunities to network and meet new people are endless!  The best part of Austin is the people that make up this city.  Almost everyone here is genuinely interested in what others are doing and always willing to help out.  It’s that type of support that is extremely crucial for startups as you grind out and overcome the seemingly never ending hurdles of starting a new business.

So why are we moving the company to Dallas?  There are a few primary reasons we have chosen Dallas for the next stage in OrgSync’s life:

• New Executive Management – for the past three years my father, Don Fortenberry, has served as our virtual CFO, and has agreed to come on board full-time if we moved the company to Dallas.  Furthermore, we have hired one of Don’s former business partners and close friends, Michael Schwartz, as our Chief Operating Officer.  In order to maintain OrgSync’s rapid growth, we recognize the importance of having the right, experienced people around the table to ensure we continue to build OrgSync in a healthy and sustainable manner.  And since the right people, who we know and trust, are permanently located in Dallas, then that’s where we must go.
• Access to Capital – in Dallas our CFO and COO were able to raise a substantial amount of capital within two days, and now we have some great corporate leaders serving on our advisory board.  Fund raising was not nearly as feasible in Austin.
• Strong Corporate Environment – we have secured a great office in Dallas that is affordable and meets our needs as a small and growing business.  We are also very excited about the corporate environment that Dallas has and believe it will be a great opportunity for us to network with several larger businesses as we continue to grow ourselves.
• Close Proximity to More Clients – we have numerous clients in the DFW area (UTD, UTA, TCU, UNT, UNT Health Sciences, TAMS) and want to be as close to them as possible.  This will provide us the opportunity to frequently visit with these clients, conduct focus groups, provide lots of training, and take new employees on-site to visit with clients and organizations using OrgSync.

The OrgSync Team at Twestival 2009

With all that said, we are still very sad to leave the Austin community.  Austin will always be OrgSync’s birthplace, and we will never forget our roots.  Even though we are moving our corporate headquarters, we will continue to have a large presence in Austin and will continue to attract talent and supporters to assist us in achieving our corporate mission.

On behalf of my entire team, I want to thank each and every Austinite that we have met and exchanged stories, advice, and memories.  We will keep you close in our hearts and wish everyone in Austin the very best with your current and future endeavors.

Sincerely,

Eric Fortenberry, Founder & CEO

Welcome to the beginning of Diversity: A Conversation, dedicated to this subject of profound importance to our nation and certainly to higher education.  I hope this can become the site of a calm, civil, contemplative conversation about diversity, an exploration of its complexities and ambiguities, and an examination of its real-world consequences, challenges, and opportunities.

I’ll pose ideas and issues.

• You’ll respond and raise other issues.
• I’ll respond to your responses.
• We’ll talk, not shout.

Our conversation will take us in many directions.  We shall:

• explore diversity, the idea.
• consider its real-world applications.
• examine controversial issues and dilemmas.
• express alternative views while seeking common ground.
• and, of course, discuss the intersection of diversity with higher education, particularly student affairs.

But why now?  And why a conversation?  Let’s start with the first question.  Why?  Quite simply, because OrgSync asked me to write this column.

This past November I gave the closing keynote address at the western regional conference of the National Association of Student Personnel Administrators.  In attendance was an OrgSync representative, who involved me in conversations with other OrgSync members.  This led to an invitation to write a regular diversity column for the OrgSync blog.

The offer came at a serendipitous moment.  I had just finished the manuscript of my autobiography and had begun working on a book on diversity.  The book will bring together ideas based on my four decades of dealing with diversity issues — as a history professor at the University of California, Riverside and, since early retirement in 1994, as an independent diversity lecturer, writer, consultant, workshop presenter, and futurist.

In working with more than 1,000 institutions and organizations, I’ve grappled with the myriad diversity-related complications that arise:

• when perspectives clash.
• when theory collides with practice.
• when bigotry erupts and discrimination persists.
• when attempts at solving problems generate perplexing unintended consequences.
• when history invades contemporary life.
• when the future becomes now.

Why do I want this to be a conversation?  Because we need one.

Not a debate, not an irate exchange, not a rant, not a stream of hyperbolic accusations and criticisms, not obdurate defensiveness, not an erecting of ideological ramparts.  We’ve had plenty of that.  Rather a simple conversation, honestly and seriously addressing tough issues and perplexing dilemmas with civility and without vitriol.

The kind of conversation I’ve been having around the country at colleges, universities, school districts, independent schools, government agencies, businesses, national organizations, religious institutions, and community groups.  The kind of conversation I’ve been having each summer during my two decades of teaching about diversity for the Harvard Institute for Higher Education’s Management and Leadership in Education (MLE) and Management Development Program (MDP).

I envision a conversation that:

• seeks thoughtful approaches to old challenges and contemplative responses to emerging issues.
• leads to greater intergroup understanding and deeper insight into culture, institutions, social structures, and societal practices.
• moves us toward common ground while recognizing that differing positions will remain.
• recognizes similarities while also enabling us to live more constructively with differences.
• considers ways to work toward both excellence and equity.
• enables us to create a more constructive and less strident engagement with diversity.
• helps us become more reflective in our own lives, more capable in our careers, and more effective on our own campuses.

We can all benefit from such a conversation.  I hope you’ll join me in making that conversation a reality.

These “alternative spring breaks” are fast becoming the norm for some students, thanks to efforts from groups like United Way, which has programs dedicated to rebuilding parts of the southern United States still devastated by hurricanes Ike and Katrina, and individual service organizations set up at schools like Indiana State University that encourage students to get involved in their local communities instead of wasting a week partying. Young adults wind painting houses, sorting and donating clothes, feeding the homeless, and more. But what’s behind the surge in volunteering?

Part of it has to do with the modern popularity of service as promoted by the federal government. Serve.gov is the landing page for President Obama’s service-oriented organization that connects users with volunteer groups, and the 2008 campaign spoke often of public service. Yet the national push by politicians is nothing new, nor, sadly, is the occurrence of tragedies like Hurricane Katrina or the Haiti earthquake.

The other thing getting college students motivated to volunteer is that they see how good it can be for their academic, professional, and personal lives. More and more schools are participating in programs that reward students with course credit for engaging in acts of public service. For instance, Global Crossroad has partnered with a number of schools to allow students who enroll in GC’s international volunteer programs to earn credit at their home institution. That’s a great way to boost your academic career while helping out people in need. Similarly, experience as a volunteer looks good on a resume for potential employers, demonstrating sacrifice, teamwork, and a willingness to assist someone less fortunate. More and more students are realizing that getting ahead in the job market often means standing out from the crowd, and volunteering is a great way to develop the skills and track record to prove you can do just that.

Additionally, many schools are using online tools to organize their alternative spring breaks and volunteer campaigns, often using OrgSync. Recognized student organizations at UCLA are using OrgSync to coordinate programs and interact with a Volunteer Calendar that offers a breakdown of available opportunities to give back. Using the online portal is a great way for disparate student groups to get focused and come together on major volunteer campaigns, as well as an innovative use of Web technology.

Ultimately, though, the alternative spring breaks and rise in volunteerism are a mix of all those factors as well as the intangible ones, like the chance to learn about the world by helping out some of its struggling residents. As they come of age and begin the transition into working adulthood, many students realize that volunteering is an opportunity to influence their peers and the world for good, and to demonstrate that there are longer-lasting, more productive ways to spend a school vacation.

By-line:

This guest post is contributed by Alvina Lopez, who writes on the topics of accredited colleges online.  She welcomes your comments at her email Id:  alvina.lopez@gmail.com.

The 2009 National Survey of Latinos released by the Pew Hispanic Center reported possible reasons for this gap between aspirations and actual enrollment & graduation, which included:
1. Students’ desires/need to help financially support their family
2. Lack of direction and mentorship
3. Language barriers
How exactly does financial responsibility and lack of mentorship affect the ability of Hispanic students to attend college?

FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY WITHIN THE FAMILY
Nearly three-quarters (74%) of all 16 to 25-year-olds who cut their education short during or right after high school say they did so because they had to support their family. Most families work as a team, i.e. all family members contribute to the well being of the family. Parents will work to make money and provide food and shelter, while children attend school and make good grades to favorably represent the family.

On the other hand, some Hispanic families will rely on each other to be financially stable. This puts great responsibility and obligation on teenagers when faced with questions such as, “Will I go to college?” “Where will I go to college?” “Dad doesn’t want me to go to college; can I pay for college on my own?”

The answers to these questions are irrelevant, with at least the emotional support of the parents or someone, anyone (!), attending college seem a lot more realistic. Some parents place so much emphasis on basic necessities and being financially stable (TODAY), it is very unlikely that [most] Hispanic students will get the support they need, financially or emotionally.

An Opportunity for Discussion:
Students that successfully applied and enrolled in college now face the need to work and may not have a vehicle.  This could be challenging, time consuming, stressful and may end in bad grades, among other problems. Any thoughts on this predicament?

THE HISPANIC COMMUNITY AND QUALIFIED MENTORSHIP
A study published in 2004 stated that 62% of Hispanics report that neither of their parents went to college. This barrier faced by many Hispanic student implies a lack of strong family support (qualified assistance) during the entire college search and application process. This is a huge responsibility for the student to take on, mentally.

Parents who have not attended college themselves may not have the skills, funding, or social networks to help their child during his/her college search, SAT preparation, and application process. Some families are even unaware of the financial aid available to fund their child’s education and are uncomfortable with completing the Free Application for Student Financial Aid application (FASFA).

My Own Experiences and Opinions as a Hispanic Woman:
This notion that many Hispanics grow up in communities that fail to promote higher education, is something that I personally experienced in my own community while growing up. Thankfully, I have seen some improvements in my old neighborhood’s school system, one that caters primarily to Hispanics.

A Spark of Improvement in the System:
You can imagine my excitement when I see my five-year-old niece wearing a Longhorn t-shirt (UT is my Alma Mater) to school every Friday for College Spirit Day.  Most importantly I am delighted because looking back, at five-years-old, I cannot remember hearing the word college. The fact that my five-year-old niece is exposed to the notion,“Going to college is the next step after high school” is, believe it or not, very impressionable on her young mind and something that has been missing from a lot of the schools within my old neighborhood. Let’s remember that these small changes over time will significantly add up and essentially give students and parents the empowerment (courage and knowledge) needed to conquer such barriers listed above.

An Opportunity for Discussion:
How do we constructively address and change these things that hinder Hispanic students’ education? What do you think the problem is, and of course in order to be constructive, how do you think the problem should be solved?

Don't Be Denied by your dream college! Research, plan & execute to beat your competition.

We are all aware of the pesky recession that has forced us into making some rather life-altering adjustments.  Because of its negative effect on the number of jobs available, many of those affected have resorted to going back to school.  Furthermore, deep budget cuts by public state universities and an increase in the number of college applicants have resulted in fierce competition for college admittance.

This means three things: A large number of college bound applicants will be:
•  Rejected from public schools due to limited budgets
•  Forced to attend expensive private institutions
•  Set back due to unavailable classes in overcrowded community colleges

For those planning your college search and application process, keep in mind that in addition to your peers, a higher number of your peers are resorting to college due to limited job prospects, you may have to also compete with laid off employees.  Therefore, make sure to do your research early; knowing what it takes to be accepted by your ideal college will definitely give you an advantage in competing with others.

I have listed a few sites that may help you in your college planning:
•    Plan for College offered by College Board. This will help high school students during their first phase of college preparation.


•    Wilson Daily Prep. This SAT Prep program is affordable and has been featured in Time, The New York Times, CBS, and on NBC & ABC news.  This site also gives an SAT prep timetable.


•    Apply to College offered by College Board. Find resources that will help you during your college application process including tips on essay writing.


If you have any suggestions for the college bound please post in comments below.

College can be expensive; adopt smart budgeting habits and avoid financial debt.

Many of you are college attendees or graduates; therefore you know what it means to stretch a buck and what it feels like to have a bank account balance of $9.00 until financial aid is released for the semester.  A lot of us do not make the effort to research smart budgeting methods and/or execute these practices. 97 Ways to Save Money in College is a article posted on MRI Technician Schools blog site. I have chosen what I believe to be the top ten tips from this article that students can easily adopt and benefit from, financially, while attending college. Consider it a gift as I suspect many of you are currently headed into another semester of school and needless to say –another semester of spending.

10. Rent Movies From the Library: Public and school libraries alike often rent movies for free.

9. Take Advantage of Public Transportation: In larger cities with reliable public transportation or smaller towns conducive to walking, ditch having a car and all its associated expenses.

8. Barter With Friends: Figure out ways to trade goods and services with other students in order to get things done without ever having to spend a penny.

7. Buy Store Brand Goods: Store-brand goods are almost always as good as the name brands, and many stores offer additional savings when buying store brand products while using store discount cards.

6. Buy International Editions of Textbooks: In the occasional instance where used books are not available, buy international editions of textbooks online. They are usually much cheaper and contain the same content in the same language as the domestic.

5. Drink Tap Water: Ditch the bottled stuff and drink straight from the sink. You’ll save tons of cash.

4. Set Up a Definitive Budget: Budgeting money ahead of time is one of the best financial decisions anyone – not just college students – can make.

3. Apply for Scholarships: Apply to as many as possible to help defray some tuition expenses.

2. Eat at Home: Sometimes, the cost of a meal at a reasonably priced restaurant can be used to prepare 3-5 meals at home.

1. Save the Credit Card for Emergencies Only: Use your credit card only when faced with an absolute financial emergency…and sorry, but needing that adorable Coach purse does not qualify as a dire situation.

For more ideas on how to save money while in college visit 97 Ways to Save Money in College.