In 2000, there were four universities in Syria; while all public and free, they enrolled just 12% of 18-23 year olds. Today, there are 19 universities in Syria and approximately 21.7% of the age cohort is enrolled in university (UIS 2009). This expanded access to higher education, a process known as massification, is the result of explicit and ambitious reforms taken by the Syrian government to introduce competition and expand higher education to wider segments of the population (Risheh 2006). Syria's higher education reforms are being framed as an essential component of Syria's larger economic transition from a centrally planned economy to a social market economy. Despite the widespread consensus that the transition towards a knowledge economy is necessary for Syria's economic vitality (IMF 2006; Sottimano and Selvik 2009), the changing role of the university reflects a larger and more fundamental change concerning the role of the state in its citizens' lives. Yet, there is still very little understanding of how recent reforms to expand and privatize higher education are altering young people's perceptions of their educational and employment opportunities in Syria. Based on interview research conducted with 25 young Syrian youth aged 18-31 in summer 2009, this paper will examine how the massification of higher education in Syria is altering young people's experiences of higher education and their perceptions of the opportunity structure. The paper argues that Syria's traditional university system was one of high standardization and high stratification, which acted to doubly sort students -- first into secondary tracks and again into university programs -- leading to an inflexible university system and a rigid rank-order of careers in the labor market. Based on interview findings, I argue that while objective opportunities for both education and private sector employment may be expanding in Syria, youths' subjective perceptions of educational and employment opportunities are not as optimistic, for a number of reasons. First, while today's youth are extremely ambitious, access to higher education no longer promises the secure position in the state sector that it once did. Second, while the recent reforms have been successful at introducing diverse new tertiary education providers and decreasing the rigidity of student sorting, it is perhaps only those with the means to pay who can benefit. Lastly, institutional, family, and cultural pressures still limit young people's educational and employment options, frequently directing them into majors and careers for which they have little interest.