Analysis Argument Against Pushing Teens Towards College
From an early age, American children are subliminally pushed harder and harder toward the idea of attending college. Even more so as they grow older, the thought of schooling after graduation is seemingly pounded into teenage heads by teachers, guidance counselors, and even society. Many say that this “slight nudge” towards the college career path is good for the teens of today. Others, especially the teens themselves, feel that the constant mention of postgraduate education is both stressful and tiresome, especially when considering that college is not for everyone. In the preceding argument ‘Kid I’m Sorry, but You’re Just Not College Material,’ author Michael Petrilli voiced his opinion
…show more content…
on the focus of today’s education and stated that we should not force anyone into the route of college, especially those with low odds of college success.
Though he somewhat failed to establish any sort of credible connection with the reader, Petrilli presented a well-written and effective argument against propelling students towards universities through the use of logos, rhetorical questions, assumptions, and even a strong premise.
Premises and Line of Reasoning
One aspect that made Petrilli’s argument valid is his ability to utilize one main premise to support his thesis. The unique aspect of this argument is that Petrilli primarily focused on one central reason for the entirety of his argument. The author’s thesis, that we should not force any young adult into the college career path, sustained itself with the premise that Petrilli felt some teens had low odds of college success and, “contain very low, basic skills that have no real shot of
…show more content…
earning a college degree” (Petrilli, 2014). While this point acted as the author’s sense behind the entire argument, it immediately gained the need for validity. As the composition continued, validation can soon be found as Petrilli expounded upon this single reason through the use of deductive reasoning. In other words, he led in with his one premise and followed with statements to provide support, such as the incorporation of facts, logical appeal, and even final propositions. Evidence of this can be found throughout the entirety of Petrilli’s piece. For example, after stating the original premise he provided facts and logical appeal within paragraphs 2-8, and then a final proposition in paragraphs 9-13. These techniques were all aimed to create a series of logical steps in order to validly carry the reader to the end of the piece. In other words, Petrilli took the audience from point A, his thesis with a premise, then to point B, his reason supported with the several techniques, and finally to point C, his conclusion and ideas on how to help. Ultimately, this single premise gave a great, unique characteristic to the argument and allowed him to keep the reader on track with what he was trying to argue. Logical Appeal Throughout Petilli’s argument, logos was easily the most prominent technique of appeal. Statistical data, expert opinion, and even several hypothetical examples were some skills used by Petrilli within his support for the premise. In paragraph 3, Petrilli used evidence from Georgetown University when he wrote, “According to research by Georgetown’s Anthony Carnevale and Jeff Strohl, less than 10 percent of poor children now graduate with a four-year college degree” (Petrilli, 2014). Here, the author’s decision to discuss the reality of college degree rates, as stated by Carnevale and Strohl, appealed directly to the statistically minded audience. In addition, this reference to Georgetown’s evidence allowed the reader to better understand and believe the author’s initial premise because the information appeared so concrete. As the argument continued, Petrilli illustrated thought provoking hypotheticals and examples that also reflected logical appeal. In paragraph four, Petrilli created an entire scenario of which the reader is in high school. In this scenario, his audience was directed to “Imagine that you're finishing ninth grade at a large comprehensive urban high school. The year hasn’t gone very well; because you are reading and doing math at a sixth-grade level” (Petrilli, 2014). Not only did he speak directly at the reader using second person point of view, but Petrilli used this example to help the audience better visualize his topic and find the truth through this logical situation. Ultimately, his incorporation of a hypothetical scenario put the reader in the position of a high school student that will most likely never be able to meet the college standards that their urban high school requires. This not only better described the situation of the argument, but it logically explained a point that demonstrated truth. Overall, Petrilli’s hypothetical examples, statistical evidence, and expert opinion were effective forms of logical appeal and aided in translating the complicated topic of college enforcement into more relatable terms for his audience. Rhetorical Questions Another effective type of support used throughout Petrilli’s argument were his incorporation of rhetorical questions.
For example, within the second paragraph he asked several “What if?” questions, such as, “What if encouraging students to take a shot at the college track - despite very long odds of crossing the finish line - does them more harm than good?” or, “What if a cautionary sermon is exactly what some teenagers need?” (Petrilli, 2014). Petrilli’s choice to incorporate this uncommon type of support was extremely compelling because the question was ultimately asked to make his point, not because he wanted an answer. The question is designed to spark the reader’s thoughts on the subject and then have them follow those questions down the paths they reveal, which in Petrilli’s case was the topic of driving today’s teenagers unrelentingly towards the college track. Also, Petrilli’s decision to use this device at the beginning of the piece provided for a very effective introduction and catalyst for what was going to be argued throughout the remainder of the composition. For this reason, rhetorical questions proved to be an effective type of support towards Petrilli’s main premise and argument against college
enforcement. Assumptions Petrilli’s decision to limit himself towards one main assumption allowed his article to become more effective and believable, especially after he not only used support, but also provided us with the counter argument for the audience to understand why it is believable. His thesis, as stated in paragraph eight, read, “We shouldn’t force anyone into the route of college, but we also shouldn’t guilt children with low odds of college success - regardless of their race or class - to keep trudging through academic coursework as teens” (Petrilli, 2014). Overall, Petrilli made the inference that we need to stop forcing teens, no matter the background, towards college. This was based largely on his assumption that kids don’t need to attend college in order to achieve a well paying job, which was ultimately an idea that followed the remainder of Petrilli’s piece. Based on this assumption, the level of possible debate for this topic became very clear. Many of Petrilli’s audience may have found this assumption to be invalid, considering that statistics can prove a high paying job is linked to college readiness and graduation. However, the reason that Petrilli’s argument remained strong was because he was able to back up his assumption so efficiently, therefore making it difficult to argue against while he supplied the arguing points himself. A great example of this could be seen in Petrilli’s introductory counterargument as he shared, “A recent Pew Study reiterated, people who graduate from college earn significantly more than those who do not” (Petrilli, 2014). Here, Petrilli admitted that evidence may go against his assumption, stating that college success has proven to be linked towards high education. The effectiveness is that he chose to somewhat disregard this evidence and dove straight into exactly why he felt this point was wrong. Support for this can be linked straight to the previously mentioned hypotheticals that Petrilli incorporated after stating his counterargument. In addition, he backed up his thoughts through the embodiment of logical appeal, expert opinion, and a valid premise. This then supported the main linking premise that continued on throughout the rest of the piece. Ultimately, this resulted in Petrilli making his assumption valid and carrying it along throughout the remainder of his argument. Improvements One very important factor that Petrilli failed to incorporate throughout his argument was the establishment of ethos. This was a very important step that Petrilli missed and could consequently wreck his entire line of reasoning for his readers. Though Petrilli did a fantastic job of making valid claims, supporting his premise, and even effectively addressing the other side, none of it may even matter if he cannot build credibility with the reader. Not only did he fail to provide how he was linked with his position and foreknowledge of the education system, but he also did not make known his relation towards any of the issues facing the suffering college students directly. On the other hand, it would be extremely effective for Petrilli to state that perhaps he was once a high school history teacher, or even the parent of a struggling student. Still, Petrilli did not incorporate either and ultimately failed to establish himself as a resource with experience or detailed knowledge of the issue. All in all, the author’s use of strong premises, logical appeal, rhetorical questions, and valid assumptions provided for a well-written and effective argument. As a start, the author supported their thesis with one main premise that they proved to be valid through deductive reasoning. This thesis and premise were both made upon the same assumption, which Petrilli effectively recognized and argued against. Also, his deductive reasoning provided for a strong and fluid line of reasoning, while the techniques of logical appeal and rhetorical questions became various types of support that were also used to carry along the audience. Though Petrilli did many things well, he could still improve upon establishing a more credible relationship with the reader through the incorporation of ethos. With this being said, the author composed a well-constructed argument that effectively conveyed their opposition to propelling students towards the college career path.
In the article “America’s Most Overrated Product: The Bachelor’s Degree” by Marty Nemko, the author argues several different views on why higher education may be very overestimated. For starters, the author shares his opinion more than anything else due to him being a career counselor. The purpose of this essay is to explain to the readers that most people start off with the idea of living the American Dream. Which is practically going to college to have a better life and career. But over the time the idea of working very hard for a Bachelor’s degree has become very dimmed. Furthermore, for some people, when they think of the American Dream they think of hope for bettering themselves and also helping their families. Unlike the author, Nemko feels that even the thought of trying to pursue to get a bachelor’s degree is overrated. The audience of this passage would most likely be teenagers going into college and parents. Nemko states that “Colleges are quick to argue that a college education is more
Society tells almost every high schooler that they need to go to college in order to be successful, but that is not necessarily true. Stephanie Owen and Isabel Sawhill question whether attending college is essential to being successful in their article, “Should Everyone Go to College?”. Owen and Sawhill discuss how even though college may be very helpful for many people, for some the benefits of a college education do not outweigh the costs. In discussing this, they compare statistics on the costs of college and general student success. Overall, this article does a very good job showing ethical appeals with statistics and showing logic with factual evidence, but only does an average job appealing to emotion.
In an article originally published in May 2003 in USA Today called “College Isn’t For Everyone,” by W.J. Reeves combined these rhetorical devices to make a compelling argument that although colleges are easily accessible, higher education lacks students with the capabilities of academic success. To validate this claim, Reeves uses persuasive appeals to convey an effective argument by influencing the audience, however, he limits his reach because of the excessive pathos and condescending tone used to present his argument.
Many kids beginning the college - decision process may be feeling lost at first, and ”By telling all young people that they should go to college no matter what, we are actually doing some of them a disservice. ”(Owen and Sawhill 209) For a seventeen/eighteen year old, going to college is arguably the biggest decision that they have had to make in their life thus far, and having the facts that Owen and Sawhill produce can be invaluable to the decision-making process. It is clear that the purpose of their essay is to better inform these young adults and guide them on their journey that is life after high school. The primary claim that Owen and Sawhill attempt to drive in using rhetorical appeals is that on average, having a college degree will lead to a higher income than not having one; however, it is not universally
In this society, almost every high schooler is told they need to go to college in order to be successful, but that is not necessarily true. Stephanie Owen and Isabel Sawhill questioned if everyone needs college to be successful in their article, “Should Everyone Go to College?”. In the article, Owen and Sawhill discuss that even though college is very helpful for many people, but for some the benefits of a college education do not outweigh the costs. Owen and Sawhill discuss this and show the statistics on the pricing of college and general student success throughout the article. Overall, this article does a very well job showing ethical appeals with statistics, does an average job with emotional appeal, and does a very well job showing logic
As the economy evolves and the job market continues to get more competitive, it’s becoming harder to have a successful career without some kind of college degree. This creates a belief in many young students that college actually is a commodity, something they must have in order to have a good life. There’s many different factors that influence this mindset, high schools must push the importance of the student’s willingness and drive to further their education. College isn’t just a gateway to jobs, but it is an opportunity to increase knowledge and stretch and challenge the student which in return makes them a more rounded adult and provides them with skills they might lack prior to
Hence, a college education is not needed to obtain success. Menand’s ideology on reconstructing education to better fit a variety of people while simultaneously stating that college is not essential to succeed. This essay provides a great amount of information to not only convey his message, but to persuade his reader to follow his ideology on college. While Delbanco only states three reasons as to why a college education is needed. Though many Americans seem to follow a similar trend of attending a higher education after graduating from secondary there are many examples of successful people who never went to college. Both passages displayed that whether one decides to go to college or not, they must first decide what they wish to do in life.
Right from the start, the title of the article “Is College For Everyone?” sparks immediate curiosity. Pharinet, author of the article and current teacher, explains her numerous reasons as to why attending college is not for everyone. Although Pharinet is not as credible as we would like her to be, she makes an exceptional argument. Beware, an argument like this may alter our opinions as Pharient sits back pulling on our heart strings, playing with our minds, and hitting us with back to back facts.
Imagine telling that to a student who just finished four years of hard, grueling, expensive work; or, even worse, a parent who paid for their child to finish that same grueling work. But, in some ways, that statement can’t be any further from the truth. College can prepare a student for life in so many more ways than for a career. However, in the way that college is supposed to prepare soon-to-be-productive students, that statement could be right on. As a student myself, I’ve found college to be a little bit of both. I often find myself asking, "How will this help me later in life?" But, then again, college gives me more control over my life and where I want it to go. In trying to figure out what exactly made college like this, and whether the way I felt was felt by others as well, I interviewed an Anthropology teacher at Las Positas College, Mr. Toby Coles, and I examined an essay by Caroline Bird called College is a Waste of Time and Money. The two sources offered interesting views from both side of the spectrum.
Over the past few years, people have begun to see going to college as a way to achieve the American Dream through career-readiness. People used to go to college, hoping to get a better well-rounded education. For most the well-rounded education, it usually came with the courses required for a liberal arts education. The courses would provide a level of analytical and in-depth understanding that would prepare the students for both life and whichever career path chosen. No matter the amount of money paid, parents would be willing to gi...
College is not for everyone, although, everyone should have some form of higher education. "Should everyone go to college?" is an essay meant to inform students of the pros and cons of going to college. Owens and Sawhill state that the cost of a college degree may not be worth the money that students put into furthering their education. In their article, Owens and Sawhill use three different rhetorical appeals; egos, logos, and pathos; to persuade the readers to think consciously about attending college. Their argument was effective because it forces the readers to look at the overall college experience in different aspects.
In Caroline Bird’s “College is A Waste of Time and Money”, it’s argued that there are many college students who would be better off if they were to begin working after high school graduation. Colleges and universities can no longer ensure that one will go on to get a better job, getting paid more than they would have without a higher education. However, high school seniors still stress about where they will be attending college, how they’re going to pay for it and what they’re going to study for the next four years. Bird points out how college has changed over the past few decades and how, in turn, it has set many young adults up for disappointment, if nothing else.
Charles Murray, the author of “What’s Wrong With Vocational School?” discusses how too many of today’s high school graduates wrongfully head off to a four-year college. For a large majority of the population, a college education is unnecessary. Murray says that a lot of students don’t even want an advanced education. Even if they do want an education, they aren’t qualified for it. Additionally, a large number of these students are striving for an education or experience that a four-year college isn’t meant to fulfill.
Is a four-year degree all it’s cracked up to be? Are colleges still a relevant cornerstone of our society? Are vocational schools the future of education? His college hit-piece "Are Too Many People Going to College? ", author Charles Murray attempts to persuade the reader that in fact the current educational system is outdated and becoming obsolete, that colleges are becoming irrelevant to society, and that vocational schools offer a better value for most students. In his examples, Murray overlooks the great variety of interests held by individuals, and diminishes the benefits colleges have to offer students.
We spend four years of our lives attending high school. Going through high school is supposed to prepare us for college and “the real world.” Throughout these four years we begin to better understand our choices for college majors, but we don’t get presented with the financial and time struggle that we will face. College costs money, along with everyday living. When attending college we become more independent and are faced with the problem of coming up with money and finding a balance between time for work and school. Though it may seem like working through high school is a bad idea, it could better prepare students for “the real world.”