In the article, “Revolution Hits the Universities” (2013), author Thomas Friedman argues that massive open online courses (MOOC’s) that are being developed by several prestigious universities are going to revolutionize learning. Friedman suggests that with online courses, learning can be extended to all types of students while pushing the physical boundaries of the classroom. The vast benefits include access for minorities such as those with low income, learning disabilities, and from poor countries, but additionally also benefits students and professors existing in the university system. Friedman’s target audience in “Revolution Hits the Universities” is middle class North American readers who are familiar with the current education systems …show more content…
In the introduction, Friedman begins by referencing events that resonate feelings of sadness and crisis and then instills feelings of hope and positivity. He writes, “Lord knows there’s a lot of bad news in the world today to get you down.” Friedman then introduces MOOC’s, and consequently, turns the tone around. He suggests solutions to the crisis’ that North American’s face, invoking feelings of optimism. Friedman says, “Nothing has more potential to lift more people out of poverty… unlock a billion more brains to solve the world’s biggest problems… [and] enable us to reimagine higher education.” When Friedman suggests what MOOC’s have the potential to do, it evokes feelings of optimism. Friedman convinces the reader that MOOC’s can solve many problems by connecting their feelings and his argument. Friedman first sets up a scene of despair by referencing events that his readers will have an emotional connection to, and then presents his premises which in contrast conjures positive feelings among the …show more content…
The counterargument is that universities cannot regulate who is doing the work in solely online courses, since there isn’t any meeting in-person. This becomes problematic when awarding credentials for the work, because there is no way to verify who has done all the work and passed the exams. Friedman does not properly dispute it when he writes, “The process of developing credible credentials… is still being perfected.” Friedman does not offer any techniques of rhetoric therefore not convincing the audience, but additionally, he glazes over something that has the potential to be a major problem for implementing MOOCs. Friedman’s failure to pay attention to this major detail and his lack of reasoning to counter this point are a major drawback to his argument. However, it does not deny the strength of his other premises in his argument. Friedman suggests an enriched learning for all individuals. If this is the case, then something tangible such as a credit cannot embody the knowledge and insight
After assessing Gregory’s essay, it is obvious that Gregory’s ability to adjust to anything that is thrown at him and his ability to work with anyone heightens his marketability to be chosen as a student for MOOC. Being flexible and having the ability to work with any kind of person is a big advantage because he can respond well to the pressures of this course. He can overcome many of the challenges that the massive open online course has to offer in order to get his training. For example, In Gregory’s essay he mentions how he would “...volunteer work at a summer day camp for kids…”, and exhibited “...dedication to student council” , while also “...enthusiastically devote time to service projects through Junior Civitans that help the community” (Gregory 14, 15). This also shows that Gregory is the best candidate to enroll in a MOOC- massive open online courses. In another article title “The Year of the MOOC” by Laura Pappano the author informs the readers
David Bartholomae’s “Inventing the University” represents the process of writing a student must undergo every time they composite a new piece of work. In order to properly fulfill expectations, students must interpret, pretend and assemble the language of the desired community they wish to hold as their audience. Bartholomae blames the confusion that most students undergo has to deal with the authority; the teacher assigning the writing is asking the student to take on an authority in denying the classroom setting of which they are in, while the teacher is still a higher authority present. He blames the teachers and the curriculum of which they teach for making students see writing as a tool in referral to the mode of learning in their view
Murray believes that education systems in general are not efficient because they have an incorrect foundation. Murray believes that “Full participation in any culture requires familiarity with a body of core knowledge” (235). To expand, the specific subjects that young students are learning is not necessary, and students should be learning instead the fundamentals of what makes an individual culturally capable. Murray believes that this body of core knowledge should come before studying in a specific field of research. However, not only are the education systems broken, but it’s obvious that closed-space learning environments in modern-day learning institutions will be limited. Amy Collier, an advocate for open-online education, states that there are problems of access, inequities, quality, and relevance in this limited system, but that the perception of brokenness in this system should instead be a perception of
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.
Have you ever read something and thought “What a bunch of crap”? Well that’s the reaction I had to reading Fareed Zakaria’s book, In Defense Of a Liberal Education. Over the course of the book, Zakaria makes the argument that attending college with the specific intention to get trained for a job is “Short sighted and needlessly limiting”. Zakaria also breaks down the differences between the United State’s education system with other countries across the globe. By attending college with the intention of receiving critical thinking skills and being able to express our ideas, rather than just going to train for a job, Zakaria believes that the average student would be much better off in the world after they graduate.
In recent years, many have debated whether or not a college education is a necessary requirement to succeed in the field of a persons’ choice and become an outstanding person in society. On one hand, some say college is very important because one must contribute to society. The essay Three Reasons College Still Matters by Andrew Delbanco shows three main reasons that students should receive their bachelor’s degree. On the other hand, many question the point of wasting millions of dollars on four years or maybe more to fight for highly competitive jobs that one might not get. Louis Menand wrote an article based on education titled Re-Imagining Liberal Education. This article challenges the main thought many americans have after receiving a secondary education. Louis Menand better illustrates the reasons why a student should rethink receiving a post secondary education better than Andrew Delbanco’s three reasons to continue a person’s education.
The right and privilege to higher education in today’s society teeters like the scales of justice. In reading Andrew Delbanco’s, “College: What It Was, Is, and Should Be, it is apparent that Delbanco believes that the main role of college is to accommodate that needs of all students in providing opportunities to discover individual passions and dreams while furthering and enhancing the economic strength of the nation. Additionally, Delbanco also views college as more than just a time to prepare for a job in the future but a way in which students and young adults can prepare for their future lives so they are meaningful and purposeful. Even more important is the role that college will play in helping and guiding students to learn how to accept alternate point of views and the importance that differing views play in a democratic society. With that said, the issue is not the importance that higher education plays in society, but exactly who should pay the costly price tag of higher education is a raging debate in all social classes, cultures, socioeconomic groups and races.
Education has always been a current issue due to the fact that it is seen as an economic cure-all. However, the perception of college is ill-conceived and there are multiple debates on how to improve it. College universities believe that having open admissions will increase the amount of matriculations, but the fact is the amount of students being enrolled into a four-year university has no relationship to the amount of students with academic aspirations. W.J. Reeves, an English professor at Brooklyn College of The City University of New York, gives a few examples of how open admissions has changed education methods and student abilities. Reeves wrote this opinion piece to convince everyone, especially parents, that schools are in need of reform
(Owen and Sawhill 208) After all, if our country’s leader is preaching about college being a good thing, it should reflect the views of a majority of people in this country. They then continue to try to make connections with the audience by emphasizing that this is a “we” problem and by recognizing that the decision to go off to college is not an easy one for everybody. These first words in the essay demonstrate a call to the ethos of President Obama and clear cut pathos to bring the authors down to the same level as their audience; However, the rest of the essay is absolutely dominated by
Throughout the years, America has always debated whether education is needed- if it helps people succeed or not. The argument in the past was always over high school education, which is now mandatory. That decision has helped the US rise economically and industrially. Today, the US is in the middle of the same debate- this time, over college. Some, like David Leonhardt, a columnist for the business section of The New York Times, think a college education creates success in any job. Others, such as Christopher Beha, an author and assistant editor of Harper’s Magazine, believe that some college “education” (like that of for-profit schools) is a waste of time, and can even be harmful to students. Each stance on this argument has truth to it, and there is no simple answer to this rising issue in an ever changing nation full of unique people. Any final decision would affect the United States in all factions- especially economically and socially. However, despite the many arguments against college, there is overwhelming proof that college is good for all students, academically or not.
Louis Menand, a professor of English and American literature at Harvard University presented three different theories for higher education in an article for The New Yorker named, Live and Learn: Why We Have College. Menand (2011) claims that the reasons for college are meritocratic, democratic, and vocational. These theories are great models for the purpose of higher education in our culture, at different points in our history. As a nation, there are definite intentions behind the way that instruction is conducted in our colleges and universities. The techniques adopted by institutions of higher education are no mistake and they are designed to serve a purpose. These methods evolve with time and shape the way that generations think and reason. In our generation, the purpose of higher education in our culture is to sustain the nation atop of the worldwide economy.
Studying a university degree is one of the biggest achievements of many individuals around the world. But, according to Mark Edmunson, a diploma in America does not mean necessarily studying and working hard. Getting a diploma in the United States implies managing with external factors that go in the opposite direction with the real purpose of education. The welcome speech that most of us listen to when we started college, is the initial prank used by the author to state the American education system is not converging in a well-shaped society. Relating events in a sarcastic way is the tone that the author uses to explain many of his arguments. Mark Edmunson uses emotional appeals to deliver an essay to the people that have attended College any time in their life or those who have been involved with the American education system.
According to Leber (2013), “as online education platforms like Coursera, edX, and Udacity burst onto the scene over the past year, backers have talked up their potential to democratize higher education in the countries that have had the least access” (as quoted in Xin, Debora & Casheena, Accessibility Section, para.1 ). MOOCs eliminate the requisite and cost of learning and also provide lifelong opportunities that match individual interest and career goal (Xin, Debora & Casheena,
Some students within society need to have online learning to complete college degrees due to their lifestyles. While it is good to have online learning as an option if one chooses, it should not be the only option available to some students. Some may argue that online education is not creating discrimination within the educational environment. Furthermore, some may suggest that online learning is benefiting our students in society. There has been a breakthrough in time and geographical limitations of education via online courses (Ho, 2009).
A time approaches in every person’s life when they must come to learn new things. Speaking on behalf of all those who have attended school at some point in their life, I must say that most do not like it for its educational significance. Today’s youth undervalue the worth of America’s public school system to the point of shame. Hard-working, underpaid teachers and professors prepare to educate these ingrates as their living, and it’s exasperating for the students to not even care. I must be fair though and call attention to the fact that not everyone shares this loathe for education and schooling.