DonT Send Your Kids To The Ivy League Summary

People attend college or university for several reasons, including exploring hundreds of career opportunities, pursuing their passions, learning critical thinking skills, and achieving their maximum potential. According to Dr. Richard Vedder’s, “For Many, College Isn’t Worth It”, attending college or university is not worth the time, effort, or money – Dr. Richard Vedder wants to solely focus resources on private universities and institutions. Vedder describes how many graduates with Bachelor’s degrees do not even obtain jobs in their specific field and how they will never start a career in their area of academic study. In his article, Richard Vedder describes how there should be more stringent standards placed on college undergraduates; he believes that public universities are not necessary and only private, more elite universities should remain operational. I personally believe that obtaining a college degree from an accredited university is worth the risk and the money, not only for one’s self but for society as a whole. Instead of shutting down undergraduate universities, we should consider raising collegiate admission standards throughout the nation.

In September of 2015, Harper’s Magazine published William Deresiewicz’s essay The Neoliberal Arts: How colleges have sold their soul to the market. In this essay, Deresiewicz discusses how colleges have changed their mindset over the last century and how the world’s new neoliberal thinking has changed higher education for the worse.

A college education is valuable and its quality is of the highest importance to most Americans. In his essay, “On the Uses of a Liberal Education: As Lite Entertainment for Bored College Students,” Mark Edmundson utilizes ethos, pathos, and logos to effectively deliver his argument that the current educational system, especially in college, revolves around consumerism which in turn has negatively impacted students, teachers, and universities in general. However, although Edmundson presents an overall logically sound argument, there are few instances throughout the article that may hinder the reliability of his claims to the audience.

Andrew Simmons published his article for The Atlantic, “The Danger of Telling Poor Kids that College is the Key to Social Mobility” on January 16, 2014, which raises his concerns that higher education is only being promoted as an opportunity to increase their economic status, when it should be an opportunity to experience an education (Simmons). Through the use of students such as Isabella, Simmons disagrees with the way students now look at higher education and blames the educators through the students’ lives for this view. Instead, Simmons views education as an intellectual opportunity rather than a way to elevate ones economic class which is all people see when they see “higher education.” He believes that education, ambition and work ethic is how you have a satisfying life, not with how much you make. He makes the point that when economics becomes the main goal of education it’s all children begin to think about and they might not pursue something that they are truly passionate about or what they want to learn about, which then does not create an intellectually awakening experience (Simmons).

Higher education in modern day America has become a debated topic, with some saying that it is not worth it due to the debt it leaves upon leaving, and some saying that it opens opportunities that surpass the results of obtaining one. A resulting view from this conflict is that certain forms of education aren’t as beneficial as others. A primary example of one of these less valuable educations is the study of Liberal Arts. Author Sanford J. Ungar discredits this view in his article The New Liberal Arts where he discusses the many misconceptions that have come to form this interpretation. To convince the reader of these misunderstandings, Ungar uses the appeals of Ethos, Pathos, and Logos, with heavy appeal to logic (Logos) over the other two. Each misconception uses and focuses on more of one appeal than others, and by doing this, he is very successful in influencing the reader into considering that these misunderstandings are present.

Every higher institution of learning has their own set of myths and history. Some of them may be vaguely true and some may be highly influential. The history of the institution may have a negative effect on those who look to apply or be a part of the institution. The history of a place sets the epitome of future enrollees. Some of the ghosts that haunt any college may have an extremely negative impact on how they are viewed today. This negative perception of the university can lead to strong economic deficits. Throughout trying to combat negative concepts that are thrust upon an institution, they have resolved issues of ethics, violence and, to most importantly, boost cohesion and moral.

When people hear the term “Ivy League school”, they oftentimes think of a prestigious, high ranked college where extremely intelligent, well-rounded individuals go to shape themselves into an efficient member of society. However, a piece published by William Deresiewicz called “Don’t Send Your Kids to the Ivy League” does exactly the opposite, as Deresiewicz, a former 8 year Yale professor, criticizes Ivy League schools for being too constricting and not allowing their students to be themselves and come out to be a well-rounded efficient member of society. Deresiewicz is an award winning essayist and critic, as well as a frequent college speaker, and the best selling author of the 2014 novel “Excellent Sheep,” which also criticizes the roles of major Ivy League schools relating to American society. The main theme of “Don’t Send Your Kids to the Ivy League” is to convey the message to parents that contrary to popular belief, Ivy League schools do not always create perfect, well rounded individuals, and Deresiewicz uses his years of experience at Yale and the years he attended Columbia to back up his claims that sending away your kids to the Ivy League is not always the best choice.

In his work entitled “The Shock of Education: How College Corrupts”, journalist and author Alfred Lubrano poses the question of how receiving education can lead to a harsh reality. Lubrano explains that as a child works toward a higher education, there are certain aspects of life they are forced to leave behind as they enter into a new existence. According to Lubrano’s statement, “At night, at home, the differences in the Columbia experiences my father and I were having was becoming more evident” (532). Additionally, Lubrano states, “We talked about general stuff, and I learned to self-censor. I’d seen how ideas could be upsetting, especially when wielded by a smarmy freshman who barely knew what he was talking about” (533). In answering this question, Lubrano must explore the types of conversations that occurred with other family members, the disconnection from his peers, and how segregating himself from his family

Charles Murray’s essay proposes that American colleges are being flooded with individuals who are either unprepared for higher education or who are simply forced into attending college and can’t succeed because of the lack of certain innate abilities. Murray’s essay goes on to take issue with the idea that the pursuit of a traditional college education is somehow strategically creating a separation of the American class system. While Murray makes many salient points with regards to America’s obsession with college education as a standard into a class of the intellectual elite, the essay fails to take into consideration the various motivators that can lead to student success, despite

Mark Edmundson, the author of “On the Uses of a Liberal Education”, is an English teacher at the University of Virginia who expresses his concerns about the trajectory of the universities and colleges in America. Edmundson depicts how college students today have “little fire, little passion to be found,” towards their classes (4). In an effort to find the source of this lack of passion, Edmundson describes contacting other professors about this issue while refining his own ideas. Ultimately, Edmundson comes to a conclusion. He believes that the consumer mindset of college students has hindered American universities as a whole. My target audience is my professor, Professor Chezik. Looking closely at his wording, formation of sentences, and idea structure, one can see a recurring theme throughout Edmundson’s essay. Edmundson uses fragments, specifically at the beginning of his paragraphs, to start his point, pose counter arguments, and to have a poetic refrain.

To discuss the value of liberal education, there should be a mutual understanding that investing in college means to invest in oneself. Furthermore, while some consider this investment to be a critical stepping stone to success, others dismiss it, explaining that school simply cannot prepare someone for the “real world.” Sanford J. Ungar and Robert Reich explore both of these subjective values in their essays “The New Liberal Arts” and “College is a Ludicrous Waste of Money.” Ungar, the president of Goucher College in Baltimore, Maryland, discusses why a liberal education should be sought after; he does so by introducing common misconceptions about liberal arts and, using argumentative persuasion, proves their insignificance. On the other hand, Reich, the former secretary of labor, argues against the conventional belief of college being the only road to financial wellbeing; rather, he explains why a two-year education may better accommodate many college students, especially those in need of immediate work or those that simply cannot afford a four-year education. In all, although both Reich and Ungar generally discuss liberal education, their perspectives differ when it comes to its practicality in the current economy. Also, to express their different views about liberal arts, the authors use contrasting tones to present their ideas to different intended audiences.

America’s education system has been in a state of distress for the past decade, but garnished headlines recently as the student loan debt crisis reached over a trillion dollars. In conjunction with that, tuition is no longer the only obstacle a student faces when considering their future. As generations come and go, universities have slowly, but surely, been angling their education in a way to favor profit over knowledge. Because of the new direction higher education models are taking, Magdalena Kay questions her readers, “is there a problem with students, with teachers, with administrators, or maybe

In The Basement of the Ivory Tower is a very illustrative and witty analysis that presents the idea that not everyone is suited for college. The author, who goes by the alias Professor X, presents himself as a man of scholar with the difficult task of teaching English to students he believes should not even be in college. He is an adjunct professor that teaches at two community colleges as a last resort. Throughout this article, he argues that there are too many unreachable students. During his efforts in exploring various strategies to help these students, he claims that they are deficient in ability to complete any college course—especially English. Overall, with a lack of statistics and research, Professor X utilizes his professional character by sharing multiple anecdotes that feebly argue higher education is simply not for everyone.

The article of “ In the Basement of the Ivory Tower” really remind me to considered plenty of things that I have never been thinking about before. In my mind, pursuing and accomplishing a higher level of education is always good for people. However, the view that the Professor X raised is a very sharp phenomenon buy it does exists in our society. In the article he questioned whether it is necessary for everyone to get higher education or not. It seems that as far as Professor X concerned, some of those students who are just waste of time and money by taking college education. He exposed that many colleges nowadays are bend to financial profits rather than to provide a high quality education. What is more, some of the students are not that well prepared for their college study and many of them cannot pass his class.

As a high school senior, the pressure to pick the school that will provide me with both a good social and academic experience is on. For someone like me, I would be content with going to a good state school to save money. But for other students, Ivy League is the only option. These same students and their parents strongly believe that an Ivy League education is the principal to the finest opportunities in life. William Deresiewicz claims they do not give a remarkable social experience nor do they allow room for students to think themselves. In his article, “ Don’t Send Your Kids to the Ivy Leagues”, he uses his status and personal anecdotes to persuade the reader of just that.