Entitlement Education In Daniel Bruno's Generation X Goes To College

In his essay “Why Colleges Shower Their Students with A’s”, Brent Staples argues that many colleges have less vigorous grading rubrics than in years past because of the increase in student-consumers. Consequently, this “new” grading policy has led to an increase in A’s that are awarded to students. A few factors have led to this unfair distribution. Firstly, students who earn high grades in poorly attended classes assure that these classes will remain viable in the future. Secondly, high grades guarantee the presence of student consumers at a college {REWORD}. Additionally, the tenure status or salary of a professor may be affect if (s)he does not give out high grades to students, leading to disapproving evaluations.

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).

In a May 2003 persuasive article published by USA Today titled “College isn’t for Everyone”, the author W.J. Reeves states “about 15 million people in America are enrolled in college.” This is a staggering amount considering the fact that many people are in college for all the wrong reasons. About half of the Americans enrolled in college are there because they feel they owe it to their families. Only a small number of Americans in college actually feel it is necessary for successful lives. In this article, Reeves recollects on his experiences as a college English professor at an institution in New York. He speaks of how he believes that many students truly do not want to be in college. You can tell this by his stories of tardiness,

In the essay “Are Too Many People Going to College,” writer Charles Murray explains that not everyone is in need of going to college for three main reasons: a liberal education should be gained in elementary and middle school, many people already have knowledge and skills necessary for a technical career, and many students are in college to “buy an admission ticket-the B.A.” (246) and ensure employers consider their resume. Murray does not argue anything against college itself but more against society and especially the education system. Murray also accuses guidance counselors and parents of “automatically encouraging young people to go to college straight out of high school being thoughtless about the best interests of young people” (249).

Cureton and John Tagg both look at the bigger picture. In “Collegiate Life: An Obituary,” Levine & Cureton discuss larger reasons for why students behave the way they do in college–hope and fear. From these two emotions, they show how other attitudes–consumer expectations, psychological “damage,” and a utilitarian approach to learning–are a result of these two greater forces (Levine & Cureton 712). On the other hand, Tagg, in “The Decline of the Knowledge Factory: Why Our Colleges Must Change,” places the blame for the failure of higher education on universities. He writes that students’ disinterest and professors’ complaints are both due to the failure of the universities. Edmundson’s essay is given context and an explanation in Tagg’s

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

Hunter Rawlings, the author of College is not a Commodity, protests society’s view of the importance of college and argues the necessity of an education instead of the college title. Rawlings boldly exhibits stereotypical views of college as being unaffordable, creating too much debt, and simply not being worth the hassle. He then goes on to explain his contributing factor the the article, “The value of a degree depends more on the student’s input than on the college’s curriculum.” (paragraph 4) Rawlings displays that a college degree is not just handed to the student, however the expertise of that degree is dependent on the level of education that the student sought to receive. The author inevitably argues that college is not a commodity like

Students when given the opportunity to expand in something that interests them gain a confidence in learning that focuses more on internal aspects rather than on an education that will set a standard on what kind of individual they should be. For instance, Davidson in examination of Inez Davidson’s classroom found that "kids want to learn...as long as there is a payoff, not in what is won or achieved in statistical terms, but what is won and achieved inside, in the sense of self-confidence and competence" (Davidson 67). Students are not as shallow as education deems them to be. When given the opportunity to prove one’s worth it is more than high grades that are gained, it is having a place in the world through the betterment of “the Self” which betters the planet. Despite this, students are still being handed specific knowledge, and predetermined paths that are said to lead students to “success.” In truth, being handed opportunities only lead to a lack of motivation, since individuals will not want have the drive to earn for one’s self and to improve on all their overlooked skills and assets. Karen Ho refers to this as she quotes the undergraduate, Devon Peterson, on how “banking firms provide [undergraduates] with a way to maintain [their] elite status in society by providing avenues to wealth and power that other professions do not” (Ho 179). The recruitment process reflects how institutions, especially ones

Marty Nemko, in the article, “We Send Too Many Students To College,” acknowledges that colleges have become obscenely expensive and that it is possible to be successful without going to college. Arguing that too many students are sent to college without realizing that it is not imperative, Nemko targets parents in his claims that colleges focus on educating in the cheapest way possible and most importantly, that the advantage of past college graduates in the job market is declining. One of his main reasons is that even though the average college graduate makes more money, hundreds of thousands of students in the bottom half of their high school class do not succeed in higher education. Nemko’s article is the most persuasive article on whether college education still has value as he argues that college is not beneficial to everyone through demonstrations of hyperbole, and figurative language.

College, a universal, fundamental concept that the globe utilizes. Through a wide array of variations, countries across the world have developed their own meaning of what higher education is. However, the underlying tone of it all is the same, furthering one’s knowledge. With a vast number of schools from a broad range of locations trying to pull the population in, colleges compete with different tactics ranging from education relevance to evaluation. Consequently, problems have arisen from these approaches, addressed along the lines in an article called “A New Course” by Magdalena Kay, an associate professor of English at the University of Victoria and an educational film, “Ivory Tower” by Andrew Rossi, a graduate of Harvard and Yale University and a filmmaker. Furthermore, these problems change the meaning of college itself, no longer seen as an education, but as a commodity.

Nowadays, seniors students in high school are qualified to graduate and peregrinate to college to get a degree for their future jobs. There is an author, Pharinet, who verbally expresses that, “That there are too many students enrolled in school who simply don’t belong there” (680). Pharinet says that in her article, “Is College for Everyone?” She argues that college is not for everyone and that students should think deeply afore enrolling. She claims that students who are not academically ready and financially stable are the most mundane in college. Pharinet commences her credibility (ethos), logically (logos), and emotionally (pathos) with broad facts and statistics, a real-life situation, and word of mouth on why college is not for everyone.

Pharinet, the author of Is College for Everyone, explains an important factor in today’s society about college. He talks about how everyone cannot attend college like today’s society expects us to do so. Many are not able because they cannot maintain the grades and are not financially stabled. Money is a huge problem when it comes to attending college. Books expense, living situation and receiving student loans are examples of some of the issues students never think about, but endure. They only know about attending because it sounds and looks good after high school. Some high schools do not give their students the proper education to meet the requirements to attend. That is why ACT and SAT scores and high school transcripts are needed to meet college credentials.

When people see others drop out of college, they think to themselves, they are just lazy. They do not want to put the time or effort into their own education. While reading “Why Poor Students Struggle”, by Vicki Madden, I realized that it’s not the fact they are lazy, it is the fact that they can not afford it. Madden shows this effectively by using, egos, logos, and pathos to make the reader have a more clear view of the educational system’s failures.

“Kids who are the first in their families to brave the world of higher education come on campus with little academic know-how and are much more likely than their peers to drop out before graduation” (1). Many people believe that school isn’t for everyone, and whoever goes is privileged for doing so. Countless people in the world today do not attend college, and this is mainly due to an influence of those in their family. Perhaps they are unsupportive of higher education, their parents and family members may view their entry into college as a break in the family system rather than a continuation of their schooling and higher learning. Most of the first-generation students decide to apply to colleges, because they aspire to jobs which require degrees. However, unlike some students whose parents have earned a degree, they often seek out college to bring honor to their families, and to ensure they make a decent amount of money for their future.

The decision to obtain a higher education beyond high school is no longer a question of if, but when. This is the question that author Caroline Bird discusses in her article, “College is a Waste of Time and Money,” written in 1975. This text strives to convince students, parents, and advisors that obtaining a degree might not be in the best interest for those involved. Circling around the idea that college is a requirement and no longer an act of free will. Bird starts the article off strongly by building her credibility through her own personal research and other credible sources as well as appealing to readers through logical reasoning using numerous statistics, but fails to convince readers and discredits her ultimate goal through a disconnect in her use of analogies.