In the 21st century, many American students are wondering why they are even going to college at all, which begs to question, what is the purpose of education in the 21st century. As with any big question, there are multiple takes on the higher education system in America. Walter Kirn, a Princeton Alumni, describes education as a “meritocracy,” where those with merit, or wealth in this case, can rise to the top, in a personal narrative – Lost in the Meritocracy - describing what education in the 21st century is. His experiences show us the life of an Ivy Leaguer in modern times, which is very different from the common portrayal of an Ivy League student. Kirn’s experiences and life at Princeton comically contradict his own university’s mission statement, while still highlighting the pressure put on Ivy League students with “an aptitude for showing aptitude” (Kirn 143) Kirn’s narrative shows the flaws and cracks in higher education, cracks that Liz Coleman – former president of Bennington College – believes call for a reform of liberal arts education. In her TedTalk, Coleman shows us how to get education back to its roots, or what it should be. Using rhetorical devices created by Aristotle, pathos, appealing to emotion; ethos, appealing to expertise; or logos, appealing to logic; Kirn, Coleman, and various universities are able to convince the reader of their point of view. Whether it is the images of a broken education system, or the idealistic dreams of the universities
In Dr. Richard Vedder’s, “For Many, College Isn’t Worth It”, he applies numerous examples of pathos and ethos throughout his commentary on the United States’ oversaturation of undergraduate degrees and post-graduate unemployment rate; but these examples are rather weak. Instead of blaming public, more affordable state
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).
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
A look back at the institution of education over the past 20 years will reveal that once upon a time a bachelor’s degree was long since considered the marker of ultimate success, the highest level of achievement that one could make in their lives. In those days, if for some reason you failed to march across the stage on graduation day after an epic, four-year stretch of high tuition, long nights studying, and unrelenting professors that found great joy in riding your back, then you had indeed failed at life.
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.
As we move out of the 20th century into a world where technology is changing the way we work and play and are educated, college enrollment is at an all time high. But based on the SAT and ACT scores, academic achievement has declined leading to the question in Joyce Baldwin's article, "Liberal Arts for New Millennium", of whether or not a liberal arts background should still be included in the definition of "an educated person".
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.
“The New Liberal Arts” is an article written by Sanford J. Ungar, who is a president of Goucher College in Baltimore, Maryland. In the beginning of his article, Ungar wrote, “Hard economic times inevitably bring scrutiny of all accepted ideals and institutions, and this time around the liberal arts education has been especially hard hit.” In other words, Ungar means that recent economic recessions have made a huge impact on what people think of going for a liberal arts degree. In his essay, Ungar lists seven misperceptions and how he reacts to them. The most common misperception that Ungar identified is that liberal arts degrees are no longer affordable. The cost for liberal arts education is very expensive while
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.
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.
Today colleges are growing more and more necessary for attaining a solid path towards a successful career, yet the rapidly increasing cost of tuition is driving students away from their dream of attending college, due to the preposterous amount of money that is now being demanded by colleges across the nation and world as a whole. It is sad to see students being turned away from a successful future due to the money-hungry nature of the universities that dot the globe. More and more impossible it is becoming to have a “rags-to-riches” scenario that used to highlight the American Dream, as if a student doesn’t have the riches to afford a higher education and the tuition that is drug upon its coattails, then our society is doomed to be clothed in rags forever, unless major changes are brought about to restructure and end the indefatigable growth of tuition rates across the board.