The Market Mentality Drives Students Essay

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.

When Shorris explains his goal to the prospective students he indicates, “You’ve been cheated. Rich people learn the humanities; you didn’t. The humanities are a foundation for getting along in the world, for thinking, for learning to reflect on the world instead of just reaction to whatever force is turned against you.”(Page 4) That the rich have had the opportunity to buy that type of learning and embrace it, while the poor have had more things to deal with like getting food on the table from day to day. Therefore, Shorris believes that a liberal education will provide poor students with a new kind of lens to outlook the world. With the knowledge of philosophy, poetry, art history, logic and American history, Shorris trusts that these students will begin to uncover hidden talents and interests that will inspire them and help them to not only solve problems, but also seek plausible solutions. He believes that these qualities would provide the poor with an escape route from the ongoing cycle that have them trapped and it will provide them with “a certain kind of life, a richness of mind and spirit.” (Page 5) After his first thriving year teaching this class, sixteen of his prospective students completed the course, which then some went on to universities.

College offers a wide variety of educational aspects. In “Why America’s Obsession with STEM is Dangerous,” Fareed Zakaria explains the issues involving the STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) educational system and explains the need for a liberal educational system. Zakaria says we need more creative, innovative, and critical thinkers, which can be achieved through a liberal education. He also says that we need the skills that come with a STEM education, but those can also be achieved through liberal education. A narrow study helps you receive a specific job, but a broad education allows you to explore the economical depths of work. Fareed Zakaria’s essay exemplifies rhetorical strategies and the three means of persuasion

He uses strong diction as he addresses how colleges are increasingly becoming “conventional bureaucracies” because behind every college program is a need for growth (Blank 263). This need he argues is how connections between colleges and outside companies begin to formulate as colleges develop “employment favoring tactics” (263). Thus colleges build up their clientele to help advertise such well known business corporations and offices to advertise “better jobs.” Blank continues by providing the most optimistic statistical evidence which “envision a 14.8 percent slice of 1975 job market, while they bring 31 percent of 18 to 24-year old age into college” (263). This estimates to about 10,664,000 students in college, “therefore, even if every one of the so-called professional and technical jobs were indeed reserved for them (which is itself patently impossible), the number of job openings would still be inadequate” (263). These facts introduce and support the idea that receiving a college degree is not to be associated with the key to “reserving a better job”. The details and numbers build an appeal to logos and impress upon the reader that this is a problem worth discussing, the statistics prove that although there are many students in college, not everyone will receive a job as the number of job openings are

“What Is College For” by Andrew Delbanco, shows the need for both a universal college system; one which caters for all of society, and one which provides a liberal education. Delbanco gives many reasoned thoughts on how, and why the college system has become restricted, to purely those of a higher socio-economic background, rather than being exclusive to people of all backgrounds. The idea of college being a platform for people to learn, advance their skills, and become whatever they want to be has seemingly diminished over time. The ideas in favor of such an educational system are put forward, but they are foreshadowed in my opinion, by the notion that people should have the same educational opportunities in life; regardless of their economic or social background. A universal education system is needed for our society to prosper, especially if it provides a liberal education; this is not just for the individuals that make up a community, but for the community, as a whole.

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

Are too many people going to college? This question has been contemplated over for years. The increased cost of college throughout the years has caused the question to become even more relevant. Charles Murray, an author from the American Enterprise Institute, wrote the essay entitled “Are Too Many People Going to College?” Murray’s essay sought ought to explain that universities are being filled with students who are either not prepared for higher education or who are compelled into attending college and are unable to succeed because the lack of inherent abilities. While Murray makes many pertinent points about America’s infatuation with the B.A as a standard into a class of intellectual elite the essay does not take

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.

However, in Ho’s selection, investment banks, the high forces on Wall Street, take the cultural narrative, “culture of smartness” into consideration to strongly impact and manipulate the undergraduates’ choices (Ho 167). Although the Asian women tried to reset the boundaries for undergraduate students, the investment banks’ domination over these students forces them to take follow a specific path. Wall Street’s anxiousness to employ the best undergraduate students, urges the students to get into the top university and to select an uninteresting major that satisfies their desired luxurious lifestyle. For example, Karen Ho states that “470 Princeton students pursued law or medical degrees [and] – about 40 percent of Princeton students choosing full-time jobs directly after graduation – decided to work in the financial services sector” (Ho 170). This supports the upward trend of students’ interest in majors that have the most renowned jobs. These Wall Street’s qualifications, and student’s determination to aim high, construct the societal norms and confine the student’s variety of available educational options to explore. Hence, societal norms for education and career, set by high forces through cultural narratives, greatly affect the behavior and the career choices of the undergraduates in Ho’s essay.

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