To Go To College, Or Not Go To College. This Is A Question

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.

In “Too Many People Are Going to College”, the author, Charles Murray’s main purpose is to encourage people to rethink college. He clearly gives very valid and educated reasons on why college isn't for everyone and how society has made everyone think that college is a norm and, in a way, a rite of passage into adulthood and citizenship. Murray is given the difficult task of proving to the people that society has marred and distorted the views of college. He does an exemplary job of executing this task. Murray presents his argument that college is not all society says it is by presenting counter arguments and either giving rebuttals or conceding.

Murray describes it in a brief way, calling it the tough stuff on (Pg. 237). Although Murray stresses the need for core knowledge, he also thinks that sometime throughout elementary school and middle school kids should be introduced into a bit of liberal education. Murray also believes that you should not wait until college for your liberal education. For example, Murray says, “So let’s teach them, but let’s not wait for college to do it on (Pg. 237). This statement could only mean one thing.

While the term liberal education is heard from the most prestigious university to an inner city community college, the phrase itself has a hazy definition at best. While educators across America struggle with the definition of the phrase, William Cronon uses purpose, structure, and appeals in his essay "Only Connect: The Goals of Liberal education," to define a liberally educated being and the characteristics that such an education should impart. Cronon capitalizes on inductive structuring to lead the reader along, gently building each new statement upon a foundation of previous ideas. This effectively leads the reader to a strange

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.

Ungar believes that the new Liberal Arts program is powerful because it develops character, lifelong learning, and values. He further explains that creating confidence and developing positive patterns is essential to life. He believes that, “Through immersion in liberal arts, students learn not just to make a living, but also to live a life rich in values and character”.On the other hand, Gitlin believes that learning from history ensures common ground and helps people socially accept their lives as well as those of others. He states that “Students need “chaff detectors.”They need some orientation to philosophy, history, language, literature, music and the arts that have lasted more than 15 minutes”. He does agree with Ungar that Liberal

In his article “ The New Liberal Arts,” Sanford J. Ungar talks about how undergoing a Liberal-Arts education is criticized by many and in his arguments he brings seven very important points of misconceptions. The first point he discusses how many assume that liberal education is not a necessity but he argues that students need to know what they want as a career. Choosing an education that is right for them rather than being driven by other economic factors. To a job the is unsatisfying and they can barely make a living from. Ungar also argues that even with a liberal arts degree or any other degree, in economically tough times it will be just as hard to get a job. Companies will look to hire individuals based on what other and new skill sets they may have to offer.

Sanford Ungar still believes in the liberal arts. He writes this essay with hopes that the reader will begin to understand why he believes this, and maybe choose a liberal arts path for themselves. A degree in the liberal arts may include, but are not limited to, majors in fields such as social sciences, philosophy, history, English, French, and humanities. Ungar is aware of the many misperceptions as he calls them, of society today when it comes to earning a

In Freeman Hrabowski’s piece, “Colleges Prepare People for Life,” he mentions the differing opinions between going to college and choosing another path. Many people find college too expensive, and once a student graduates, he or she will face enormous debt and potentially risk still being unprepared for the working world. Hrabowski acknowledges this, and also notices that many students who do attend college occasionally make the wrong decision in terms of choosing a school and major. But while the stakes are high, he argues that college not only provides financial stability, but also allows students to become more virtuous citizens in the long run. He does this by providing information to backup his claims, using a passionate tone to explain his beliefs, and paralleling college attendance with good intentions.

He received a Bachelor of Arts degree from Yale College, and during his time there he was in various political organizations. He also received a degree in government at Harvard University. He wrote this essay to convince the American people that a more general education such as liberal arts has more productive outcomes. He is trying to reach the American population, so that they can change the educational system. He tries to connect to them by giving examples such as Mark Zuckerberg’s success through liberal arts and statistics on countries with a liberal arts education versus those with a skill-based education.

In this article, Murray argues that many people go to college when it is not actually necessary for them to do so. He begins by explaining that obtaining a liberal education, while it is important to cultural participation, is not a good reason for everyone to go to college. Instead, he says that this education should occur much earlier, beginning in elementary school. Murray also believes that the in depth analysis of information that occurs college is too difficult for most people to enjoy, and many simply aren't academically capable. Even for those who are able, he claims that four years of college is much more than most professions actually need. He states that many people believe that getting a degree is the key to getting a

For decades, students have been told that college is the next step after high school graduation. Society reiterates this by glorifying individuals that have completed a degree and looking down upon those who do not have one. The problem is that many students have not acquired the necessary tools nor have the motivation to be successful while pursuing post-high school education. Some argue that college provides the foundation of liberal studies that will improve career opportunities. Charles Murray disagrees in his essay, "Are Too Many People Going to College." He states, "Most people should be getting the basics of a liberal education. But for most students, the place to provide those basics are elementary and middle school." (Graff, 238) This raises the question, is a four-year education the best option for all students. College provides many benefits that would be difficult to find elsewhere, such as, writing skills or cultural growth, but college is not meant for everyone. A college education does not guarantee a prosperous career, instead, gaining work experience or completing a trade school is a more intelligent option for the majority of potential students.

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).

In his Essay “Are too many people going to college,” first published in a 2008 issue of AEI, Charles Murray explores many insights onto the topic of furthering education as well as exploring various other options to pursue after high school. Who exactly would think that too many people are going to college? Well with more and more students flooding campuses at the end of every school year and less and less going into trade schools, a shift in the job market is just beginning to be seen on the horizon. Charles Murray’s essay “Are too many people going to college” shows that not only are there other avenues to pursue a potential life long career, but that much of the time pursuing these avenues may offer better results for some wanting to go to college.

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.