Don T Send Your Kids To The Ivy League By William Deresiewicz

Recently, many have begun to attack and degrade higher education in the United States. In the book How College Works, authors Daniel Chambliss and Christopher Takacs claim, “As state support has eroded, and as more students attend college in an increasingly desperate attempt to find viable jobs, the price to students of attending an institution of higher education has gone up, especially at more selective institutions” (172). So is college even worth it? Caroline Bird’s excerpt from her book Case Against College “Where College Fails Us” is an adequately written article that agrees with those who question whether college is a good investment. Bird argues that although some students would benefit from college and succeed, many fall short, wasting

People attend college to become successful, independent adults, and for-profit schools draw the attention of many students because of the short amount of time the school claims to give out a degree. In the article, Why Lower-Income Students are Drawn to For-Profit schools, by Alexia Elejalde-Ruiz, real-life examples are provided of the negative effects of for-profit schools. What many students thought was going to better his/her future, actually brought it down. High school graduates are reeled into the advertisements of for-profit schools and in the end are left with major debt and even struggle to start his/her career. Alexia Elejalde-Ruiz reveals the secret behind for-profit schools through the use of ethos.

“America’s university system is creating a class-riven nation. There has to be a better way,” starts Murray (235). Are Too Many People Going To College is a piece written highlighting alternatives to traditional education, as well as the repercussions we are facing as a society as a result of the strict guidelines of traditional education; a point that is spotlighted throughout the piece is the subject of Liberal Education and the core knowledge that we as a people should maintain, as well as the flaws of college as an establishment. Though the title and points made in the writings of Murray may lead one to believe he is standing against the college establishment, it is clearly stated from paragraph one that he believes more people should be

In this memo I will be going over Higher Education Debates dealing with the fears of Asian quotas being imposed; as well as going over why there seems to be a trend of Asian-American parents who are more biased towards prestigious colleges. For the first article regarding Asian quotas, I will be summarizing and reflecting upon the six arguments whether it is believed that certain Ivy league schools impose a quota on the Asian-American population or not. As for the piece dealing with Asian American parent preferring Ivy League schools for their children, I will briefly summarize and discuss the cultural reasons why Asian-American parents are highly selective over their college choices for their children. In Ron Unz’s debate, he provides statistical evidence indicating that Ivy league schools place quotas on the Asian-American population

In his article, “Are Too Many People Going to College?” Charles Murray argues that too many people are going to college universities when they should be focusing on other lifestyle options. In his opinion, whether or not to attend college is a personal decision that should be thoroughly thought through. When weighed with the unrealistic prerequisites, the financial expenses, and the time needed to obtain a degree, many people will find that attending college will not be beneficial to them. Speaking of this Murray attests, “The question here is not whether the traditional four-year residential college is fun or valuable as a place to grow up, but when it makes sense as a place to learn how to make a living.

“Education is the key to success” is a common phrase said by many of our millennial cohorts. The idea that education is a critical component of acquiring an eminent lifestyle has dated back since premodern times. Individuals are now constantly enrolling in postsecondary institutions in hopes of attaining endless opportunities along with the implied benefits that results from a college degree. Nevertheless, a college education is, unfortunately, not accessible to all people. In “The Diploma Divide,” Kassie Bracken explores the major disparity among low income students and their affluent counterparts on obtaining a postsecondary degree in the U.S. With the employment of an alluring appeal to one’s emotions, a use of despondent word choices to establish a dispirited ambience, and a distinguished platform to elucidate the author’s thoughts, Kassie effectively promoted her argument on how a college education is not attainable for all individuals.

Many things are built on the idea of an inner circle, which you can see in private schools and colleges, country clubs, and VIPs in clubs and concerts. The more exclusive that the place is, the tighter those networks are, and if American universities were interested in merit and efficiency, places could get bigger and, in some ways, they have an economic incentive to expand and collect more tuition, but their social standing rests on the ability to exclude people. (Kingkade 3). Ivy league schools are prideful of their low acceptance rate because it gives them elitism. The more selective an institution is, the more people want to attend.

As a college student who is currently spending thousands of dollars to further my education and achieve a career goal, it was, at first, disheartening to read Caroline Bird ’s essay “College is a Waste of Time and Money”. However, after thoroughly examining her points, I now see that her essay is illogical. In her piece “College is a Waste of Time and Money”, Caroline Bird argues against the idea that “college is the best place for all high-school graduates” (1); in other words, college isn’t for everyone. Throughout her writing, Bird supplies her readers with evidence that explains how, for some individuals, college is a waste of not only time and money, but of intellectual effort, as well.

Brent Staple’s essay "Why Colleges Shower Their Students with A's" had various elements that helped provided evidence and persuade the readers. The first thing I noticed when reading this essay was the comparison between the marketplace and college. This comparison helps to develop Staple’s argument because it explains something that is unfamiliar by comparing it to something that is more familiar. I can assume that the target readers were business men and women. Since I am unfamiliar with some business terms, I found that this essay explained something that was unfamiliar with something else that was unfamiliar.

He is biased and only focuses on how higher education’s image hurts poor students academically, but not all students in general. Simmons writes about how poor students are told by others that higher education was the only way to earn a good living and be successful, but does not show that wealthier students are also taught to look at college in that way. The only evidence Simmons has that shows what students in wealthier economic areas are being taught is the two years that he spent in a private school. He does not have a lot of experience or knowledge about how higher education is taught to wealthier students and is ignorant of the fact that they are taught to look at college in the same way that poor students are. All students are urged to succeed in life and were taught that college was the only way to do it.

Liz Addison’s essay, “Two Years Better Than Four,” was first published in the New York Times Magazine back in September of 2007. Addison went to two community colleges and majored in biology; earning her degree in 2008. In her essay, she is responding to Rick Perlstein's article “What’s the Matter with College?” in which he claims, “College as America used to understand it is coming to an end” (211). Addison refutes Perlstein’s claims by saying, “My guess, reading between the lines, is that Mr. Perlstein has never set foot in an American community college” (212).

Students with a blue-collar background have different universities experiences and Stephens, Fryberg, Markus, Johnson, and Covarrubias, (2012) ask the question on the experiences and how they were more likely to have grown up with different rules the game. A number of these students are First-generation college students. First-Generation college students (a.k.a. First-Gen) is a term that refers to someone whom is the first within their eminent families minus siblings to attend a college/university. First-gen students may face many disadvantages that counterparts (student’s whom eminent family has attended college minus siblings).

The very controversial and widely known article “What College Can Mean to the Other America” under the authority of Mike Rose – for the sake of clarity and objectivity – touches upon three main points regarding formal education in America, which are: well-round education as whether a private or public good, governmental intervention in helping the less fortunate, and lastly, poverty in America is regarded, especially by the upper classes, as a prerequisite for social hierarchy and economic progression. Allow me to further elaborate and support these three main points, in my perspective anyway, throughout the paragraphs to follow. Rose under some instances in his article strongly advocated for government intervention in preventing or at least

“3 Reasons College Still Matters” by Andrew Delbanco 3) “Surely, every American college ought to defend this waning possibility, whatever we call it. And an American college is only true to itself when it opens its doors to all - the rich, the middle, and the poor - who have the capacity to embrace the precious chance to think and reflect before life engulfs them. If we are all serious about democracy, that means everyone.” 4) In this part of the writing Andrew Delbanco tries to persuade his audience by using the pattern of logic that agrees with the overall argument but also considers another striking point of view to strengthen the argument (While these arguments are convincing, they must also consider…).

Ho proposes a possible explanation on why so many elite students scramble for Wall Street’s job opportunities that “Those most enamored of, or dependent on, their putative membership in ‘the cream of the crop’ seek ways to maintain and continue the high status to which they have become accustomed, especially as graduation looms near”(179). Regarded as the most intelligent and promising students, students at elite universities are accustomed to receiving praise and respect from others. With the date of graduation approaching, they desire to sustain the high social status by working on Wall Street which satisfies their fastidious demand for not only financial security but also prestigious social status. Expecting to sustain high status is not restricted to only elite college students. Similarly, Stiglitz declares that “Those with power used that power to strengthen their economic and political positions, or at the very least to maintain them.