Alethea Spiridon Generation Debt Analysis

Money is the basis of living , even people with lower income degrees could support themselves before the cost of tuition went up drastically. However, when you add student loans in the mix , debt over takes the standard of living. Ellison has heavy focus on this because he wants to highlight a big reason why free tuition can be beneficial for people in the long run. He believes if free tuition was put in place , every college graduate, lower income or higher income, will be able to live within their

In recent discussions of unemployment, a controversial issue has been whether a college education is worth the oppressive debt that colleges thrust upon their students. From this perspective, obtaining a preeminent education is not valued above the threat of student loans that constantly loom over the possessor. On the other hand, however, others argue that a college education constructs the building blocks for undergraduates to pursue more than just a job or career. In the words of one of this view’s main proponents, “Post secondary education should help students to discover what they love to do, to get better at it, and to develop that ability to continue learning so that they become agents of change- not victims of it,” (Roth). According to this view, secondary education develops a student’s ability to rise above change and are not lost to its enormous list of victims.

If everyone is given the same opportunity at the same start why must we prohibit the go getters that came from nothing with new thresh holds in which gives my stand on education is an equal opportunity stands on the revelations of our country’s next generation. Some people believe college tuition should be free; however, it should not, because it will devalue the college diploma, taxes will become higher, and it’s as simple as nothing in life is free. The first reason why college tuition shouldn’t be a hand out is because it would devalue the college diploma. If everyone had a diploma what makes it different from the people you’re working next too, who is going to get that promotion. Say college tuition

College is a specific environment that has its own expectations and rules, and students who seek enrollment should take into account that the gates are open only for those who are willing to excel and thrive academically. A cruel reality faced in college could be far away from students’ expectations. Paying for tuition, students become more responsible for their learning process, taking authority of their knowledge. Before enrolling in a class, students will consider their chances to pass it on the first attempt rather than spending money for a second or even a third chance. Thus, college tuition should be perceived as an investment in a new project, college degree, that becomes profitable at the time of successful

Students adopt ‘achieving’ approach in learning, which is the students focus more on obtaining high grades. Thus, graduates lack of soft skills and higher order thinking skills. In relation to this, exam-oriented approach does not benefit our graduates. The government and universities should apply student centered learning using problem-based learning (PBL) to focus on monitoring and assessment methods. 1.2 Problem statement: Malaysian graduates are too exam-oriented.

Caroline Bird’s argument against postsecondary education is incorrect, specifically her beliefs that students are exposed to too many options and graduates only desire jobs that save people. First, Caroline Bird shares her belief that “a college experience that piles option on option …merely adds to the contemporary nightmare.” Although too many options are sometimes overwhelming, limiting choices would also create undue pressure for students. For instance, as a student, I am exposed to several options: what classes I should take, what major I should major in, what professors I should take, etc. This allows me control over my education, so I can avoid being pressured into a class or a major that is not right for me. As a matter of fact, author Virginia N. Gordon found statistical evidence that about 75 percent of students change their major at least once before graduation (Freedman).

The goal of the usage of this fact is to show readers this common term does not reflect real traits of smart people and can be treated as an insult because of that. It is one of the few examples of Fridman’s appeals to readers’ logic. The essay is based on general data; the author mentioned schools and universities promote negative attitude to smart students: “Nerds are ostracized while athletes are idolized” (Fridman). But he did not use any statistical or science data to support his position. For example, Fridman could provide data about scholarships and other types of funding for sports and other activities.

The student retorts, “we talk about what’s true, what’s important, what’s good. Well, how do you teach people to be good?” (p. 2). She also wonders whether Emerson would have “any ideas about what to do about what was worrying him-or did he think he’d done enough because he’s spelled the problem out to the Harvard professors?” (p. 2). When activities that promote both practical wisdom and connect information to application are missing, liberal education only makes the assumption students know how to bridge the disparity between thinking and doing. It does little to nurture its

The authors declare existing educations systems “encourage the opposite”, meaning they are not encouraging students to learn both sciences and humanities. Not encouraging additional learning is due to “funding provided by government grants.” Graduate schools are forced to “create a closed system” to meet the “demand for results” in doctoral programs. Ottino and Morson show that graduation schools are not to blame for the neglect of “whole-minded” learning, but funding is to blame. If students are receiving funding from the government; they must maintain certain GPAs and learning paths. Therefore, funding is discouraging students from pursuing degrees in the arts and sciences.

After being rejected, Gratz pursued a lawsuit against the University of Michigan, raising the question if affirmative action is still need in higher education (Hull 31). Gratz and Hull are not alone on the defense side of affirmative action. In his article “University Affirmative Action Admissions Policies Are Toxic,” Robert Cherry asserts that “affirmative action admissions policies disportionately accept students with lower-than-average test score and grades. As a result, they are not adequately prepared for the rigors of top-tier universities.” In making this comment, Cherry clearly favors for affirmative action to be taken out of higher education. He supports his argument with data that suggest that minorities are not performing as well as whites because some colleges lower their standards in order to accept more minorities.