Analysis Of My Struggle With Anti-Intellectualism By Paul Stoller

Some of the considerations about education have changed when we compare those considerations by looking closely at the qualifications of the blue-collar workers and students. Two writers looked at different generations, and one of them focused on the experiences of the blue-collar workers; however, the other writer looked at considerations from another perspective by paying attention to statistics. While in “Blue-Collar Brilliance,” Mike Rose claims that college is not necessary in “Are Too Many People Going to College,” Charles Murray believes college is somehow necessary; however, both Rose and Murray agree on how we value knowledge and how we measure intelligence.

After Graduating High School students have a choice of going to college or not. College is a place where students want to be educated or have a better job in the future. Some people believe that students who go to college more intelligence than students who go working after graduating high school. However, going to college does not means all students as intelligence; because students might go to colleges to have a degree, but not to be intelligence. Sometimes intelligences can be measures by the level of school a student completed, but for a blue collar job they need to practice and observe in the field to be able to perform the job on they own preference. People believe students who go to college have intelligence more than students who’s in the work field after high school.

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. The answer is: in a sensible world

Having never taken a college writing course before, I did not know what to expect and therefore assumed that I would choose my own topic to write about; of course, this isn’t the case. However, if I had the choice, I would not have chosen to write a response to Gerald Graff’s “Hidden Intellectualism”. After going through his essay with a fine-tooth comb, I have found a few flaws in his reasoning. Gerald Graff believes that schools and colleges are not taking advantage of “street smarts” by not using them in an intellectual setting when in fact, schools are providing students with a large assortment of other knowledge and skills. In Graff’s essay “Hidden Intellectualism”, he argues for the importance of changing school curriculums in order to better reflect the interests

The general argument made by author Charles Murray in his article, “Are too many people go to college,” is that the college is not necessary for everyone. More specifically, the Murray argues that students who went to school should have learned the core knowledge they will learn in the college. He writes, “ K-8 are the right years to teach the core knowledge, and the effort should get off to a running start in elementary school” (236). In this passage, Murray is suggesting that start teaching the core knowledge in elementary school until high school is better than to spend money and more time to the college. It is not important to go to college. In my opinion, I agree with Murray’s claim that four year college is not worth, job satisfaction for intrinsic reward, and the dark side of the Bachelor's degree.

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. It wasn’t until after reading this piece several times that I began encountering flaws within her reasoning. Although I agree with Bird that college is a waste of all these for some students, I also believe that Bird does not provide strong enough evidence to persuade her readers into thinking this.

Going to college for many students is just a normal part of life. It is what will enable them to get an education that eventually will lead to get a well-paid job and the resources and the status to live a comfortable life. But for college professor, Andrew Delbanco, the American college has a higher purpose. In the article “College at Risk”, Delbanco states that colleges should be promoting critical thinking among students, through knowledge of the past and the interaction with each other; as well as, help them discover their talents and passions and figure out what they want to do in life. This type of education is called liberal arts and for Delbanco, it represents the ideal education. However, the high cost of receiving an education and the competitive labor market is making very hard for student to obtain a liberal art education.

Martha Nussbaum, then reminds the reader that these types of colleges are very active in class and to stay afloat in them, it’s highly recommended that you participate in class, no longer can just relax and look out of the class’s windows and expect to pass, “is its characteristic emphasis on the active participation of the child in inquiry and questioning.” This relates back to what Ronald Barnett wrote about. Both writers are trying to convince their readers that college is no place to fool around. If you plan on succeeding you must push yourself, ask questions, participate in classes and do hours of library work that might just lead you nowhere. College is a time to grow and isn’t always

The article titled “Even for Cashiers, College Pays Off” by David Leonhardt is an article that tackles the different reasons why skeptics and critics think spending money and time in college wasting. Despite the advantages that have been experienced by America in comparison to Europe, it does not make sense having to explain why college education for the masses is a noble and profitable venture. The reasons among which are quoted by those opposing and critics is that it is an expensive venture. This might be true but it results in self improvement which is very valuable and not quantifiable in terms of price and can result in a good job which will, in turn, result into more money. Although some of the facts that the workers

In Charles Murray’s essay “Are Too Many People Going to College,” he believes that the concept of college has changed over the years. According to him, a four-year college is no longer as necessary as it was when it was first created because most jobs requires more on job training. He also adds to his reasoning by mentioning that because of the advancement of internet, physical libraries and the physical proximity of student and teachers is less important. Because of the changes he noticed he believes that people should go to college but not for liberal education. He makes the claim that the basic core knowledge of liberal education should be learned in elementary and middle school and that only people with high academic abilities should be encouraged to go to college. He finishes his argument by saying that instead of liberal education, most people would be better if they focus on career education in college. While I agree with Murray’s idea that people would benefit from getting a liberal education before college, I disagree with his statement that liberal education is not needed in college. Due to the wide range of knowledge a liberal education provides it can help a person become more adaptable to the constant change and demand of the job market, allow that person to have an advantage over another, and ultimately help a person figure out what they feel more comfortable doing in

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.”

If anyone has ever went to high school, then they have heard about college. Everyone has a different point of view on the idea of college. Part of it depends on how someone was raised. If a person’s parent or guardian drilled the idea of college into your head, or if they told you ‘do what you want’ or ‘I don 't care’, or ‘You’re not going’. While college is great, there are other means of education.The value of college is a low because there are people who do not qualify for a college education, and also because there are other ways of post-secondary education other than college.

In Should The Obama Generation Drop Out Charles Murray talks about the flaws found in the Obama education plan . He brings to the attention of the public the fact that many student in America graduate lacking the skills necessary for the proper college education. Murray goes on to argue that in today 's society students who graduate from High-school go on to technical college to pursue a vocational education in their field of study; whereas, older generations have pursued an all around education, enrolling in classes that were irrelevant to the career they were pursuing. Murray claims that if you test the vast majority of Americans (including himself) in the more rigorous subjects, they would most likely fail. Murray mentions that he does

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

Throughout the essay, Charles Murray stresses the idea that college is the wonderland of finding oneself and to find the career that one would want to follow for the rest of their lives. “College is seen as the open sesame to a good job and a desirable way for adolescents to transition to adulthood. Neither reason is as persuasive as it first appears.” Murray, C (2008) Practically spoken, this is not normally the case. College is a fair amount of work, much more work than one would normally acquire through any course of a high school or secondary school setting. In no way saying that the average student cannot meet the requirement and achieve success over the amounted work, it would also be ridiculous to expect every graduate