632 Words3 Pages

Clifford Adelman states that, “Among high school students who graduated in the bottom 40 percent of their classes, and whose first institutions were four-year colleges, two-thirds had not earned diplomas eight and a half years later.” (121 qt. in Nemko). How is this data justifying our understanding of what influences the people’s success rate? Why should we believe there is a connection between a person’s high school class and their success rate in college? It is admirable that Nemko wants colleges more accountable towards the success of each student entering their campus, but his argument does not seem as if colleges are his target. His argument seems as if it is towards the parents of each individual hoping to get accepted into four-year colleges after high-school. Furthermore, His choice of words creates an image of the author having a one-on-one with every college hopeful’s parent while the hopeful is at the kid’s table listening in. His tone is also undermining, and creates a hierarchy. Those words blame and maintain the status of all disadvantaged students, and categorize them as inferior to all who come from wealthy households. …show more content…

Nemko believes this method will help the country, but does not show quantitative data supporting his claim. Without that, there is no information on the efficacy of his claim. Therefore, Nemko is appealing to ignorance. Nemko’s suggestion hasn’t been proven false, so he creates the space for the reader to conform to him by questioning the accountability of universities. Nemko also displays an either or fallacy. Nemko mentions the benefits of his solution as if it is not possible with the methods that are currently in

Open Document