Hacker And Dreifus Analysis

438 Words1 Page

The social standard seems to be that after finishing high school, students should attend college in order to have a bright future, but Andrew Hacker and Claudia Dreifus, in “Are Colleges Worth the Price of Admission?” question that notion. Colleges are trying to do too much, yet none of it is done well, they assert. However, in “Give Colleges More Credit,” Barry Glassner and Morton Schapiro argue the norm of many attending college will continue, despite the claims of those critical of the higher education system. The overwhelming amount of debt is an argument Hacker and Dreifus make against college. The “staggering loans…, six figures’ worth of debt” makes Hacker and Dreifus wonder if college is a good investment. Conversely, Glassner and Schapiro claim that students have relatively small amounts of debt, if any, making the investment one of worth, considering that those with a college education make more than their high school counterparts. Hacker and Dreifus uphold that professors and presidents have lost track of their purpose. They believe that professors receive too many sabbaticals and are too focused on teaching their own published works. Additionally, Hacker and Dreifus argue that the quality of teaching also declined; professors with tenure become lazy and …show more content…

Hacker and Dreifus note that many students should become more thoughtful and educated in fields other than vocational ones during their time in college. Glassner and Schapiro agree with that assertion, admitting that they are concerned that while in college, their students receive the practical knowledge as well as more sophisticated intelligence so that they can become leaders, prepared to address prominent societal issues rather than simply having a

Open Document