A controversial debate has been at hand for several years. Many view education as learning from your outside surroundings and gaining information through first-hand contact. Knowing information is one aspect, but the ability to apply the knowledge is another. In "How To Get a Real Education," Scott Adams argues that students should choose courses that are practical to daily life and therefore should not have to sit through the monotonous classes taught today. According to Adams, if someone is not "book smart," they should not have to sit through the same courses as those heading for that 4.0 GPA; it is a waste of time. While having "street smarts" is a crucial component to surviving in society, the same can be said of "book smarts." His outline …show more content…
Scott Adams fills his essay full of verbal fallacies that take away from his initial theme of finding his/her passion. These two quotes use the fallacy of the "straw man argument." “That was the year I learned everything I know about management,” and, “That was the year I learned everything I know about getting buy-in” (99). He is trying to prove the argument that all his education/learning experiences came from practical knowledge. This over exaggeration and overstatement takes away from his argument. It cannot be validated because school is proven to build character and hard-work ethics ("EdLab"). Due to his assumptions, his credibility is under question. Next, he uses “hasty generalizations” in the opening sentence by saying, “I understand why the top students in America study physics, chemistry, calculus and classic literature” (98). Through inductive generalizations, he rushes to a conclusion that all top students study in a certain field, which is a false statement. Along with verbal fallacies, Adams carries a bias throughout the essay. He says, "That's my starter list that would serve B students well" (101). While yes, the information can aid the "B" students to become more successful, it can pertain to anyone with any grade. His use of these segregating statements narrows the window of his audience …show more content…
However, after concluding the essay, it is clear that the title is misleading. From the first paragraph, it is gathered that the essay's theme is to teach "B" students to find their niche and pursue their goals. He builds on this idea momentarily by speaking about his journey to discovering his love of entrepreneurship and the college that molded his experiences. For all that, this is where the fluency in his essay "hits a brick wall." Adams goes on tangents about how he manipulates "the system" as an entrepreneur. He hatches a plan to become the student manager of their dorm and be paid for his services. Finding a "loophole" in the system, he is successful in his scheme to fire all of the professional staff (99). He gives a false theme that his success comes from deceitfulness, not from finding his passion. "That's the year I learned that if there's a loophole, someone's going to drive a truck through it, and the people in the truck will get paid better than the people under it" (99). He uses this strategy of finding a "loophole" to gain success, and covers up the manipulative tactic by calling it "entrepreneurship." Is this an appropriate lesson to pinpoint in an essay titled "How To Get a Real Education"? He concludes by saying, "Remember, children are our future, and the majority of them are B students. If that doesn't scare you, it probably should" (101). First off, this
“We want to emphasize that the personal characteristics and skills of each individual are equally important”. (Page #221, para #3) Owen and Sawhill are inquiring that to be successful in any major requires dedication and personal motivation, which is another example of the authors bringing pathos into their argument. Owen and Sawhill state that “if they don’t just enroll but graduate, they can improve their lifetime prospects”. (page #220, para #1) Owens and Sawhill statement is taken as, applying with great intensions is not good enough to be successful in college. Owen and Sawhill are completely open about the fact that college isn’t for everyone and that’s perfectly acceptable. “It may be that for a student with poor grades who is on the fence about enrolling in a four-year program, the most bang-for-the-buck will come from vocationally-oriented associate’s degree or career-specific technical training”. (Page #222, para #1) this statement opens the argument to be about both, is college worth it financially, and also academically. Owens and Sawhill want their reader to understand that, being pushed to achieve something that you have no passion for attaining, only robs someone of their true
The journey begins at the heart of the matter, with a street smart kid failing in school. This is done to establish some common ground with his intended audience, educators. Since Graff is an educator himself, an English professor at the University of Illinois in Chicago, he understands the frustrations of having a student “who is so intelligent about so many things in life [and yet] seems unable to apply that intelligence to academic work” (380). Furthermore, Graff blames schools for not utilizing street smarts as a tool to help improve academics; mainly due to an assumption that some subjects are more inherently intellectual than others. Graff then logically points out a lack of connection “between any text or subject and the educational depth and weight of the discussion it can generate” (381). He exemplifies this point by suggesting that any real intellectual could provoke thoughtful questions from any subject, while a buffoon can render the most robust subjects bland. Thus, he is effectively using logic and emotion to imply that educators should be able to approach any subject critically, even non-traditional subjects, lest they risk being labeled a buffoon.
In “Life is Not Measured by Grade-Point Averages” by H. Bruce Miller, Miller announces that a young lady named Gabrielle Napolitano was suing the University for accusing her of plagiarism in her paper. Napolitano hired a lawyer and built the case stating that the so called “plagiarism” was just a, quote “technical error” (Miller, par.2). Miller announces this problem but doesn’t get his true argument out until the last few paragraphs of his paper, stating that students need to stop worrying about their grades or grade-point averages and need to start enjoying the process of learning, to embrace the knowledge and use it without the fear of lack of money in the back of their minds. Miller uses strong terminology throughout his paper and keeps the paper at a fast-pace to retrieve the audiences full attention and to also keep it until the end, he also uses antonomasia to refer back to his university, making his style of writing very entertaining; however, Miller fails to accept Napolitano’s feelings about the problems at hand and makes a huge assumption that she is only concentrated on her grade-point average, fails to appeal to his audiences beliefs, and includes inappropriate fallacies in his paper. Even though Miller has weaknesses in his paper, he did a good job using the proper style in his paper to keep the reader’s attention and to get his argument that people need to enjoy learning and not just be in it for the money across.
bell hooks’s essay, "Keeping Close to Home", uses three important components of argument (ethos, pathos, and logos) to support her claim. hooks develops her essay by establishing credibility with her audience, appealing to the reader’s logic, and stirring their emotions. She questions the role a university should play in the life of a nation, claiming that higher education should not tear a student away from his roots, but help him to build an education upon his background.
The third essay that I covered was Clueless in Academe by Gerald Graf. I could agree and disagree with this one. I agree with the fact that there is some disconnect with the schools and the real world with the schools not preparing students well enough. I do not agree with the fact that this could cause students to not be prepared because many young people these days just do not care or think about the future. You may have some students that are very motivated and have everything planned out for when they get out of school but most do not.
In recent years, many have debated whether or not a college education is a necessary requirement to succeed in the field of a persons’ choice and become an outstanding person in society. On one hand, some say college is very important because one must contribute to society. The essay Three Reasons College Still Matters by Andrew Delbanco shows three main reasons that students should receive their bachelor’s degree. On the other hand, many question the point of wasting millions of dollars on four years or maybe more to fight for highly competitive jobs that one might not get. Louis Menand wrote an article based on education titled Re-Imagining Liberal Education. This article challenges the main thought many americans have after receiving a secondary education. Louis Menand better illustrates the reasons why a student should rethink receiving a post secondary education better than Andrew Delbanco’s three reasons to continue a person’s education.
The film stated that only certain aspects of a subject are selected to teach because they are either useful to the teacher or they could cause trouble in the classroom. Education either frees the mind and allows you to think for yourself or it controls the mind. I believe the purposes of education is not only to teach the common subjects of math, english, science, and history, but also to teach students about issues in our world and about life in general and how to grow individually as a person. Teachers should be encouraging students to have their own opinions on matters and should also be teaching and introducing other skills. Society teaches that in order for anyone to be successful and have any social power, you have a proper education and to further after high school. People tend to look up and respect someone based on the highest level of education they achieve and the professional career they hold. Conversely, we tend to look down and have no respect for others who did not get a college education and simply have a technical or trade job. Personally, I disagree with this view. College is not for everyone and unlike the school system misleads you to believe, you can succeed even if you choose not to pursue a college education. Everyone has their own standards and level at where they are content with their
‘“It’s not that it makes you more intelligent,” says Phoebe, a history student. “It’s just that it helps you work. You can study for longer. You don’t get distracted. You’re actually happy to go to the library and you don’t even want to stop for lunch. And then it’s like 7pm, and you’re still, ‘Actually, you know what? I could do another hour.’” (Cadwalladr)
Miller closed her argument encourages putting first-generation student in the spotlight. Instead of focusing all of the country resources on students who already have it easy, we need to use it and make it affordable to attract more first-generation students. Miller last sentence reminds the reader of the story she opened her argument with, creating a nice circle for the reader to connect things. In this way Miller will not lose her follower. “We need to want the son of Beth’s friend to succeed as much as his mother does, for his own, his children’s, and our sakes”
(Owen and Sawhill 208) After all, if our country’s leader is preaching about college being a good thing, it should reflect the views of a majority of people in this country. They then continue to try to make connections with the audience by emphasizing that this is a “we” problem and by recognizing that the decision to go off to college is not an easy one for everybody. These first words in the essay demonstrate a call to the ethos of President Obama and clear cut pathos to bring the authors down to the same level as their audience; However, the rest of the essay is absolutely dominated by
When the department of admissions assessed whether or not Oher will be able to succeed as a student of Wingate Christian School, they find out that his GPA is .6, and he has an IQ of 80. Oher ranked where he did because he did not have the opportunity to go to school or to stimulate his education in any other way. He often wanted to just leave and gave up easily. Ways that Oher could develop his comprehension and reading skills would be to go to school, visit a library, or get a tutor. If he would take the time to learn and open a textbook, he would be able to go farther in his
...a career to something that guarantees a successful life. This negative light gives many student the ugly side of college that maybe it isn't as good as it sounds. The function of the essay to deter students from becoming like sheep and following social norms, Murray wants students to become informed before making decisions that can change the outcome of their life for many years.
In “Hidden Intellectualism”, author and professor Gerald Graff describes his idea of what book smarts and streets smarts actually are. He details how new ideas can help to teach and build our educational system into something great and that perhaps street smarts students could be the factor that traditional education is missing that could make it great.
Throughout the years, America has always debated whether education is needed- if it helps people succeed or not. The argument in the past was always over high school education, which is now mandatory. That decision has helped the US rise economically and industrially. Today, the US is in the middle of the same debate- this time, over college. Some, like David Leonhardt, a columnist for the business section of The New York Times, think a college education creates success in any job. Others, such as Christopher Beha, an author and assistant editor of Harper’s Magazine, believe that some college “education” (like that of for-profit schools) is a waste of time, and can even be harmful to students. Each stance on this argument has truth to it, and there is no simple answer to this rising issue in an ever changing nation full of unique people. Any final decision would affect the United States in all factions- especially economically and socially. However, despite the many arguments against college, there is overwhelming proof that college is good for all students, academically or not.
When Gerald Graff was younger he and his friends would have various debates about sports including what team had the best pitcher in baseball. Graff pointed out that while having these arguments with his friends, they would have evidence to support their thoughts whether it be using statistics to find batting averages or using their argumentative abilities in general to support their opinion. This proves that even people who do not do the best in school are capable of brilliant things, the school system just needs to encourage students to use their hobbies to enhance their academics. Instead of dividing the different forms of intelligence, book and street smarts could merge and grow into a more detailed educational system that can help not just with academics, but with life itself. While it is good to know proper grammar, knowing about dating, sports, or cars can actually get people farther than anticipated in life. Graff thought that in the school system, street smarts is perceived as less than compared to “book smarts” which are encouraged in school. If the two forms of intelligence were to merge instead of separate, the educational system can transform into something