Boyette 1 Nigel Boyette Mrs.

Flippin English 214 1/31/2012 A College Education When we think of college we generally consider it to be a place of higher education where young students go to learn and earn their degrees, so that they may become self reliant adults. For some college is just a place to earn a degree, to others it might represent the utopia of educated thought and reason. In the article Live and Learn, by Louis Menand, we are introduced to three theories of what college is or should be. Theory one states that college is a mechanism for determining the more intelligent members of society. Theory two states that college is a place that socializes, empowers, and produces intelligent and like minded people. While on the other hand, Theory three says that college is merely a place where people can be taught what they need to know in order to perform their jobs. We also are introduced to an anonymous professor(Professor X) who believes that every student having the opportunity to get a liberal education is a waste of resources because most students are not qualified. Therefore, he proposes to put kids on a tracking program around the age of 13, which will decide if they go on to get a liberal education at a university, or if they go to a vocational career school based on their early grades. Although Professor X's tracking approach seems like a highly efficient way to process students, I tend to agree more with a Theory two approach, because I believe that people who want to pursue a liberal education should have the right to; educational paths are not something to be predetermined at an age where the children dont really know what they want to do. Professor X's tracking system is unfair to kids and flawed. The tracking system works by sorting kids based on previous academic merit. The kids with better grades go unto the college track, while the kids with lower grades go unto the vocational career track. This is grossly unfair, not only does it not

Boyette 2 give the student a choice, but it also judges young preteen children who dont know the lifelong consequences of scoring poorly on examinations early in their childhood. This system does not give out second chances, nor does it account for late intellectual bloomers. Once your on a certain path your there until its completion. Such a huge importance on early examinations can put a huge amount of stress on children as well, parents tend to do whats best for their children and they know the gateway to a better life lies with rigorous study. Kids in other countries who follow this system study more each day on average in grade school than most kids in America study in high school. Believe it or not I dont think this is actually a good thing, I say let kids have a childhood, let them have fun, because you only get to be a kid once. People put a very high value on college, and some will pay upwards to 50,000 dollars a year to put their kids through private colleges such as Hartford and Stanford. They do this in order to provide the best possible education for their kids, but just because it costs more money doesnt mean its necessarily a better education, its all what the student puts into it. And as a matter of fact according to two sociologists Arum and Roksa, either students are not studying as hard in school or colleges are not teaching to the standard they were years ago. Arum and Roksa put this to the test by testing 2000 freshman in 2005 then testing them again later in 2007 in the following areas; critical thinking, analytical reasoning, problem solving, and writing. The test showed that no significant improvement occurred in 45% of the students tested. While this is troubling I do not believe that the colleges or faculty can be fully if at all responsible, the students themselves must be held responsible for their own academic success or failure. In the short time Ive attended college I have already learned much more comparatively with what I have learned in high school, because I have paid attention and have worked hard to get good grades. In other words my opinion is that people overly value high priced schools, in reality the actual learning lies with the student. Professor X might say that some if not most students are unteachable when it comes to literature and writing, he thinks that these students are unqualified to attend college. The fact is without the right

Boyette 3 motivations kids just wont care about certain classes. For example students in community college who plan on becoming firemen dont need nor care about literature, the motivation just isnt there. But whether or not they care about it, those classes help them become well rounded and like minded adults. The skills taught in generalized educational classes such as philosophy and critical thinking help us become better thinkers and more well versed in the language of the intellectual community. Professor X's tracking system in my opinion is ridiculous, I have been raised under the belief that everyone regardless of background and past mistakes could have the chance to get into college somewhere and if that person worked hard enough he/she could get a degree. Predetermining peoples educational paths in essence takes away their freedom to choose their own destinies. Even though I would consider myself a theory two person, I also understand that the other theories have valid points as well. It is my greater understanding that college cannot be followed by one theory alone, because people attend college for different reasons. A combination of all three theories makes for the most sound conclusion to the true purpose of college. Whether here for our degree or our job, everyone who attends college learns something important that sticks with them for the rest of their lives.

Work Cited Menand, Louis. Live and Learn English 214 Course Reader. SFSU. Text. 2012