He states that just because you start your career, it does not mean that that is where your education ends. (Hrabowski 260). Hrabowski focuses on helping the public good because to him that is what being educated is all about. It is not about how much money you will make; it is about helping the people around you. The author also points out that the lack of counseling, when it comes to helping the students decide which college or what education, plays a role in why less than 10 percent of students have earned a college degree by the age of 24 (Hrabowski 261). It is hard for a student so young to decide which educational path to take, and with the lack of help, the decision will only be prolonged because there is no one there to help set or meet goals. Hrabowski also argues that there is data out there showing that employers look for people with a college degree so to this he says, “college graduates aren’t suckers; they’re the winners in a globally competitive economy (Hrabowski 260). Although we are putting a lot of time, effort, and a lot of money into college, we are the ones who will benefit financially because our salaries will be a lot higher than those of high school …show more content…
The difference in both of these authors is that Hrabowski does focus some of his argument in helping others benefit from the graduate’s education, and not just letting the education process end once the graduate has earned their job. Both authors do make a point when they talk about how we need to make a wise decision when it comes to deciding where we are going and what we will major in, but Hrabowski elaborates more because he argues that we do not have the resources to make the right decisions. Counselors do lack knowledge and experience to help us in our selections. If more counselors were able to help students decide on which college to go to, depending on each of their personalities, then college would be a great experience for everyone and there would be more graduation rates because everyone would be