Both articles use rhetorical strategies to convey the purpose of their article to the reader. Charles Murray uses interesting anecdotes, understandable logical reasoning, and relevant statistics to facilitate his non-traditional ideas clearly to the reader. On the other hand, through the use of credibility Stephanie Owen and Isabel Sawhill uses assertions, logical reasoning, and statistics to educate the readers, however, the unintentional result is a paper with tone and word choice that is difficult to understand for much of the target audience. Therefore, the article that should be published is Charles Murray’s “Are too many people going to college?”
Charles Murray’s article “Are too many people going to college?” Murray indirectly claims …show more content…
They say, “With tuitions rising faster than family incomes, the typical college student is now more dependent than in the past on loans, creating serious risks for the individual student and perhaps for the system as a whole, should widespread defaults occur in the future” (Owen and Sawhill 212). This is another example where the authors use logical reasoning to explain their points to their reader. The average household income rates are decreasing and the average debt rates are increasing which makes the average person in debt. Sawhill, being an economist, has all credibility to be able to make this assertion too. However, as stated before in the article, correlation doesn’t imply causation. There could be multiple factors that cause household income to fall and college debt to increase, such as the baby boomers retiring and more people going to college. Not only is this example a bit misleading, it also plays to the emotion of fear. Saying household income rates are falling and student debt rates are rising elicits fear in a reader debating on whether college is an appropriate path. This fear of college debt may result in the reader making a wrong decision about going to college based on this article. While the authors may have meant this example as well intended, the last few sentences of their article are a bit
Charles Murray’s article “Are too many people going to college?” Murray indirectly claims …show more content…
They say, “With tuitions rising faster than family incomes, the typical college student is now more dependent than in the past on loans, creating serious risks for the individual student and perhaps for the system as a whole, should widespread defaults occur in the future” (Owen and Sawhill 212). This is another example where the authors use logical reasoning to explain their points to their reader. The average household income rates are decreasing and the average debt rates are increasing which makes the average person in debt. Sawhill, being an economist, has all credibility to be able to make this assertion too. However, as stated before in the article, correlation doesn’t imply causation. There could be multiple factors that cause household income to fall and college debt to increase, such as the baby boomers retiring and more people going to college. Not only is this example a bit misleading, it also plays to the emotion of fear. Saying household income rates are falling and student debt rates are rising elicits fear in a reader debating on whether college is an appropriate path. This fear of college debt may result in the reader making a wrong decision about going to college based on this article. While the authors may have meant this example as well intended, the last few sentences of their article are a bit