Also, this person covered every topic that others can argue about: finance, education, and future paths. He says the necessary finance may be greater at an elite university, but many more future paths have opened up and the quality of education is greater than that of those at a normal 4-year univeristy.
On the other hand, the least persuasive person is Luis Fuentes-Rohwer. Of the craziest thigns he can say, he says:
"a positive effect on the likelihood that a student will graduate; on future earnings; on the likelihood that a student will attend graduate school; and even to lower divorce rates and better health."I can agree with Rohwer that the chance the student will graduate, earn more money, or attend graduate school is greater, but I also think Rohwer is on crack. An education has absolutely no effect on health or marriage. There may be a spouse who wants to marry an educated person, but sitting in a classroom at Harvard does not affect your health any different from sitting ina classroom at US San Francisco. Everything that you do at a younger age affects what happens when you're older. It's just likely that the kids who went to Stanford or Princeton were well beehaved at ate their vegetables.
Other than making absolutely no sense, he went off topic. the question is would going to an elite university gives more benefits. Rohwer went off talking about race and how white people have a higher chance of getting into an elite university. This issue was not asked about and confuses the reader like it did to me. I was wondering what he wanted to talk about.
http://hldepartmentofwriting.blogspot.com/2011/01/uses-of-may-and-might-in-debate.html... I respond here... it just that it not complete yet, as of the moment i am writing, this i am also playing rom while making flash card (oh shit, a 127 dura!) so ill finish it later, but feel free to read it.
ReplyDelete