Critique on Why College Isnt for Everyone

Rising college fees in America has sparked many debates. Through the article Why
College Isnt for Everyone, Richard Vedder aims to convince readers of Bloomberg
Businessweek that by looking at the costs and benefits of enrolling in college, it is clearly not
suitable for most. (Para 1) Vedder is an economics professor at Ohio University and director
of Centre for College Affordability and Productivity (CCAP). He is also the author of Going
Broke by Degree: Why College Costs Too Much, which highlights the increasing cost of
higher education. Vedders arguments may appear strong, however his assumptions and
evidence of questionable credibility weakens his points. Coupled with his condescending
tone and choice of words, his analysis of the issue becomes narrow and slightly biased.
Firstly, Vedder makes assumptions and builds his arguments around it, showing the
lack of insight when crafting his arguments. He assumed that all students who did not score
well in high school will drop out of college as university graduates were better students in
high school. (Para 2) Vedder failed to consider the fact that there are many students who
did not do well in high school yet managed to excel in college. In addition, not all students
that did well in high school will definitely be able to complete college. After all, the
difference between high school and college is huge and many factors, such as level of
maturity and difference in interests, would have played a part. This reflects that Vedders
elitist mindset and it has influenced his points in the article, resulting in a loss of
persuasiveness as it is a narrow point of view.
Secondly, Vedder quoted statistical data to support his stand; however he did not
reference or cite his sources, making the data questionable. He claimed that more than 40
percent of students enrolled in four-year courses would drop out and there are more than
100,000 cleaners and 16,000 valets that own a degree. (Para 3, 5) Being unable to verify the
validity of his data really raises doubts about his arguments, making it unconvincing to
readers.
Lastly, Vedder used a rather condescending tone, causing the article to seem like a
biased analysis. Specifically, words like unequivocally shows that Vedder is adamant about
his stand that students with below average results should not attend college. (Para 1)
Vedder is also judgemental towards those who failed to graduate from college by claiming
that graduates are smarter, implying that the rest are not as bright which in fact is not
true. (Para 2) The words he uses and passing of judgements would leave a negative
impression on readers, causing them to likely reject his arguments.
In conclusion, there might be some valid points in Vedders article, however his
assumptions and tone clouded his arguments. If only he presented his arguments in a
measured tone, backed up with solid evidence, then he would be able to convince readers.