College, or higher education, is something that is pressed upon many people in the modern day. Whether it is needed or not is still widely disputed. In Learning by Degrees Rebecca Mead discusses just this point. She questions the arguments of many others that are against obtaining a college degree. She herself believes that it is important to get a college degree, as long as the individual finds worth in the degree, regardless if its economics, liberal arts, or some other degrees.
She begins by discussing the effectiveness of certain college degrees. She states, “according to a survey conducted by the National Association of Colleges and Employers, graduates with math skills are more likely than their peers in other majors to find themselves promptly and gainfully employed.” (Mead 1). She then backs this evidence up with specific college majors and their success rates. She cites that, “The safest of all degrees to be acquiring this year is in accounting: forty-six per cent of graduates in that discipline have already been offered jobs.” (Mead 2). Mead then goes on to state that business and engineering majors are also highly valuable degrees, with forty-four percent of business majors having a job straight out of their respective colleges. She then criticizes the fact that a certain Richard K. Vedder, a college graduate himself, argues that people should reconsider college in the first place. She discusses Vedder questions why “eight out of the ten job categories that will add the most employees during the next decade—including home-health aide, customer-service representative, and store clerk—can be performed by someone without a college degree.” (Mead 2-3). Vedder also questions “why fifteen percent of mail carriers have bachelor’s degrees.” (Mead 3). She then criticizes Vedder once more, stating that his argument is economic. Vedder stated that they could have spent that money more wisely than on a college degree. Meads use of evidence is effective here. She is not only providing sound details for why certain majors are genuinely important, but also criticizes an argument pertaining to her own argument.
In her essay, she uses many different examples of very successful people to further her point. She states, “Within the sphere of business, a certain romance attaches to the figure of the successful college dropout, like Steve Jobs, who was enrolled at Reed for only a semester, or Bill Gates, who started at Harvard in 1973 but didn’t get his degree until it was granted, honorarily, thirty-four years later.” (Reed 3) She provides examples of possibly the most successful non-college graduates. Neither Steve Jobs nor Bill Gates graduated from their respective colleges, yet became some of the most successful businessmen in the world. I believe this is a very important point to make. Using such extreme examples shows exactly why these successful people are poor examples. Gates and Jobs are just two people, and do not represent the rest of the dropouts. Bill Gates and Steve Jobs may have been successful without degrees, but many other with degrees have been just as successful. There are many newcomers in the ranks of the most successful people that have earned college degrees in their respective fields. People like Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos have exceeded the wealth that was held by both of the dropouts, and both attended and graduated universities. Therefore, the evidence she uses is very effective, and shows exactly why you shouldn’t use the greatest successes to represent the masses.
Mead then continues on with similar evidence of Presidents of the United States, but in a different context. She writes, “On the political stage, too, having spent excessive hours in seminar rooms and libraries is widely regarded as a liability.” (Mead 3-4). Here she is stating that many people in politics get criticized for their college education. She brings up and example of George W. Bush, who went to both Yale and Harvard, and criticism of his education. Peggy Noonan, a worker for the Wall Street Journal, states that “He’s not an intellectual,” and that, “Intellectuals start all the trouble in the world.” She then goes on and provides another example of Bush’s education being criticized. She recalls when Sarah Palin, another politician, stated that she was “not one of those who maybe came from a background of, you know, kids who perhaps graduate college and their parents get them a passport and give them a backpack and say go off and travel the world.” Mead then denounces Palins criticism and cites that Palin had attended five different colleges within the span of three years. Bush is obviously a very educated individual, and Mead is showing that regardless of his education others still criticize him. She continues on to provide another example of a prior president, Barack Obama. The same argument against a college education that was made against Bush was also brought up against Obama. Like Noonan and Palin against Bush, Charles Murray stated that there is no need for any more intellectuals in the government. Mead even cites Murray’s education in her text as, “the political scientist Charles Murray (B.A., Harvard; Ph.D., M.I.T.).” I believe Mead is calling both Noonan, Palin, and Murray out on their hypocrisy in her writing. By stating that Noonan attempted many different colleges, and citing Murray’s schooling, she is obviously calling them out in some sort of way. I believe the claims and evidence she provides in this part of her writing is much more effective. Mead calls out the hypocrisy of others against college degrees. Bush and Obama both achieved the highest position in the United States, so for a journalist and political scientist to denounce their education, they don’t have much credibility.
Throughout Mead’s writing it is clear that her argument is supporting the attendance of a college or university. Her argument is that if the higher education is worth it to the individual in some way spiritually, economically, or intellectually, than it does not matter what the opinions of others is. It is not up to society to decide whether a college degree is truly worth the money or not.
Works Cited
Mead, Rebecca. “Learning by Degrees.” The New Yorker, The New Yorker, 31 May 2010, www.newyorker.com/magazine/2010/06/07/learning-by-degrees.
HR: None