Nicole Anders Informal Writing #5

The articles read, including I’m Not Paying for my Son’s College Tuition and There’s No College Tuition “Bubble:” Education is Underpriced have multiple similarities and differences concerning the cost of tuition and for college education in the 21^st century. In both articles, the columnists proclaim that they believe that the cost of college tuition is far cheaper or manageable than it should be and that the price should be increased or stay at a constant. This may alienate the audiences of the two columnists to a more limited amount of people who would agree or side with their views. The columnist of There’s No College Tuition “Bubble:” Education is Underpriced, seems to cater to an audience of parents who may not have children in college, potentially parents of young children, and those who expect their children to pay for their college tuition. While the writer of I’m Not Paying for my Son’s College Tuition gains the focus of the parents who are contemplating or not paying for their children to go to college. Either articles could be considered to be very controversial, given the financial state of some families and even though the arguments portrayed are focused on two different family perspectives, they both agree that the cost of a college education is too low for the benefits that one receives from completing college and earning a degree. In both arguments, the columnists use appeals towards logic in order to prove their points. While in one article, the columnist discussed the financial help one can easily receive for college in the present day and focuses on the living moment, the other uses information that concerned the future and the increase in income a college graduate will receive and how the benefits from the actual degree will be beneficial in the long run. In I’m Not Paying for my Son’s College, the writer used emotional appeals through the experiences that she had faced when she dealt with the financial situation, herself.  Both the author and her husband had to pay for college and graduate school because their parents would not help them and by proving to her audience that neither her husband or herself have to pay for their college tuition, anymore because they worked, saved and received money. This personal inquiry proves to the parents who may be reluctant about the author’s opinion that if the writer herself went through it, that she is a reliable and knowledgeable about her argument. In the other article, the writer focuses on using more logical appeals to persuade his audience to believe that the benefits and financial increase that one receives from going to college is significantly greater than the cost of tuition and going to college, itself. Both articles are very selective about the appeals used to convey their argument in a stronger and more rounded manner. Neither article really sparked my interests, although their points and arguments were valid and reasonable because I have already been in attendance at a university and understand the financial complications that my family and I personally have to face and the persuasion of a few individuals based on their individual circumstances wouldn’t affect my opinions.