“Waking Up and Taking Charge” by Anya Kamenetz. This article talks about college students and how we can take control of our lives/money back. It is very much involved around money and how college students come out of school with so much debt. The author gives helpful suggestions about how we can take the control back and what action we can take. She also talks about how people in Canada and in America are taking control of the situation and actually doing something about their debt.

Kamenetz is a factual writer. She is very forth giving about the information she has and she has information to back up the information. She clearly has done her research about college debt and what we as college students or parents can do to help lower or pay off our debt. She talks about how we should take charge of our student loans by forming a PAC. She puts readers to ease when she talks about how if you have debt you don’t need to worry because there are ways to get out of it. She brings facts into the article when she starts talking about Canada and everything they have done and how they aren’t just done yet, that there is still more to come. She mentions a few programs that have been successful and that have been put out there for students to use. She is giving so many different resources and I believe that if used in the right way can be very beneficial.

I think the author has a great idea with joining a PAC. I think when Ferguson says “We’re trying to find a way to support mainstream, bipartisan, middle-of-the-road issues that affect all of us on a day-to-day basis,” that he truly want to help everyone because, he understands the struggle with debt and that joining the PAC is allowing him to not only help himself but others. I believe that a student run PAC would be very beneficial and would help students tremendously with student loans and debt. I go to school on a very good scholarship due to my active role in the Ohio National Guard. Now the guard helps with my schooling but somethings I still have to pay out of my own pocket and no it is not a lot but it is still quite a bit. Now for people who chose a different path in life that is perfectly okay but they might struggle a bit more with having to pay for schooling. I feel that those people shouldn’t to suffer in debt and that there should be something else for them, and Kamenetz is giving it to them in this article. She is giving them a life line that they can chose to grab onto and make their lives a whole lot easier having no debt because, they are choosing to do something about it.

I personally like this author. Now I know my opinion is not yours and you have to make one for yourself but she articulates herself well. She gets her points across without making you feel like this is your only option. She gives her suggestions as to what her research has proven successful and from there allows the reader to for their own opinion, but she doesn’t do this without her facts and that’s what I like. She gives the facts and isn’t pressuring you into anything. She is however persuading the readers because after reading her article she wants us to go out and take action and do something about our debt.

She is a reasonable reasoner because she isn’t arguing for herself she is doing it for the readers because she is thinking about them and not herself and just her points. She wants to help her audience. She is also reasonable because she in very informative about her content. She knows what she is talking about and she is able to articulate it very well to her audience. She also is fair, she knows that her way isn’t the only correct way and she mentions it but she is critical on herself in that way but that was all that I was able to pick apart in her writing, so I don’t think she is very self critical but she does make it a point to say something. I believe that the information she provided was good but I wanted more. She gave the readers just enough information to calm their nerves about debt and that there are ways put of it but, she didn’t give me personally enough details. She talks about PAC and VA21 but I would have liked to know a bit more about it. I know that this is an article and if I truly wanted more information that I can research it on my own after reading the article but, I feel as if that is the authors job to give me that much information that I shouldn’t have to research it on my own.

In conclusion I believe that Anya Kamenetz is a good writer and gives reader the facts. I think she writes well to her audience and that her information will be able to help a lot of college students and parents. She is well informed and isn’t just writing to make her point but to help her audience the best way she knows how.

CLAIM: You should join a student run PAC for political change against college debt

QUALIFIER: ‘Should’, The claim isn’t a definite thing, joining a PAC isn’t a thing that will work all of the time and she shows that using a counterargument

EXCEPTIONS: The exception to this is that if the PAC is backed by a bank company (example being VA21 because they’re backed by Bank of America), you can’t stand against issues involving bank companies (credit card interest rates). PACs aren’t always effective because you need to get funding from someone, and the funding will influence what you can and can’t do since you want to keep your sponsors happy first to ensure that the funding doesn’t stop coming

REASON 1: It would help students leverage their numbers against colleges

EVIDENCE 1: page 411, paragraph 25

REASON 2: You need to do something political in order to convince government leaders

EVIDENCE 2: Paragraph 2

WARRANT: The thing that relates these reasons is that you need to get involved in politics in order to spark change in tuition and the way colleges work and get their funding. I would agree with this, the government holds all of the power with college budgets so if you want tuition to change, you need to get the government involved. Waiting around won’t do anything, in fact, people have already been waiting around long enough and the author is tired of it.

COUNTER ARGUMENTS: One of the very few counter arguments that the other writes about is where PACs get their funding from. All she says is that VA21 is backed by Bank of America so they can’t face issues like unfair credit card marketing, but the government is still listening to them more. She doesn’t go too deep into this because basically the issue she is describing is that since they’re backed by a certain company, they are getting their funding from them. This company has a little bit of control over what that PAC will vote for or support. If the PAC wants to go against something that the company does, they would lose their funding. This means that if you’re backed by a credit card company, you can’t address issues relating to credit cards. It limits what you can say and do, but she only mentions it a little bit

I believe that college debt is a real thing and there are many ways to handle it. Kamenetz makes good points and offers good solutions to what you can do to save money and pay off your debt. Kamenetz talks about using PAC and AARP and these are good viable solutions to debt issues and can help but its not as easy as Kamenetz makes it seem. There might be more that goes into it and it might be a lot of work but at the end of the day if it helps with the debt issues then the article is giving good helpful advice and resources.

8. Characters because of they way she states her values (if you’re impatient, like me) & reason that builds case that supports PAC organizing (which is her claim)

9. The aim of argument in this essay is persuasion because she is trying to get more readers to join her side and take action with her. It also appeals to reason which is what I answered on #8

10. She is a reasonable reasoner because she is well-informed, arguing with audience in mind (college students, especially young people in college) and knows the context of the argument. She isn’t very self-critical but I think she does a good enough job wit the other criteria that she is still considered a reasonable reasoner. Counter argument is that PAC can be evil because it can be a little corrupt, this makes her self-critical.

1. reason: almost everyone who goes to college comes out with college debt

character: “when I attended Tulane University back in the 70’s the tuition was 2,500 now its over 60,000.”

emotion: refer to paragraph 4 on page 403 of The Aims of Argument.

Style: paragraph 6 on page 403 of The Aims of Argument

2. I think he is using Convincing because he is trying to make a point that college is expensive for no reason but he isn’t calling for action.

3. Yes he is a reasonable reasoner because he follows all the criteria that is required. He is well informed, and relatable because he understands student debt.

4. Yes because he provides strong evidence and he uses good sources who are also creditable.

pg 408

1. college and college debt

2. That college is expensive

3. yes because she has more knowledge than I do about this stuff and can be more imformative

4. not very controversial

5. collegestudents because were the ones who has to deal with it and pay for it

6. The colleges because they are making money off of it and don’t want to change

7. she wants us to join a PAC to make political change. paragraph 25 page 411. reason to leverage their numbers

1. The value of a degree has gone down because you could get the same education at any college. But you are taken more seriously if you go to a big name collage that is more expensive.

2. reason: almost everyone who goes to college comes out with college debt

character: “when I attended Tulane University back in the 70’s the tuition was 2,500 now its over 60,000.”

emotion: refer to paragraph 4 on page 403 of The Aims of Argument.

Style: paragraph 6 on page 403 of The Aims of Argument

3. I think he is using Convincing because he is trying to make a point that college is expensive for no reason but he isn’t calling for action.

4. Yes he is a reasonable reasoner because he follows all the criteria that is required. He is well informed, and relatable because he understands student debt.

Claim: respect from the government and politics

Reason: “rolled over by greedy middle-aged and older people who have been expropriationg our earnings for generations.”

Evidence: “The federial government gives out most student financial aid.”

1. it is very controversial.

2. The college students and parents or guardians would agree with her because they are the ones paying and are in debt.

3. Colleges and the government might disagree because it is more of a bad look on them.

1. Her proposal is very controversial. The people who would agree with her would be the people playing college sports. The people who wouldn’t agree with her would be the Drama people. The people who play sports would agree because it would benefit them in more ways. The people in Drama would disagree because they would most likely say “the athelets are the ‘cool’ popular ones and they get all the attention nobody comes to our performances they all go to games” etc…

Claim : The point of her essay is to get college athletes a major within what sport they are playing.

Reason : Because drama people are able to major in what they are doing but athletes can’t.

Evidence : Toni Dorfman (head of Yale) agreed and said “What a wonderful idea”

Evidence : There are already textbooks available on sports law and origins.

Evidence : NCAA stated mission would back up the reason for why colleges should offer this major.

1. The value of a degree has gone down because you could get the same education at any college. But you are taken more seriously if you go to a big name collage that is more expensive.

Claim: the cost of college and student loans

reason: as time goes on costs go up and it goes up the better the school is, and if you go to that better school you get a better education and therefore you get a better job etc…

Evidence: In The Aims the author provides the tuition costs of each school and the student loan debt.

1. I believe they should have been persuading us. They should have wanted us to be on their side of the argument.

2. They weren’t really persuading the audience they were using dialogue to talk back and forth to one another. They were talking amongst themselves how to “kill” this old man.

3. Well-informed ; they didn’t have enough information.

Self Critical; they weren’t seeing the other side of the argument they thought their ideas were right and that was it.

Argue with their audiences or readers in mind; they weren’t arguing with readers in mind they were arguing for their own “hypothetical” theory

Arguments context; they weren’t arguing in the future they were arguing in the present and were only arguing to benefit the person in the example.

4. Steve persuaded Steven into agreeing with his side by saying if you agree I will give you what you want. Which was a way to kill off an old rich man. Steven didn’t stick to his argument enough.

It can help me with making better points and that it can show me new and improved way to make my point. It can help me break down the writing and understand it better.