Rough Draft

New technologies, such as the Internet and Google, have become a major part of people’s lives. There has been an increase in the dependance on the Internet for new information, social media, and communication. What do you use the Internet for? How has the Internet been beneficial to you? Many people have opposing opinions about how the Internet has shaped and affected human cognitive abilities. The main argument made by Thompson is that the vast increase in public writing inspired by the Internet is an important, new, beneficial change for individuals and for society. Whereas, Carr makes the argument that the Internet is hindering human cognitive abilities, such as their ability to concentrate. I personally believe that there are true factors in each author’s arguments. I will further analyze each author’s belief and provide my own opinion on the topic of how the Internet affects human thinking. 

Clive Thompson is the author of the article, “Public Thinking.” In his article, Thompson’s main purpose is to answer the underlying question of “how has the evolution of public writing affected and influenced people’s thinking?” His main argument is that the Internet and new digital technologies are beneficial to people and society. People believe that it has profound cognitive, cultural, and political implications. In many ways, the Internet has been advantageous to human thinking and writing abilities. Thompson provides various claims that support this argument such as that the new forms of digital writing significantly improves writing and thinking. The increase in writing due to digital technology has helped clarify thinking, generate ideas, and improve memory, according to Thompson. The increase also advances democracy and civil society. The new forms of writing expand connections and improve the social networks that support research. Thompson also claims that this new digital medial is creating a golden age for literacy because students are reading and writing more than in the past which results in better writers and improved thinking patterns. He introduces quotes from professional writers, provides anecdotes, and brings up research studies to support his claim. The arguments made by Thompson prove to be effective through his sub claims that are easily relatable to others. 

Through his article, “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” Carr gives an explanation of why he believes that the Internet is only negatively affecting human cognition and is detrimental to human concentration and contemplation. Carr uses personal experiences, scientific research, and past events to make his argument effective. He believes that people have become heavily reliant on the Internet and that it is hindering humans’ abilities to let the brain evolve. Instead of allowing people to use their own thought process to come up with possible answers or ways of reasoning, the Internet gives people all of the answers. Many people have stopped questioning things and have stopped thinking for themselves. Carr even admits that the Internet has become his main source of retrieving information. Carr brings up the blogger, Bruce Friedman, and Friedman introduces the idea that because of how times have changed and the dependance on the Internet, many people have lost the ability to read and absorb long articles or pieces of writing. As a result, people have turned to “a form of skimming activity.” Carr’s use of personal anecdotes and experiences of other helps make his argument more effective because these accounts have also been experienced by many other people. 

There is some truth to both of the arguments made by Thompson and Carr. I agree with Thompson when he states that the Internet can help to generate new ideas and can inform people on things that they did not know before, and I also agree with Carr when he states that because of the influence of the Internet, people’s brains are being hindered from evolving and humans are becoming unable to concentrate.Though these authors have stated some insightful reasons behind the effects of the Internet on human cognition, I think they are forgetting to realize that these factors only play a part depending on how and how much people use the Internet. The determining factor of how and how people use the Internet is a key aspect of how people are affected by these digital technologies. The amount of time spent using the Internet and the reasons why the Internet is being used ultimately makes the difference when determining both the positive and negative affects. If people limited their use and did not abuse the conveniences and aids of the Internet then maybe the negative affects stated by Carr would not occur. If people allowed their brain to analyze and contemplate information and situations then the Internet would not be needed as much. Allowing the brain to analyze things for itself would also allow the brain to evolve and retain new information. I believe that if people stopped taking advantage of what the Internet offers and used it during appropriate times, then the Internet could be a helpful and positive source of information and entertainment. Because of the heavy reliance on the Internet, the view of what the Internet has to offer is being turned into a negative connotation.  I have personally experienced both sides of the argument of how the Internet affects human cognition. I feel like my thinking has been enhanced and broadened after reading digital writings. I have learned things that I did not know about before and I gained that information from texts that I have read online. I have also been writing and reading more since the most common texts that I read are found online on social media sites. I have also experienced the drawbacks of using the Internet too often. I feel like my memory has been hindered due to the use of the Internet because I do not have to memorize many things. My ability to concentrate has also been diminished. I have never been a big fan of reading, therefore, I can relate to Carr’s claim that people are no longer able to read long pieces of writing without getting distracted. Especially because of the all of the different aspects of the Internet, it is easy for me to get distracted or to loose concentration because I am thinking about somethings else that I could be doing on the Internet. I have also limited my brain’s abilities by always turning to the Internet for answers. Instead of allowing my brain to analyze information and come up with ideas on its own, I turn to the Internet for answers. 

There has become a heavy reliance on the Internet over the years due to all of the new things that become available and it affects people in different ways. Different people have various opinions about how these new digital technologies are affecting human cognition. For example, Thompson believes that the Internet has been beneficial and has a positive affect on human thinking. He argues that the Internet helps clarify thinking, generate new ideas, and improve memory. Whereas, Carr believes that the Internet limits human thinking and diminishes people’s ability to concentrate. There is validity in both author’s arguments, and I have personally experienced many of the things they are saying happens from using the Internet. It is true that the Internet can teach people things that they did not know before and that it can hinder people’s ability to concentrate, but all of these things are solely dependent on why and how much people use the Internet. People should be turning to the Internet as a useful source and not abusing what it has to offer. 

Introduction: In the Introduction, I will state the main argument about how digital technology and the Internet are affecting human cognition skills. I will further analyze how those forms of technology positively and negatively affect human thinking. I will also be providing my own logic and reasoning about my position on the topic.

1st Body: In my first body paragraph, I will introduce Clive Thompson's article, "Public Thinking." I will give a brief summary about Thompson's belief that the Internet has a positive effect on human thinking and state the ways in which he backs up his argument. I will also state the strategies that he uses and further analyze his sub claim that the increase in writing with these technologies helps to clarify thinking, generate ideas, and improve memory. I will also state the effectiveness of his sub claim.

2nd Body: In my second body paragraph, I will move on to introducing Carr's article, "Is Google Making Us Stupid?" I will explain how Carr has opposite beliefs than Thompson on the topic of how the Internet is affecting human cognition. I will briefly summarize Carr's main argument that the Internet has negative affects on human thinking and how he backs up his argument. I will state what strategies Carr uses to explain his argument and then analyze his sub claim that the Internet lowers people's ability to concentrate. I will also state the effectiveness of his sub claim.

3rd Body: In my third body paragraph, I will introduce my own thoughts about the topic of how the Internet affects human cognition. I will first state how I agree with certain parts of each author's arguments and then state how there can be positive and negative effects of the Internet. I will provide my own anecdotes and personal experiences with the Internet and state how I have been affected. I will further explain my belief that the Internet's affect on others is solely based on how and how much people use the Internet.

Conclusion: In my conclusion, I will wrap up my argument by restating Thompson's and Carr's beliefs on the topic of the effects of the Internet. Then I will restate how I agree with certain parts of each author's argument and provide how I have personally been affected. I will also state why this topic is important and how it affects everyone.

Intro Paragraph

New technologies, such as the Internet and Google, have become a major part of people’s lives. There has been an increase in the dependance on the Internet for new information, social media, and communication. What do you use the Internet for? How has the Internet been beneficial to you? Many people have opposing opinions about how the Internet has shaped and affected human cognitive abilities. The main argument made by Thompson is that the vast increase in public writing inspired by the Internet is an important, new, beneficial change for individuals and for society. People believe that it has profound cognitive, cultural, and political implications. In many ways, the Internet has been advantageous to human thinking and writing abilities. Thompson provides various claims that support this argument such as that the new forms of digital writing significantly improves writing and thinking. The increase in writing due to digital technology helps clarify thinking, generate ideas, and improve memory. The increase also advances democracy and civil society. The new forms of writing expand connections and improve the social networks that support research. Thompson also claims that this new digital medial is creating a golden age for literacy because students are reading and writing more than in the past which results in better writers and improved thinking patterns. Through the analysis of three different works of writing by separate authors, I will determine how the Internet and new digital technologies are affecting human cognition, and I will provide my own personal analysis of the issue. 

Anecdote

I believe that my thinking has actually been enhanced and broadened after reading and writing online. I have either learned about things that I did not know about before or I have learned more about a specific topic that I was familiar with but did not know much about. Because of online social media and sites, I tend to read and write more often too. I am not a big fan of reading books but I will read interesting articles or posts that catch my eye on the Internet. I use various forms of social media online where I can read about what other people are doing and write about things that I am doing or thinking about. I also use these forms of social media to communicate with others, which is another way that I use reading and writing through the Internet. I have found clarity on topics when I use the Internet to find out information on things I did not know about before. I understand that everyone can see what I put online and that they Internet has an enormous audience. Once something is uploaded to the Internet, it is there forever. Information and pictures posted on the Internet can never be fully taken down; therefore, it is important to think about what one is putting on the Internet and to be responsible because they can never get it back. I feel like my memory has been hindered after using the Internet so much. I usually do not have to memorize that many things now that the Internet has become so prevalent in my life. The Internet helps me stay connected to my friends and people that I do not see on a regular basis through the use of various social media sites. These sites allow me to either look at people’s pictures or read their posts or chat with them through instant messaging. I think that my ability to concentrate has been lowered through the use of the Internet because there are so many things available online that distract me from doing the things i am supposed to be doing. Through the information online, it has challenged my thinking and shows me that there are things that I do not already know. I have gained more knowledge through reading things online because there are people that post their knowledge and it helps people to learn new things. 

Final Draft

Google and the Internet have made major impacts on our lives. Humans as a whole have all become heavily attached and dependent on advanced technology. The Internet has evolved tremendously in the short amount of time that it has been around, to the point that people are drawn to it because of the many things that it provides, from entertainment to informative knowledge. Have you ever thought about what role the Internet and Google have played in your life and how it has shaped your learning habits and thinking patterns? In the article, “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” Nicholas Carr argues that Google and the Internet cause negative effects on human cognition and are detrimental to human concentration and contemplation. I agree with Carr’s claim that the Internet and Google have negatively affected human thinking and cognition skills. Humans heavily rely on the Internet for information rather than finding out answers on their own. His argument proves to be persuasive to the audience as a result of the analysis of his personal experiences and the experiences of others and his theories about how the Internet has weakened human thinking processes. Carr uses the rhetorical strategies of logos, narration, and exemplification to argue his claims. I will analyze Carr’s claims and describe how he uses each rhetorical strategy to argue his points. I will also evaluate how effective one of his strategies is on persuading his audience.

Carr uses the rhetorical strategy of exemplification by the use of examples and cases to point out his claim. This strategy tends to be beneficial to people making an argument because it gives the audience real life accounts and experiences with the problem at hand. Carr introduces multiple examples of how the Internet has become a major part in shaping how the human brain works. He uses his own person experiences to back up his claim by showing what part the Internet plays on his own life. He says how “the Net is becoming a universal medium,” and is “the conduit for most of the information that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind.” Just like the majority of people these days, Carr shows how most of the information that he analyzes and receives comes directly from things displayed on the Internet. Carr also states that when he brings up these accounts with his friends, they too are experiencing the same effects. He uses the strategy of introducing his own personal experiences as examples of his claim to take his argument to a more personal level. He wants to show his audience and readers that this issue is not just affecting others but himself too. By using this strategy, Carr wants his audience to relate to his own accounts with how the Internet has played a part in his life and realize how the Internet is affecting their lives as well. This example further proves his previous claim by providing person experiences with the Internet and relating it to peoples’ lives. Carr also introduces the blogger Bruce Friedman into his writing. He describes how the Internet has altered his mental habits. He states, “I now have almost totally lost the ability to read and absorb a longish article on the web or in print.” Due to his heavy reliance and constant usage of the Internet, Friedman explains, “I can’t read War and Peace anymore. I’ve lost the ability to do that. Even a blog post of more that three or four paragraphs is too much to absorb. I skim it.” Friedman accurately exemplifies how a matured adult has lost touch with his ability to focus and comprehend long pieces of writing. This strategy of introducing an experienced blogger gives readers another perspective on the issue. Bruce Friedman’s account shows that even if a person was once a connoisseur of reading and writing that after becoming heavily reliant on the Internet those habits can change dramatically. Carr wants his audience to realize that even if they are experienced readers and writers, the Internet has the strong effect of diminishing those abilities if used too often. This helps to further his claim by showing readers another perspective of how the Internet is negatively affecting human cognition. The strategy of using examples to get his argument across to his audience proves to be effective. The use of exemplification strengthens Carr’s argument because he takes his writing to a more personal level and gives another perspective to this audience by introducing Bruce Friedman. 

Carr uses the rhetorical strategy of logos to help persuade his audience into believing his claims on the issue of how the Internet and Google negatively effect human thinking. Logos is one of the three Aristotelian Appeals, which are ethos, pathos, and logos. Logos refers to the use of logic, reason, facts, statistics, data, and numbers. Carr presents how research was conducted by scholars from the University College London on the topic of online research habits. Their research suggested that “we may well be in the midst of a sea change in the way we read and think.” These scholars have been examining computer logs and are documenting the behavior of visitors of two specific websites, one that is operated by the British Library and another that by a U.K. educational consortium, that allow access to journal articles, e-books, and other sources of written information. They have come to the conclusion that the users of these sites use “a form of skimming activity,” otherwise meaning that they move from one source to another at fast paces without ever returning to the previous sites. Users tend to only read a few pages of an article or book then they move to a new site. Carr’s strategy of introducing scientific research works with his persuasive writing because it shows his audience that professionals are highly interested in the topic and that they want to get answers for themselves on how the Internet is affecting human activity and why. Readers can now see that this is a major issue and that researchers are interested in coming up with answers. Carr uses this particular strategy of introducing scientific research to show readers that this is an important issue and that there are people studying the topic to come up with answers to this unsolved phenomenon. These researchers are showing real life examples of how the human brain is being diminished by the use of the Internet. Humans are no longer able to read long texts and have to use a skimming strategy. This strategy furthers his central claim by showing readers from another perspective how people are invested in this topic of how the Internet affects human thinking.

Narration is another rhetorical strategy that Carr uses to persuade his audience. This strategy involves recounting an event. Carr introduces Friedrich Nietzsche’s story about him and the typewriter. Nietzsche’s vision was diminishing and he could barely keep focus on a page of reading. He was forced to put a hold on his writing and was scared that he would soon have to give it up. The typewriter ended the idea of Nietzsche having to give up writing. Once he got used to using the typewriter, he was able to use it with his eyes closed. He was once again able to transfer his thoughts onto paper. Carr states how the mind is “almost infinitely malleable.” Most people believed that our brains were fixed at a certain point by a certain time in our adulthood, but researchers have discovered reasons to believe otherwise. James Olds was a professor of neuroscience at the Krasnow Institute for Advanced Study at George Mason University, and he stated that “the mind is very plastic” and that “The brain has the ability to reprogram itself on the fly, altering the way it functions.” Carr uses this account to his advantage of showing how the brain works in order to present another reason of how the brain can change at any moment. Since the brain can change at any time, it can surely start to diminish in certain qualities due to the lack of practice in that area of work. By using the Internet and Google for long periods of time, the brain can surely start to loose practice in certain areas because those parts are not being used as often. The use of narration helps the audience to realize the brain works in ways that are still unclear to human research, and by bring up this account, it shows readers that it is scientifically possible that human brain qualities can be diminished from the frequent use of the Internet and Google. 

As a result of reading Carr’s article and analyzing his use of rhetorical strategies to prove his claims, I was effectively persuaded into believing that the heavy reliance on the Internet and Google have negatively affected human cognition skills. I never realized how substantial of an effect the Internet could have on our lives, and I have come to realize that people’s reliance on the Internet and Google are hindering the human brain’s ability to grow and evolve to greater lengths. The brain is not being challenged and is just being handed information instead of having to think things through to come up with answers. Carr proves to be effective in his intent to persuade his audience into agreeing that the Internet and Google are diminishing human concentration and contemplation. He provides his audience with personal experiences and examples of real life people who have experienced these side effect of using the Internet. They say that they are no longer able to read extensive amounts of writing and that the Internet has become their sole source of new information. Carr also introduces the work and research of scholars from the University College London. These researchers have come to the conclusion that since people are no longer able to fully read and analyze long accounts of writing that people have turned to “a form of skimming activity.” The story of Friedrich Nietzsche shows a real life event of how the brain can adjust to different situations and that it is beneficial for the brain to be challenged so that it can continue to evolve. Nietzsche was set back by his diminishing eye site but thanks to the typewriter and the ability of the brain to change, he was able to continue with his writing. Therefore through the use of exemplification, logos, and narration, Carr has effectively given the audience multiple accounts and reasons to back up his claim that human dependency on the Internet and Google has inhibited the brain’s ability to concentrate on long texts and analyze information.

Intro through 3rd body paragraph

Google and the Internet have made major impacts on our lives. Humans as a whole have all become heavily attached and dependent on this advanced technology. The Internet has evolved tremendously in the short amount of time that it has been around, and people are so drawn to it because of the many things that it provides, from entertainment to informative knowledge. Have you ever thought about what role the Internet and Google have played in your life and how it has shaped your learning habits and thinking patterns? In the article, “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” Nicholas Carr argues that Google and the Internet cause negative effects on human cognition and is detrimental to human concentration and contemplation. I agree with Carr’s claim that the Internet and Google have negatively affected human thinking and cognition skills. Humans heavily rely on the Internet for information instead of finding out answers on their own. His argument proves to be persuasive to his audience due to his analysis of his personal experiences and the experiences of others and his theories about how the internet has weakened human thinking processes. Carr uses the rhetorical strategies of logos, narration, and exemplification to argue his claims. 

Exemplification is one to the rhetorical strategies that Carr uses. Exemplification uses examples and cases to point out his claim. This strategy tends to be beneficial to people making an argument because it gives others real life accounts and experiences with the problem at hand. Carr introduces multiple examples of how the Internet has become a major part in shaping how the human brain works. He uses is own person experiences to back up his claim by stating what part the Internet plays on his own life. He says how “the Net is becoming a universal medium,” and is “the conduit for most of the information that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind.” Just like most people these days, Carr shows how most of the information that he analyses and receives comes directly from things displayed on the Internet. Carr also states how when he brings up these accounts with his friends that they too are experiencing the same effects. He uses the strategy of introducing his own personal experiences as examples of his claim to take his argument to a more personal level. He wants to show his audience and readers that this issue is not just affecting others but himself too. By using this strategy, Carr wants his audience to relate to his own accounts with how the Internet has played a part in his life and realize how the Internet is affecting their lives as well. This example furthers his previous claim by providing person experiences with the Internet and taking his writing to a more personal level. Carr also introduces Bruce Friedman into his writing. Bruce Friedman is a blogger who regularly talks about the use of computers in medicine. He describes how the Internet has altered his mental habits. He states that, “I now have almost totally lost the ability to read and absorb a longish article on the web or in print.” Due to his heavy reliance and constant usage of the Internet, Friedman states, “I can’t read War and Peace anymore. I’ve lost the ability to do that. Even a blog post of more that three or four paragraphs is too much to absorb. I skim it.” Friedman accurately exemplifies how even a matured adult has lost touch with his ability to focus and comprehend long pieces of writing. This strategy of introducing an experienced blogger gives readers another perspective on the issue. Bruce Friedman’s account shows that even if a person was once a connoisseur of reading and writing that after becoming heavily reliant on the Internet those habits can change dramatically. Carr wants his audience to realize that even if they are experienced readers and writers that the Internet has the strong effect of diminishing those abilities if used too often. This helps to further his claim by showing readers another perspective of how the Internet is negatively affecting human cognition. The strategy of using examples to get his argument across to his audience proves to be effective. The use of exemplification strengthens Carr’s argument because he takes his writing to a more personal level and gives another perspective to this audience by introducing Bruce Friedman. 

Carr uses the rhetorical strategy of logos to help persuade his audience into believing his claims on the issue of how the Internet and Google negatively effect human thinking. Logos is one of the three Aristotelian Appeals, which are ethos, pathos, and logos. Logos refers to the use of logic, reason, facts, statistics, data, and numbers. Carr presents how the research was conducted by scholars from the University College London on the topic of online research habits. Their research suggested that “we may well be in the midst of a sea change in the way we read and think.” These scholars have been examining computer logs and are documenting the behavior of visitors of two specific websites, one that is operated by the British Library and another that by a U.K. educational consortium, that allow access to journal articles, e-books, and other sources of written information. They have come to the conclusion that the users of these sites use “a form of skimming activity”, otherwise meaning that they move from one source to another at fast paces without ever returning to the previous sites. Users tend to only read a few pages of an article or book then they move to a new site. Carr’s strategy of introducing scientific research works with his persuasive writing because it shows his audience that professionals are highly interested in the topic and that they want to get answers for themselves on how the Internet is affecting human activity and why. Readers can now see that this is a major issue and that researchers are interested in coming up with answers. Carr uses this particular strategy of introducing scientific research to show readers that this is an important issue and that there are people studying the topic to come up with answers to this unsolved phenomenon. This strategy furthers his central claim by showing readers from another perspective how people are invested in this topic of how the Internet affects human thinking. 

Narration is another rhetorical strategy that Carr uses to persuade his audience. This strategy involves recounting an event. Carr introduces Friedrich Nietzsche’s story about him and the typewriter. Nietzsche’s vision was diminishing and he could barely keep focus on a page of reading. He was forced to put a hold on his writing and was scared that he would soon have to give it up. The typewriter ended the idea of Nietzsche having to give up writing. Once he got used to using the typewriter, he was able to use it with his eyes closed. He was once again able to transfer his thoughts onto paper. Carr states how the mind is “almost infinitely malleable.” Most people believed that our brains were fixed at a certain point by a certain time in our adulthood, but researchers have discovered reasons to believe otherwise. James Olds was a professor of neuroscience at the Krasnow Institute for Advanced Study at George Mason University, and he stated that “the mind is very plastic” and that “The brain has the ability to reprogram itself on the fly, altering the way it functions.” Carr uses this account to his advantage of showing how the brain works in order to present another reason of how the brain can change at any moment. Since the brain can change at any time, it can surely start to diminish in certain qualities due to the lack of practice in that area of work. By using the Internet and Google for long periods of time, the brain can surely start to loose practice in certain areas because those parts are not being used as often. The use of narration helps the audience to realize the brain works in ways that are still unclear to human research, and by bring up this account, it shows readers that it is scientifically possible that human brain qualities can be diminished from the frequent use of the Internet and Google. 

Revised Intro and first body paragraph

Google and the Internet have made major impacts on our lives. Humans as a whole have all become heavily attached and dependent on this advanced technology. The Internet has evolved tremendously in the short amount of time that it has been around, and people are so drawn to it because of the many things that it provides, from entertainment to informative knowledge. Have you ever thought about what role the Internet and Google have played in your life and how it has shaped your learning habits and thinking patterns? In the article, “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” Nicholas Carr argues that Google and the Internet cause negative effects on human cognition and is detrimental to human concentration and contemplation. I agree with Carr’s claim that the Internet and Google have negatively affected human thinking and cognition skills. Humans heavily rely on the Internet for information instead of finding out answers on their own. His argument proves to be persuasive to his audience due to his analysis of his personal experiences and the experiences of others and his theories about how the internet has weakened human thinking processes. Carr uses the rhetorical strategies of logos, cause and effect, and exemplification to argue his claims. 

Exemplification is one to the rhetorical strategies that Carr uses. Exemplification uses examples and cases to point out his claim. This strategy tends to be beneficial to people making an argument because it gives others real life accounts and experiences with the problem at hand. Carr introduces multiple examples of how the Internet has become a major part in shaping how the human brain works. He uses is own person experiences to back up his claim by stating what part the Internet plays on his own life. He says how “the Net is becoming a universal medium,” and is “the conduit for most of the information that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind.” Just like most people these days, Carr shows how most of the information that he analyses and receives comes directly from things displayed on the Internet. Carr also states how when he brings up these accounts with his friends that they too are experiencing the same effects. He uses the strategy of introducing his own personal experiences as examples of his claim to take his argument to a more personal level. He wants to show his audience and readers that this issue is not just affecting others but himself too. By using this strategy, Carr wants his audience to relate to his own accounts with how the Internet has played a part in his life and realize how the Internet is affecting their lives as well. This example furthers his previous claim by providing person experiences with the Internet and taking his writing to a more personal level. Carr also introduces Bruce Friedman into his writing. Bruce Friedman is a blogger who regularly talks about the use of computers in medicine. He describes how the Internet has altered his mental habits. He states that, “I now have almost totally lost the ability to read and absorb a longish article on the web or in print.” Due to his heavy reliance and constant usage of the Internet, Friedman states, “I can’t read War and Peace anymore. I’ve lost the ability to do that. Even a blog post of more that three or four paragraphs is too much to absorb. I skim it.” Friedman accurately exemplifies how even a matured adult has lost touch with his ability to focus and comprehend long pieces of writing. This strategy of introducing an experienced blogger gives readers another perspective on the issue. Bruce Friedman’s account shows that even if a person was once a connoisseur of reading and writing that after becoming heavily reliant on the Internet those habits can change dramatically. Carr wants his audience to realize that even if they are experienced readers and writers that the Internet has the strong effect of diminishing those abilities if used too often. This helps to further his claim by showing readers another perspective of how the Internet is negatively affecting human cognition. The strategy of using examples to get his argument across to his audience proves to be effective. The use of exemplification strengthens Carr’s argument because he takes his writing to a more personal level and gives another perspective to this audience by introducing Bruce Friedman. 

Intro and first two body paragraphs

Google and the Internet have made major impacts on our lives. Humans as a whole have all become heavily attached and dependent on this advanced technology. The Internet has evolved tremendously in the short amount of time that it has been around, and people are so drawn to it because of the many things that it provides, from entertainment to informative knowledge. Have you ever thought about what role the Internet and Google have played in your life and how it has shaped your learning habits and thinking patterns? In the article, “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” Nicholas Carr argues that Google and the Internet cause negative effects on human cognition and is detrimental to human concentration and contemplation. I agree with Carr’s claim that the Internet and Google have negatively affected human thinking and cognition skills. Humans heavily rely on the Internet for information instead of finding out answers on their own. His argument proves to be persuasive to his audience due to his analysis of his personal experiences and the experiences of others and his theories about how the internet has weakened human thinking processes. Carr uses the rhetorical strategies of logos, cause and effect, and exemplification to argue his claims. 

Exemplification is one to the rhetorical strategies that Carr uses. Exemplification uses examples and cases to point out his claim. This strategy tends to be beneficial to people making an argument because it gives others real life accounts and experiences with the problem at hand. Carr introduces multiple examples of how the Internet has become a major part in shaping how the human brain works. He uses is own person experiences to back up his claim by stating what part the Internet plays on his own life. He says how “the Net is becoming a universal medium,” and is “the conduit for most of the information that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind.” Just like most people these days, Carr shows how most of the information that he analyses and receives comes directly from things displayed on the Internet. Carr also states how when he brings up these accounts with his friends that they too are experiencing the same effects. He uses the strategy of introducing his own personal experiences as examples of his claim to take his argument to a more personal level. He wants to show his audience and readers that this issue is not just affecting others but himself too. He wants to prove that this issue affects everyone. By using this strategy, Carr wants his audience to relate to his own accounts with how the Internet has played a part in his life and realize how the Internet is affecting their lives as well. This example furthers his previous claim by providing person experiences with the Internet and taking his writing to a more personal level. Carr also introduces Bruce Friedman into his writing. Bruce Friedman is a blogger who regularly talks about the use of computers in medicine. He describes how the Internet has altered his mental habits. He states that, “I now have almost totally lost the ability to read and absorb a longish article on the web or in print.” Due to his heavily reliance and constant usage of the Internet, Friedman states, “I can’t read War and Peace anymore. I’ve lost the ability to do that. Even a blog post of more that three or four paragraphs is too much to absorb. I skim it.” Friedman accurately exemplifies how even a matured adult has lost touch with his ability to focus and comprehend long pieces of writing. This strategy of introducing an experienced blogger gives readers another perspective on the issue. Bruce Friedman’s account shows that even if a person was once a connoisseur of reading and writing that after becoming heavily reliant on the Internet habits can change dramatically. Carr wants his audience to realize that even if they are experienced readers and writers that the Internet has the strong effect of diminishing those abilities if used too often. This helps to further his claim by showing readers another perspective of how the Internet is negatively affecting human cognition. The strategy of using examples to get his argument across to his audience proves to be effective. The use of exemplification strengthens Carr’s argument because he takes his writing to a more personal level and gives another perspective to this audience by introducing Bruce Friedman. 

Carr uses the rhetorical strategy of logos to help persuade his audience into believing his claims on the issue of how the Internet and Google negatively effect human thinking. Logos is one of the three Aristotelian Appeals, which are ethos, pathos, and logos. Logos refers to the use of logic, reason, facts, statistics, data, and numbers. Carr presents how the research was conducted by scholars from the University College London on the topic of online research habits. Their research suggested that “we may well be in the midst of a sea change in the way we read and think.” These scholars have been examining computer logs and are documenting the behavior of visitors of two specific websites, one that is operated by the British Library and another that by a U.K. educational consortium, that allow access to journal articles, e-books, and other sources of written information. They have come to the conclusion that the users of these sites use “a form of skimming activity”, otherwise meaning that they move from one source to another at fast paces without ever returning to the previous sites. Users tend to only read a few pages of an article or book then they move to a new site. Carr’s strategy of introducing scientific research works with his persuasive writing because it shows his audience that professionals are highly interested in the topic and that they want to get answers for themselves on how the Internet is affecting human activity and why. Readers can now see that this is a major issue and that researchers are interested in coming up with answers. Carr uses this particular strategy of introducing scientific research to show readers that this is an important issue and that there are people studying the topic to come up with answers to this unsolved phenomenon. This strategy furthers his central claim by showing readers from another perspective how people are invested in this topic of how the Internet affects human thinking. 

Intro and 1st Body Paragraph

Google and the Internet have made major impacts on our lives. Humans as a whole have all become heavily attached and dependent on this advanced technology. The Internet has evolved tremendously in the short amount of time that it has been around, and people are so drawn to it because of the many things that it provides, from entertainment to informative knowledge. Have you ever thought about what role the Internet and Google have played in your life and how it has shaped your learning habits and thinking patterns? In the article, “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” Nicholas Carr argues that Google and the Internet cause negative effects on human cognition and is detrimental to human concentration and contemplation. I agree with Carr’s claim that the Internet and Google have negatively affected human thinking and cognition skills. Humans heavily rely on the Internet for information instead of finding out answers on their own. His argument proves to be persuasive to his audience due to his analysis of his personal experiences and the experiences of others and his theories about how the internet has weakened human thinking process. Carr uses the rhetorical strategies of logos, cause and effect, and exemplification to argue his claims. 

Exemplification is one to the rhetorical strategies that Carr uses. Exemplification uses examples and cases to point out the claim. This strategy tends to be beneficial to people making an argument because it gives others real life accounts and experiences with the problem at hand. Carr introduces multiple examples of how the Internet has become a major part in shaping how the human brain works. He uses is own person experiences to back up his claim by stating what part the Internet plays on his own life. He says how “the Net is becoming a universal medium,” and is “the conduit for most of the information that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind.” Just like most people these days, Carr shows how most of the information that he analyses and receives comes directly from things displayed on the Internet. He uses the strategy of introducing his own personal experiences as examples of his claim to take his argument to a more personal level. He wants to show his audience and readers that this issue is not just affecting others but himself too. He wants to prove that this issue affects everyone. By using this strategy, Carr wants his audience to relate to his own accounts with how the Internet has played a part in his life and realize how the Internet is affecting their lives as well. This example furthers his previous claim by providing person experiences with the Internet and taking his writing to a more personal level.

Is Google Making Us Stupid?

Carr's main argument is that he believes that reading books is more beneficial to how the mind works than reading online. His main forms of evidence are that the Internet changes the way that people think, distracts people, and only supplies people with information and does not provoke people's thought process or understanding of the topic. He uses the strategy of cause and effect to explain how the Internet affects people's reading strategies and learning tactics. He uses description to explain to the audience how the Internet has affected out lives now and how it is different from years ago. He also uses division and classification. He divides up his ideas about how the Internet affects people's lives and gives explanations about each division.

Rifkin and Parry

In Rifkin's "A Change of Heart about Animals", I like the strategy of making things more personal and relating the topic back to humans. Rifkin explains how animals are more like humans than we may realize. One of the main things that shows that animals are more like us is that they have many of the same emotions that humans do. In Parry's "The Art of Branding a Condition", he uses the strategy of informing others. He explains his topic of condition branding to his readers and then states his importance.

“Why Do You Thing They Are Called For-Profit Colleges”- Final Paper

There are various ways in which for-profit colleges are negatively impacting the the lives of people who are striving to acquire a college degree, and there are few ways in which these universities serve in these people’s favor. The people working for these establishments are only interested in their own well-being and will do anything to get ahead, no matter who they hurt in the process. In Kevin Carey’s article, “Why Do You Think They’re Called For-Profit Colleges?” he states all of the ways in which for-profits turn the opportunity to receive a college education into a path full of stress and hardship. Carey’s article helps the world to realize how corrupt and heartless for-profit colleges can be. These colleges use the very few positives that they have to trick people into enrolling in their college’s classes. The government has even caught on the tactics that these universities are using, and various advocacy groups are opposed and others support the idea of passing an amendment to limit the latest of government spending on for-profit education. Carey claims that there are some positives to for-profit colleges, but that there are also aggressive recruiters that are tricking students into enrolling into classes they will not be able to afford therefore trapping them into countless amounts of debt. There are many articles by other authors that illustrate, extend, challenge, qualify, and complicate Carey’s arguments. In my analysis of Carey’s text, I will examine how these outside sources illustrate, extend, challenge, qualify, or complicate his text and argue how his claims are affected. 

Carey claims that for-profits higher education is not inherently bad. There are some aspects of for-profits that pose as beneficial to certain students. Carey states that, “they profit by serving students that public and private nonprofit institutions too often ignore,” (55).  For example, many for-profits have basic campuses that are located near freeways so that working students have easy access in order to attend evening classes. Many for-profits also offer courses that bankrupt public colleges do not offer. The article, “For-Profit Colleges Deserve Some Respect,” by Michael J. Seiden extends how for-profit colleges provide some positives to their education system. Seiden states how many for-profits are sanctioned for overly aggressive marketing and enrollment tactics, but he rebuttals that conception by introducing the idea of how for-profits offer the quality education that everyone deserves to have an opportunity for. There are various reasons why so many people do not obtain college degrees, such as dropping out of college, failing to achieve high enough grades, or stopping schooling after graduating from high school. The article discloses how people who immediately start working after high school acquire knowledge and skills that are more relevant than good SAT scores, and for-profit institutions provide open admissions requirements and flexible course scheduling; therefore, these types of college appeal more to already employed students. For-profits’ flexibility and appeal to these working people gives them the opportunity to earn the meaningful college degree that these people were never able to obtain. Business oriented degree programs also serves as a positive to for-profit education. Degree programs and curricula are more market-driven than public institutions. The reason for this is that for-profits view their students as customers and in order to retain those customers, they must provide things that will attract them. Students more than often are motivated to earn their degrees because they want to move up in their careers; therefore, these colleges offer both general-education courses and courses that students’ employers demand. For-profits operate with the idea that they must appeal to students in ways that their competition does not. They appeal to students through their exceptional services, flexible schedules, strong faculty, and market-driven programs. This article by Seiden introduces other ways in which for-profits offer positives to their students. Seiden illustrates examples of how Carey stated that for-profits do have their appeals and that they do offer students things that public colleges do not. 

Another one of Carey’s claims is that aggressive recruiters will do anything they need to to succeed at their job and to get students to enroll in classes at their university. These recruiters tend to trick students into enrolling when they already know that the students will not be able to afford it. Carey states how he has heard of, “Horror stories of aggressive recruiters’ inducing students to take out huge loans for nearly worthless degrees…” (53). In the article, “Faculty at For-Profits Allege Constant Pressure to Keep Students Enrolled,” Kelly Field states how even though some for-profit institutions have revived awards for their work, many of the reasons of how they have achieved all that they have are through negative means. The article states how some former faculty members say that the honors of their schools came at a steep price. Those faculty members revealed how in order to keep their numbers high, administrators pressured employees to falsify attendance records, raise grades, and manipulate job-placement numbers. Dolores A Howland-Justice says, “We were constantly told to lower the bar, that we were helping poor people.” Howland-Justice later filed a lawsuit against her former employers for fraudulently obtaining millions of dollars in financial aid by inflating its graduation and job-placement rates. This event exemplifies how institutions would make their employees do what ever it took to achieve the success that they institution “needed.” This article illustrates how recruiters and universities will do whatever is necessary for their institution to succeed. The tactic of getting students to enroll in classes they could not afford was what caused many student to get trapped in countless amounts of debt that they will never be able to pay off. Sometimes parents would even be dragged into their child’s debt because they are part of the loan or financial aid that the students received. The quote “…a large and growing number of graduates of for-profit colleges are having trouble paying those loans back,” (53) stated by Carey shows how even after college students continue to struggle to pay off their debt. In the article, “Excerpts from Government Accountability Report on For-Profit Universities”, it illustrates how colleges will do whatever it takes to make money and get students to enroll in their classes. An undercover applicant was encouraged by four out of the fifteen schools that he applied to to falsify his FAFSA in order to qualify for financial aid. He was told to not report how much he obtained in his bank account  because it would affect how much money he would receive from financial aid. The admissions representative at one of the schools also encouraged the student to change the FAFSA to falsely add dependents so that the applicant would be eligible for grants. These recruiters will not change their strategies no matter how much they negatively affect the students. This lack of consideration for others shows how far these recruiters will go to succeed and make money. 

Carey brings up the event of speaking with Michael Clifford about his business deals. He states that, “Clifford will concede…to the abuses in the for-profit industry. But that he rejects the Obama administration’s proposal to cut off federal aid to for-profits at which student-debt payments after graduation exceed a certain percentage of the graduate’s income,” (54). Carey informs others about how Clifford denies that colleges have any responsibility whatsoever for how much students borrow and whether they can pay it back. Clifford will not even acknowledge that student borrowing is related to how much these colleges charge for classes. Carey shows how business men, such as Clifford, turn situations around to blame the students for their inability to pay off debt when in reality, those students would not be in those debt situations if their schooling did not cost as much as it did. In the article “House Passes Amendment to Block Funding of Oversight Measure for For-Profit Schools” by Sharona Coutts, she illustrates how the issues with for-profits has gotten back to the government, and she informs readers about how an amendment was passed by the House that could restrict the Department of Education’s attempts to regulate for-profit colleges. The amendment was aimed at the Education Department’s rule that would regulate schools from accessing federal student aid if too many students could not repay their loans. It has not yet been finalized, but there have been various advocacy groups that either support or oppose the rule that are making their opinions known. Advocacy groups that oppose the rule claim that “it unfairly affects schools that serve greater numbers of poor and minority students and will deprive those students of the full range of educational opportunities available to more affluent, traditional college students.” Meanwhile, there are many advocacy groups that support the amendment. They agree with tightening restrictions on for-profit colleges due to the college’s questionable recruiting tactics that leave students in large amounts of debt and lessen their job opportunities. Nearly fifty civil rights consumer and student advocacy groups wrote a letter to President Obama urging the administration to adopt the rule. They believe that it would “eliminate waste, fraud and abuse” by education programs that leave students in endless amounts of debt. Coutts’ article relates back to Carey’s introduction of how business men work the system to their benefit and oppose people who get in the way of their work, as shown by Clifford when he reject’s the Obama administration’s proposal. The article also shows how major the problems of for-profits are because the government is starting to get involved. 

These claims about for-profit institutions by Carey state how these schools can both negatively and positively affect currently enrolled and future students. There are some aspects of for-profits that attract students to these institutions, such as exceptional services, flexible schedules, strong faculty, and market-driven programs. These features make it possible for already employed students to earn the college degree that they were never able to obtain. Although there are some positives to for-profit institutions, they are easily cancelled out by the amount of negatives that these colleges cause. Recruiters of for-profit colleges aggressively persuade students into enrolling in courses at their institutions that they know the student will not be able to afford. This starts the path that many students fall into when enrolling in these schools. They become trapped in a lifelong amount of debt that they will probably never be pay off, and sometimes their parents get dragged into the debt as well for being co-signers of their child’s loan. These recruiters will go to any length to achieve their goal of enrolling as many students as possible to make money and to contribute to the success of their university. The problems with for-profit colleges has become so well known that the government is starting to get involved in trying to regulate how much government aid is given to these institutions. The government is aware of most of the tactics that these colleges use and how they manipulate students into acquiring money from the them to pay for schooling. There are both strengths and weaknesses to Carey’s claims. He proves to be effective when explaining how for-profits are negatively affecting their students and when he provides examples of how aggressive recruiters can be. He seems to be less effective when informing readers about how for-profits provide some positives. Carey does not go into very much detail when explaining how for-profits provide things that public institutions do not. The examples that Carey uses to show the positives and negatives of for-profits do not balance each other out well. The examples used for negatives are more eye opening and shocking to readers than the examples used to illustrate the positives; therefore, more readers will be drawn to and affected by the negatives than the positives. 

“Why Do You Thing They Are Called For-Profit Colleges”

There are various ways in which for-profit colleges are negatively impacting the the lives of people who are striving to acquire a college degree, and there are few ways in which these universities serve in these people’s favor. In Kevin Carey’s article, “Why Do You Think They’re Called For-Profit Colleges?” he states all of the ways in which for-profits turn the opportunity to receive a college education into a path full of stress and hardship. Carey’s article helps the world to realize how corrupt and heartless for-profit colleges can be. The people working for these establishments are only interested in their own well-being and will do anything to get ahead, no matter who they hurt in the process. These colleges use the very few positives that they have to trick people into enrolling in their college’s classes. Carey claims that there are some positives to for-profit colleges, but that there also are aggressive recruiters that are tricking students into enrolling into classes they will not be able to afford therefore trapping them into countless amounts of debt. There are many articles by other authors that illustrate, extend, challenge, qualify, and complicate Carey’s arguments. In my analysis of Carey’s text, I will examine how these outside sources illustrate, extend, challenge, qualify, or complicate his text and argue how his claims are affected. 

Carey claims that for-profits higher education is not inherently bad. There are some aspects of for-profits that pose as beneficial to certain students. Carey states that, “they profit by serving students that public and private nonprofit institutions too often ignore,” (55).  For example, many for-profits have basic campuses that are located near freeways so that working students have easy access in order to attend evening classes. Many for-profits also offer courses that bankrupt public colleges do not offer. The article, “For-Profit Colleges Deserve Some Respect,” by Michael J. Seiden extends how for-profit colleges provide some positives to their education system. Seiden states how many for-profits are sanctioned for overly aggressive marketing and enrollment tactics, but he rebuttals that conception by introducing the idea of how for-profits offer the quality education that everyone deserves to have an opportunity for. There are various reasons why so many people do not obtain college degrees, such as dropping out of college, failing to achieve high enough grades, or stopping schooling after graduating from high school. The article discloses how people who immediately start working after high school acquire knowledge and skills that are more relevant than good SAT scores, and for-profit institutions provide open admissions requirements and flexible course scheduling; therefore, these types of college appeal more to already employed students. For-profits’ flexibility and appeal to these working people gives them the opportunity to earn the meaningful college degree that these people were never able to obtain. Business oriented degree programs also serves as a positive to for-profit education. Degree programs and curricula are more market-driven than public institutions. The reason for this is that for-profits view their students as customers and in order to retain those customers, they must provide things that will attract them. Students more than often are motivated to earn their degrees because they want to move up in their careers; therefore, these colleges offer both general-education courses and courses that students’ employers demand. For-profits operate with the idea that they must appeal to students in ways that their competition does not. They appeal to students through their exceptional services, flexible schedules, strong faculty, and market-driven programs. This article by Seiden introduces other ways in which for-profits offer positives to their students. 

Aggressive recruiters will do anything they need to to succeed at their job and to to get students to enroll in classes at their university. This was another one of Carey’s claims. These recruiters tend to trick students into enrolling when they already know that they students will not be able to afford it. Carey states how he has heard of, “Horror stories of aggressive recruiters’ inducing students to take out huge loans for nearly worthless degrees…” (53). In the article, “Faculty at For-Profits Allege Constant Pressure to Keep Students Enrolled,” Kelly Field states how even though some for-profit institutions have revived awards for their work. Many of the reasons of how they have achieved all that they have are through negative means. The article states how some former faculty members say that the honors of their schools came at a steep price. Those faculty members revealed how in order to keep their numbers high, administrators pressured employees to falsify attendance records, raise grades, and manipulate job-placement numbers. Dolores A Howland-Justice says, “We were constantly told to lower the bar, that we were helping poor people.” Howland-Justice later filed a lawsuit against her former employers for fraudulently obtaining millions of dollars in financial aid by inflating its graduation and job-placement rates. This event exemplifies how institutions would make their employees do what ever it took to achieve the success that they institution “needed.” This article illustrates how recruiters and universities will do whatever is necessary for their institution to succeed. The tactic of getting students to enroll in classes they could not afford was what caused many student to get trapped in countless amounts of debt that they will never be able to pay off. Sometimes parents would even be dragged into their child’s debt because they are part of the loan or financial aid that the students received. The quote “…a large and growing number of graduates of for-profit colleges are having trouble paying those loans back,” (53) stated by Carey shows how even after college students continue to struggle to pay off their debt. In the article, “Excerpts from Government Accountability Report on For-Profit Universities”, it illustrates how colleges will do whatever it takes to make money and get students to enroll in their classes. An undercover applicant was encouraged by four out of the fifteen schools that he applied to to falsify their FAFSA in order to qualify for financial aid. He was told to not report how much he obtained in his bank account  because it would affect how much money he would receive from financial aid. The admissions representative at one of the schools also encouraged the student to change the FAFSA to falsely add dependents so that the applicant would be eligible for grants. These recruiters will not change their strategies no matter how much they negatively affect the students. This lack of consideration for others shows how far these recruiters will go to succeed and make money. 

These claims about for-profit institutions by Carey state how these schools can both negatively and positively affect currently enrolled and future students. There are some aspects of for-profits that attract students to these institutions, such as exceptional services, flexible schedules, strong faculty, and market-driven programs. These features make it possible for already employed students to earn the college degree that they were never able to obtain. Although there are some positives to for-profit institutions, they are easily cancelled out by the amount of negatives that these colleges cause. Recruiters of for-profit colleges aggressively persuade students into enrolling in courses at their institutions that they know the student will not be able to afford. This starts the path that many students fall into when enrolling in these schools. They become trapped in a lifelong amount of debt that they will probably never be pay off, and sometimes their parents get dragged into the debt as well for being co-signers of their child’s loan. These recruiters will go to any length to achieve their goal of enrolling as many students as possible to make money and to contribute to the success of their university. 

Essay Plan

3 Sources: 

• “For-Profit Colleges Deserve Some Respect,” Seiden 

By MICHAEL J. SEIDEN. From The Chronicle of Higher Education, Volume 55, Issue 41, Page A80. Michael J. Seiden recently retired as president of Western International University.

• Faculty at For-Profits Allege Constant Pressure to Keep Students Enrolled

By: Kelly Field

http://chronicle.com/article/Pawns-in-the-For-Profit/127424

• Excerpts from Government Accountability Report on For-Profit Universities

August 4, 2010. Report number GAO-10-948T, 'For-Profit Colleges: Undercover Testing Finds Colleges Encouraged Fraud and Engaged in Deceptive and Questionable Marketing Practices.' 

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d10948t.pdf

Source Text: 

• “For-Profit Colleges Deserve Some Respect,” Seiden 
• I will focus on Carey’s claim that there are some positives to for-profits
• there are some things that for-profits offer that other colleges do not 
• easily accessible to students with other commitments 
• Quotes: “…they profit by serving students that public and private nonprofit institutions too often ignore.” (55) & “The for-profit Kaplan University recently struck a deal with the California community college system to provide courses that the bankrupt public colleges cannot.” (55)
• This source extends how for-profits provide some positives to their education system. 

• Faculty at For-Profits Allege Constant Pressure to Keep Students Enrolled
• I will focus on Carey’s claim that recruiters are tricking students into enrolling even though they know that there is no way that the student can afford it. 
• Quote: “Horror stories of aggressive recruiters’ inducing students to take out huge loans for nearly worthless degrees…” (53)
• This source illustrates how recruiters are doing anything they need to to succeed at their job, no matter how much it negatively affects the students. 

• Excerpts from Government Accountability Report on For-Profit Universities
• I will focus on Carey’s claim that recruiters will do anything to get students to enroll in classes 
• Quote: “…a large and growing number of graduates of for-profit colleges are having trouble paying those loans back.” (53) 
• This source illustrates how far for-profits will go to make as much money as possible.

Extends, complicates, challenges, qualifies or illustrates a claim in Carey

A statement from “For-Profit Colleges Deserve Some Respect” that extends the claim of Carey’s that for-profits are not all bad is the statement “For-profit education companies are now in high demand among venture capitalists and investment bankers, and the industry is one of the rare ones that is faring well in this economy”. It is true the these colleges are doing very well in the economy and that they can be very good investments for people trying to make money. 

The element of military personel education in “For-Profit Colleges, Vulnerable G.I.’s” extends the claim that aggressive recruiters are persuading students into enter bad situations. For-profit schools try to take advantage of “90/10 rule” by getting service members to enroll in their schools. Funds from Tuition Assistance and the G.I. Bill are not part of the Title VI funds. 

The quote, “I now know that something needs to be done after taking out a PARENT PLUS LOAN in the tune of $34,000.00 for my daughter to attend the Art Institute NYC. This was only for one term and I had to travel to New York las weekend to pick her up because I became ineligible for any more loans. I know I was dupped and there is nothing I can do about it. My daughter is depressed and I am angry that these predators can operate like this,” by Janel on the “For-Profit Recruiters and the ‘Pain Funnel’” article in the New York Times accurately illustrates how students are unknowingly trapped in endless amounts of debt that they will never be able to pay off. The horrible part of the situation is that many parents are dragged into the situation as well because they are part of the loans taken out for their children. 

Main Claims of Carey

There are many reasons why Carey believes that there are problems with for-profits but his three main claims from the first half of his text are that most of the money is coming from the federal government, growing numbers of graduates are having trouble paying back their loans, and that aggressive recruiters are wrongfully persuading students to sign up for classes knowing that they will not be able to afford payments. Carey provides evidence for his claim that most of the money going to for-profits are coming from the federal government by introducing Pell Grants and subsidized student loans. He introduces horror stories about the many graduate and currently enrolled students that are stuck paying endless amounts of debt that they will never be able to pay off. There is evidence for the aggressive recruiters because Carey talks about how the Obama administration has proposed cutting off federal aid to for-profits that trick students into enrolling.
There are a few claims that Carey makes that state that for-profits are not all bad. Some of the reasons why people are attracted to for-profits are because of the thing that for-profits offer that public universities do not, such as their easy accessibility, evening classes, and regional accreditation.
One element that I would like to investigate is how the very few positives of for-profit schools so easily persuades people into enrolling into classes they cannot afford.

Why Do You Think They Are Called For Profit Colleges?

Carey's main argument is that for-profit colleges should take less financial aid. One claim that Carey makes is that large and growing numbers of college graduates of these for-profit universities are having trouble paying their loans back. He supports this claim by addressing the horror stories of how aggressive recruiters are persuading students to take out huge loans for almost worthless degrees. He brings up the idea of how the Obama administration is proposing to cut off federal aid to for-profit colleges due to the unmanageable amounts of debt that these schools put their students in. Another claim of Carey's is how absurd it is that these for-profit colleges are refusing to acknowledge their actions and are denying the fact that they are purposefully getting their students into unreasonable financial situations at the price of their own benefit. He supports his claim by talking about how for-profit universities charge much higher rates than public colleges and universities and how large debts plus small incomes end up with high risk defaults. Carey acknowledges the "90/10" rule. A rule that shows that for-profit universities receive more than 90 percent of their revenue from federal aid. Carey's final claim is how for-profits are not all bad. They do provide their students with things that public colleges and universities do not. They provide the easy access for students to take classes either online or in the evenings. They have a more flexible schedule so that the classes appeal to people's various schedules and workloads. Carey's first two claims about the negatives of for-profits were effectively persuasive and supported. They were backed up with various examples and reasons to why the claims were true. The positives of for-profits fell short of evidence to support his claim. There was more effective evidence for the negatives of the for-profits than there were for the positives.

For Profit Universitites

I found it very interesting how schools would trick students into starting classes with their university even though they knew that the students would not be able to pay the tuition. I think this method is absurd and heartless. These universities are being selfish and have no consideration for anyone else. After watching these videos, my impression of non-profit universities has completely changed. I knew that these schools were very expensive, but I did not know that they tricked students into enrolling even though they had no way of affording classes. I would want to learn more about how these schools persuade students so easily into enrolling and attending their schools even though the students know that they do not have to money to pay for classes. I feel like the thought of not being able to pay for the school would make me think twice before enrolling if I was one of those students.

Public Thinking Rough Draft

Clive Thompson is the author of the book Smarter Than You Think, which contains the excerpt “Public Thinking” as one of its chapters. The purpose of his project is to answer the underlying question of “how has the evolution of public writing affected and influenced people’s thinking?” Thompson’s main argument is that public forms of writing and speaking change humans’ cognitive behavior.  Through various sub claims, such clarified thinking, audience effect, multiple effect, and memory, Thompson backs up his main argument to make people understand and believe the points he is trying to make. In my analysis of Thompson’s text, I will examine and break down those sub claims to further understand his main argument. 

Thompson claims that public writing clarifies thinking. Some forms of public writing are written in a way that helps further understand specific topics or helps clarify what the writer is actually thinking. Thompson states that, “Professional writers have long described the way that the act of writing forces them to distill their vague notions into clear ideas…This is why writers often find that it’s only when they start writing that they figure out what they want to say,” (51). In other words Thompson believes writing out what people are thinking onto paper helps them actually form out what they are trying to get across to others. He refers to the poet Cecil Day-Lewis as a form of evidence when she says, “I do not sit down at my desk to put into verse something that is already clear in my mind. If it were clear in my mind, I should have not incentive or need to write about it…We do not write in order to be understood; we write in order to understand,” (51). This quotation by Day-Lewis supports Thompson’s claim about how writing out one’s thoughts helps to formulate what needs to be said because it shows that even well-known writers have a hard time trying to get their point across without writing it down first. This claim is relatively effective because others can easily relate; many people struggle with trying to develop what they are thinking, and writing things down makes things easier to formulate a point. 

Thompson also introduces the idea of “audience effect”. He argues that, “the cognitive shift in going from an audience of zero (talking to yourself) to an audience of ten people (a few friends or random strangers checking our your online posts) is so big that its actually huger than going from ten people to a million people,”(56). Audiences help to clarify thinking even more. Thompson uses statistics to support his claim because studies have been carried out that reveal what affect an audience has on analytic or critical thought. As stated in “Public Thinking”, “…the effort of communication to someone else forces you to think more precisely, make deeper connections, and learn more,” (55). Thompson validates his statement using observational testing research. The research emphasizes the affect of an audience on people’s thinking. He acknowledges the experiments done in 2008 by a group of Vanderbilt University professors on small children. The testing groups included dozens of four and five year olds, and the tests challenged their cognitive behavior using various tactics of how people may think. They called for the children to look at a sequence of patterns and to predict what the next sequence would be. The tests would become more and more difficult each time the child too the test. Three versions of the same test took place. The first test involved having the children solve the puzzles quietly on their own, while the second test required the children to explain their thinking into a take recorder. The final test had the children explain to their mothers what their thinking was on how they were going to solve the puzzles. The tests concluded that the children who explained their thinking to the audience of mothers did the best, while the children who solved the puzzles on their own quietly did the worst. This experiment helped prove that the act of articulating their thinking process aloud helps people think more critically and identify things more clearly. Because of the many examples that appeal to various audiences from teenagers to writers and publishers, Thompson is more effective in getting his point across.

Memory is another sub claim that Thompson analyzes. He states how, “writing about things has other salutary cognitive effects,” (57). Writing about things so that it is more easily remembered is also known as the “generation effect.” Thompson describes a piece of evidence from 1978 when two psychologists tested people to see how well they remembered words after they had written them down versus people who just read the words and tried to remember them. The people who had written down the words did better in the experiment. The strategy of writing down text to memorize the information is more beneficial than just reading because generating text yourself “requires more cognitive effort than does reading, and effort increases memorability,” (57) according to researchers. This strategy proved to be highly advantageous to people who were attending school. This claim by Thompson was effective because it is relatable to a wide range of people both in school and in the work field. 

Thompson also brings up the idea of the multiples effect. The sub claim of the multiples effect means that several accounts of the same discovery occurred to different people. Thompson has various forms of evidence to backup his claim, such as the discovery of oxygen and sunspots. He believes that the products of our environment result in the multiple occurrences of the same discoveries. He defends his thoughts by stating, “The things we think about are deeply influenced by the state of the art around us: the conversations taking place among educated folk, the shared information, tools, and technologies at hand,” (59). This quotation supports the idea that discoveries of the same topics had reoccurrence because as time goes on, technologies and our environments start to evolve and become more advanced than years past; therefore, newly acquired technologies help researchers come up with details about some of the same topics that have already been introduced to the world but now there is more updated information that can be shared. Thompson confirms his claim of these newly advanced technologies being the reason why multiple discoveries occurred by stating that “If four astronomers discovered sunspots at the same time, it’s partly because the quality of the lenses in telescopes in 1611 has matured to the point where it was finally possible to pick out small details on the sun,” (59). Due to Thompson’s diverse examples to help justify his claim, his strategy proved to be very effective in gaining support. 

Thompson’s main claim is that public forms of writing and speaking have affected humans’ cognitive behavior. He provides many examples that support his beliefs through his various sub claims: clarified thinking, “audience effect”, memory, and multiples effect. By writing thoughts and ideas down, many writers have been able to formulate the idea that they want to present to their audience. Writing things down helps to clarify what the writer is thinking. Thompson believes that the “audience effect” helps people to improve their articulation process, as shown in the test that took place by the group of children in the Vanderbilt experiment. The improvement of the children’s articulation also help to clarify ones thinking. The act of writing things out helps to improve one’s ability to memorize things. Thompson provides information about tests that have shown that the act of writing things down helps to improve memorization; this is also known as “the generation effect.” The idea of multiples effect relates to how multiple occurrences of the same discoveries were taking place. Thompson expresses how he believes that these occurrences happened due to the environment and improvements in technology. Researchers were able to uncover new details about already known topics through the use of the advanced technology of their time. Through the many sub claims that Thompson provides, he effectively supports his main claim of how public writing has affected human cognitive behavior. 

Body Paragraph

Thompson claims that public writing clarifies thinking. Some forms of public writing are written in a way that helps further understand specific topics or helps clarify what the writer is actually thinking. Thompson states that, “Professional writers have long described the way that the act of writing forces them to distill their vague notions into clear ideas…This is why writers often find that it’s only when they start writing that they figure out what they want to say,” (p. 51). In other words Thompson believes writing out what people are thinking onto paper helps them actually form out what they are trying to get across to others. He refers to the poet Cecil Day-Lewis as a form of evidence when she says, “I do not sit down at my desk to put into verse something that is already clear in my mind. If it were clear in my mind, I should have not incentive or need to write about it…We do not write in order to be understood; we write in order to understand,” (p.51). This quotation by Day-Lewis supports Thompson’s claim about how writing out one’s thoughts helps to formulate what needs to be said because it shows that even well-known writers have a hard time trying to get their point across without writing it down first. This claim is relatively effective because others can easily relate; many people struggle with trying to develop what they are thinking, and writing things down makes things easier to formulate a point.