Both “Waking up and taking charge” and “College debt” have the same topic which is solving college debt but both essays go about persuading you in in very different ways. Kamenetz’s proposal is for college students to join a PAC but Archer says that one should either go to trade school or not go to college at all. Kamentz seems well- informed and more knowledgeable than Archer on the topic because as we discussed in class “She is an education correspondent, writer, and researcher who only writes about education” while Archer does not. Both Kamentz’s and Archer’s proposals are very controversial because they are pretty polarizing. Kamentz tries to get the reader join a PAC but not everyone agrees with PACs because “They’re not voters or citizens but they have a big hand in the outcomes of elections.” However, Archer tries to get young adults to go to trade school but some would say that trade school doesn’t give you as high of quality of an education as a college would so therefore it is inferior. Both writers are using persuasion as an aim of argument because both want the reader to take action. As Jake stated in class Kamentz wants, “More readers to join her cause” which is the same as Archer’s goal. Finally, are the writers reasonable reasoners? For Kamentz, I would say yes because she meets all the critera needed, however; she seems pretty one sided and not self- critical. For Archer, I would say that he is not a reasonable reasoner because he is very dead set in his opinion and does not state any counter arguments which means he does not cover all the criteria.
writing 