College/University should be free for ALL determined and qualifying students.

I would really appreciate it if people would voice their opinions (pro and cons) about whether or not college and university should be free everywhere for qualifying and determined students that want to enroll (even if you are an international student from another country) and add a little thing of their own that would help improve my essay. A little side note: this is my first thread that I made here, I came across this website while I was researching some guided discussions on topics, arguments, and opinions that contains any studies, statistics, interviews, books, magazines, expert opinions, etc. about whether or not college should be free for students. As you can see/read below, I have typed out exactly word for word of what my student teacher had gave.

ESSAY:
Persuasive essay using Cause and Effect. You will write an essay in which you examine the causes and effects of a situation and persuade the reader to take action to change it.

PROMPT:
Problem: Modern society needs more people who have a college education. However, college is getting more and more expensive and becoming unavailable to many qualified students.

Solution: The state of California should pay all college fees for all students who qualify for and want to attend college within the state.

I am currently a secondary education student and my student teacher had given us three prompts to choose from and since I am very closet to attending college, this prompt had poked at my interest. The essay should contain the usual essay format of an introduction paragraph of your subject and background information, body paragraphs of elaborative supporting details, and finally a conclusion paragraph that summarizes key points and providing sight. The essay should also be from five hundred to fifteen hundred words and effectively address a readers' biases, counterclaims, concerns and expectations.

So my rough outline/draft of what the essay should look like is:
first paragraph: introduction paragraph
second paragraph: supporting detail
third paragraph: supporting detail
fourth paragraph: supporting detail
*fifth paragraph: reasonable counterclaim
sixth paragraph: conclusion paragraph

*I am not sure where my student teacher wants our counterclaim to be in our essay and whether or not he would like for us to have six paragraphs in our essay because we usually have only five paragraphs in our essays. But I can easily wave this concern off, it is not of an importance to me as of yet.

I will detail and update soon, as of now it is nearly morning.

yes, more detail would be nice ^^

but... it doesn't hurt to have a more structured outline~
here's what my outline usually go like:

Theme:
Thesis:

Par 1: Introduction (include overview of the problem and your thesis/ opinion)

BODY Paragraph (2 and so on...): (i often make a 5 paragraph essay, so i have 3 body paragraph most of the time )
(in each body paragraph, you cover about ONE point that's related to your thesis. and add supporting details that correlates with your main idea for the paragraph. You may also put examples in one paragraph, reinforcing the idea that you wrote. For this, you need resource)

Last paragraph: Conclusion (put all your ideas together and state what is your intention in writing this essay)

ps: i don't really get that counterclaim part ^^; but... if what i think is true, then... you don't agree 100% to the idea, and you're just giving view from the pro and cons. It is good, but if you're going to write an argumentative paragraph... it'd be better to not include those

The grading rubric requires us to have a counterclaim in our essay. But if it was me, I would not include any counterclaims either because I am supporting the idea that colleges should be free and I would rather leave out the cons for a better chance of winning to persuade someone. Whatever the school wants I suppose.

A few examples of counterclaims for this prompt:
If colleges were all free, then the state would have to pay for all the incoming students. That would result in higher taxes, very costly for sure. And note that not everyone wants to go to a third level of education.

When people pay, they value it more. Students who apply for free colleges would have poor motivation and study habits because there is always another chance for them because all colleges in the state are going to be free.

For the introductory paragraph for my essay, I am planning on using the topic that California, as well as many other states, have constitutions that requires that state universities be free of tuition for residents of the state. The constitution worked well until 1965, universities began creating "fees". These "fees" rises commonly up to five or even fifteen percent in a single year. Imagine taking four years of college while these "fees" went up to sixty percent by the time you graduate and compare it to when you first entered the campus.

The supporting paragraphs will include:
The families that cannot afford college for their children that are very smart and would like to go to college but they are not able to. Studies have shown that lower-income families have children that know that college is too costly as often as in the grade eight and make their path for the future accordingly.

A modern country needs highly skilled graduates of all kinds. Not just skills that attracts employers but the creative new knowledge of the next graduating classes in college that will be a tremendous resource to the society as a whole.

Discrimination in employment would be less if we all had equal opportunity to education. Some people would become great people if they had a education. (I am not really sure if I will use this supporting detail or not yet, I am still researching for more.)

If I do have to include a counterclaim for this essay, I will most likely use one of the two on top. Preferably this one: If colleges were all free, then the state would have to pay for all the incoming students. That would result in higher taxes, very costly for sure. And note that not everyone wants to go to a third level of education.

My concluding paragraph will be a short summary of my intentions (like what you posted Icy Ciel) and I will also include a call to action.

You asked for cons, I will give you some cons.

The U.S. government/taxpayers already pay for *13* years of public education for most students.

Higher education is a privilege, not a right.

Scholarships should be based on merit, not the financial need of the parents. The brightest of students already have scholarship opportunities from private funding, and pubic/taxpayer funds should not be expected to pick up the slack for mediocre students.

Just because parents are financially solvent does not mean that the parents are willing to pay the educational expenses of their offspring, and needs-based scholarships that only look at the parents' earnings are inherently unfair to students who do not have their parents' financial support.

Yes, society needs engineers, doctors, and lawyers, but society also needs shopkeepers, custodians, and plumbers. If everyone has a college degree, the value of that education is diminished. We will end up with a population that is overeducated and underemployed.

College students are not "children," but young adults who should be expected to fend for themselves, even if that means taking out loans to finance their university expenses.

Providing higher-educational benefits to students who are not citizens (foreign nationals) is counter to the interest of U.S. taxpayers.

The American Dream includes a level playing field, but it should not include a leveling of the players. Everyone in this country has the opportunity to a free, K-12 education. When we, as a society, start leveling the players instead of the field, we commit a great injustice.

Paying for higher education is a tax burden that the American public cannot afford.

Well, you could omit the 3rd supporting detail if that is allowed. In my opinion, you'll get a stronger argument with 2 paragraphs of supporting detail and a para of refuting the counterargument. Refuting the counterargument is a powerful strategy.

But... why not use 6 paragraphs? That is cool, too.

Okay so here's the rough draft:

[INTRODUCTION] College is an investment in your future. With more college graduates, the better the world today will be. So the state of California should pay for all students that want and qualify to attend college. California, as well as many other states, has a constitution that requires that state universities be free of tuition for residents of the state. The constitution worked well until 1965, universities began creating "fees". These "fees" rises commonly up to five or even fifteen percent in a single year. Imagine taking four years of college, paying ten thousand the first year and the devil the next if it rises up by fifteen the next. The cost for college looks like your social security numbers, nine digits. Because of this, students make decisions about their futures accordingly, fewer jobs are being filled and undiscovered talents remain a secret.

[SUPPORTING DETAIL ONE] Sticker shock and debt aversion drive away many students who might be able to take advantage of financial aid. The families that cannot afford college for their children that are very smart and would like to go to college but they are not able to. Studies have shown that lower-income families have children that know that college is too costly as often as in the grade eight and make their path for the future accordingly.

[SUPPORTING DETAIL TWO] A modern country needs highly skilled graduates of all kinds. Not just skills that attracts employers but the creative new knowledge of the next graduating classes in college that will be a tremendous resource to the society as a whole. To allow as many people as possible to develop to their full potential and to develop the country, we need to make third level education available to all. Restricting access to the elite will have detrimental effects on the society and the economy.

[SUPPORTING DETAIL THREE] There are many students that are so smart, and they would like to go to college. However, they are not able to because of the cost. For example, Washington Post says that "there is a girl called Danielle Price with 3.3 grade point average and a 1700 SAT score, she has done better than many of her classmate. Of course, getting into college won't be a problem. Paying for it will." There are many other cases, education is expensive and causes so much stress.

[COUNTERCLAIM] If colleges were free, then the state would have to pay for all the incoming students. That would result in higher taxes, very costly for sure. And note that not everyone wants to go to a third level of education. Paying for higher education is a tax burden that the American public cannot afford especially with the economical crisis in America. But without a college degree, many young people become trapped in low paying jobs. The average college graduate earns almost twice the pay of a high-school graduate. Within a few years after you graduate college with your degree, you can easily pay off the debt.

[CONCLUSION] Funded education is an absolute necessity for every next generation. Shock and debt aversion drive away many students who might be able to take advantage of financial aid. A modern country needs highly skilled graduates of all kinds. And there are many students that are so smart, and they would like to go to college. However, they are not able to because of the cost. So I believe that the state of California should pay for a third level of education for qualifying and wanting students. If we don't have an education, we won't get a good job. If we won't get a job, we won't earn enough money, if we won't earn money, we won't be able to have an amazing future. And I want to have an amazing future.

-------------

I was told that my second paragraph needs some quotes from students that are experiencing the same problems about financial issues. So I will soon interview a few students in college, attending college, or that have just recently graduated from college. As for my grammar and sentence structures, well, I am not confident in those areas so I would really appreciate any grammar corrections.

I forgot to answer your question before. The thing is, college is never FREE if people need to get paid to provide it. It's really a question of whether taxpayers should cover it or not. Maybe the strongest argument is to say it should be partially subsidized so that it can be made affordable to students. Also, scholarships can be made available to help the most deserving students...


If you say something like this, you should cite the source of info.

You wrote this with great structure!


Hmmm... yeah, reasonable!

I like this, but I'll make a small change:
If we won't get a job we won't earn enough money, and if we don't earn money we won't be able to have an amazing future. And I want to have an amazing future.---I made a small change...

Hmmm... yes, you know, maybe tax money should pay for all education, and then students will need to earn the best opportunities by performing the best. That would even the playing field and give poor kids a chance to compete with rich kids.