Rhetorical Analysis Paper
English 1301
Rhetorical Analysis Paper
February 6, 2013
Fewer Students Less Money In “No-Nonsense Approach to Attendance Policies Would Cut Defaults,” William Cooper tries to show how community colleges need to focus on attendance policy for the better of the student and for the school. The former school teacher shows that at a previous school the attendance policy wasn’t enforced the way it should have been. In this article, Cooper argues that attendance policy should be enforced for the reasons of government-loan money provided for colleges. The writers purpose was to show that having a strict attendance policy meant being able to keep receiving government money for the college. “I thought about asking if his generosity had something to do with the government-loan money the college got to keep as long as students stayed on the roster for 60 percent of the term…” The audience is towards the government and towards colleges who don’t have strict attendance policies. The writer’s perspective is that colleges should have a strict attendance policy so that they don’t waste taxpayer’s money or government money. “This might cut into the income stream of some for-profit colleges, but it would provide welcome relief to the taxpayers who have to pick up the tab for these bad debts.” Cooper looks at what is better for the student as well as the community in that it should be a stricter policy to prove that it is not a waste of money. Coopers evidence is effective because he uses a personal experience to prove a point. “I don’t know if its default rate on student loans is lower than the other institution’s, but I would bet it is. It seems to me that the government could reduce the number of defaults if it mandated that participating institutions prescribe, and enforce, no-nonsense attendance policies.” Cooper wants to prove that if the schools enforce the rules more than the government would have less of a problem. The writer uses ethical appeals by
Rhetorical Analysis Paper
February 6, 2013
Fewer Students Less Money In “No-Nonsense Approach to Attendance Policies Would Cut Defaults,” William Cooper tries to show how community colleges need to focus on attendance policy for the better of the student and for the school. The former school teacher shows that at a previous school the attendance policy wasn’t enforced the way it should have been. In this article, Cooper argues that attendance policy should be enforced for the reasons of government-loan money provided for colleges. The writers purpose was to show that having a strict attendance policy meant being able to keep receiving government money for the college. “I thought about asking if his generosity had something to do with the government-loan money the college got to keep as long as students stayed on the roster for 60 percent of the term…” The audience is towards the government and towards colleges who don’t have strict attendance policies. The writer’s perspective is that colleges should have a strict attendance policy so that they don’t waste taxpayer’s money or government money. “This might cut into the income stream of some for-profit colleges, but it would provide welcome relief to the taxpayers who have to pick up the tab for these bad debts.” Cooper looks at what is better for the student as well as the community in that it should be a stricter policy to prove that it is not a waste of money. Coopers evidence is effective because he uses a personal experience to prove a point. “I don’t know if its default rate on student loans is lower than the other institution’s, but I would bet it is. It seems to me that the government could reduce the number of defaults if it mandated that participating institutions prescribe, and enforce, no-nonsense attendance policies.” Cooper wants to prove that if the schools enforce the rules more than the government would have less of a problem. The writer uses ethical appeals by