Elite Colleges

 The Most Persuasive Argument

  I think that the most persuasive argument came from Richard D. Kallenberg, because he gave many strong and persuasive points. His argument was well put and the flow was also good. I like Ivan dont agree with him most of the time. There were other arguments about the elite colleges that were good, but i think that that Kallenburg's argument was the strongest out of all of them. There are many things that i liked of his argument. One of them was:

attending a selective college with a large endowment offers numerous advantages, which can put students on a more favorable trajectory in life.

This is somethiung that catched my attention and i asked myself, "how can you get numerous these numerous advanteges are ther ad vanteges that you cant get at public universities?" So then i kept treading and he then Kallenberg answered my question he said
 "At selective institutions, a student is surrounded by talented and high achieving peers." I dont really agree with him because at public Universites, ther are many students who are talented and high achieving peers. Another thing that i like of his argument was when Kallenberg said

If you attend a highly selective college, the per pupil expenditure is $92,000, compared with just $12,000 at the least selective colleges. The richest colleges require students on average to pay just 20 percent of the total cost of college, compared with 78 percent at the least wealthy colleges.

At first, i was very confused when i read this. But, then found out that you as a student going to an elite university is still paying more than a student going to a least selective College even thogh paying 20% of the college cost than the student paying 78% of the college cost. Another thing that surprised me was wehen Kallenberg said a studen is more likely to graduate from a selective institution than the less ones.
Not only he said this, but so did other debaters. Overall, I think that Richard D. Kallenberg had the most persuasive argument even though I dont agree with some of his points.

The Least Persuasive Augument

I think that the the least persuasive argument comes from Martha (Marty) O'Connell.
First of all, when she said " Understand that it is not where you go that matters." It certaintly daoes matter where you go and theres important reasons why.
  You want to go to a college where you will feel comfortable studying for about four years. Why would you choose to go to a college that you probably dont even know how it is and choosing to go to that college just because its a college.
  When she started to talk about the cekebritities and how they went to college but some of then dropped out, but do very well in life and are filthy rich. I said to myself, "yea thats amazying but thats luck.

The “oohs” and “aahs” follow as the audience learns that Steven Spielberg, Steve Jobs and Bill Gates dropped out of college...

Like Cameron said. All Bill Gates did is took MAC and put it into a PC. He just did that and then became filthy rich. It doesnt matter what celebrities did. What matters is you. You going to good college and succeed. I was actaully surprised when I read that Bill Gates dropped out of college, but i dont really care abou that. What matters is you,  you wanting to go to a good college it get a great education or even lucky enough to go to an elite collge.