A Critical Analysis of the Article "entitled Students Expect Better Grades"

A critical analysis of the article "Entitled Students Expect Better Grades"

I as a member of an English class have recently been asked to critically respond to an article called ‘Entitled students expect better grades for effort: study'. An article that I can venomously declare is the poorest written article that I have seen in years. Shannon's arguments to her theses that most college students have "expectations of high marks for modest effort and demanding attitude towards teachers" (Proudfoot) can be easily discredited. A few sections of this text in particular especially demonstrate the author's lack of eloquence and how the simple placement of words seriously damages her ability to argue her theses.

Sharon's choice of quoting while referring to the opinion of the professor who conducted the study her article is comical in irony. As "a research professor of psychology" (Proudfoot) Ms. Greenberger has several reasons to report the outcome she found, making her extremely biases and her opinions suspicious.

In another significant part of the article Sharron attempts to use "Gil Troy, a history professor at McGill University" to support her claims with his observations. This section is also humorous in the article, considering that in addition to being a professor with the same bias as Ms. Greenberger, Mr Troy dose no have any degrees in psychology or professionally knowledgeable in early childhood education making his testimony next to worthless.

In another portion of the article, possibly the most meaningful point when in reference to the actual study this entire article is based on it is noted that the survey was conducted on a sample of "undergraduates aged 18 to 25" (Proudfoot) just a portion of the population of the university. Consequently, since this entire survey and thus the theses of this article is therefore based