Research Blog #9: Argument and Counter-Argument

Briefly, within my paper I argue that because of pre-existing class inequalities, the middle class has turned to college as a means of social mobility.  However, college does not act as a lubricant between classes, but rather expedites inequality due to the compounding effect of advantages for the rich at each stage of the process.

 Rather than countering one of my individual sources, which there is obvious room to but I personally do not agree with much of, I will counter my own compounding theme from within the paper.  One might argue that these advantages may exist, but are not insurmountable, and rather than being compounding factors, they are simply small advantages that can be easily dodged at each stage.

To counter the counter-argument, I will provide the example of Canadian hockey players from within Malcolm Gladwell's Outliers. Within this he explains how a cutoff date creates a small advantage for slightly older children within the system to start.  However, when they make the traveling team, this small advantage snowballs into a great one as they receive the benefits of better coaching, better competition, and more practice that the other kids do not enjoy.  This is analogous to the system that portray in my paper.