Murray is a political scientist that has written books on social issues, as well as being mentioned in Steinberg’s article for his position of opposing higher education. Murray believes that the pressure to receive a college degree to get a good job are forcing youth that do not really want to go to college to go in order to even be able to compete. These youth force campuses to change the way they approach education. Instead of teaching the young adults at a collegiate level, they develop new majors to help find themselves which is good, however those type of degrees from those majors should not determine if someone gets a job or not. Job qualifications should focus on an applicant’s certification for that job. Murray stresses that, “Certifications would tell employers far more about their applicants’ qualifications than a B.A. does” (Murray). He is not promoting not attending college, but he does want to emphasize the importance of gaining the correct certifications for jobs instead of worrying about attaining a degree that may or may not have anything to do with the career that one would end up having. Steinberg has very similar ideas, but a different …show more content…
Steinberg highlights the importance of vocational training for young adults looking for “the key to success in the United States” (Steinberg). He believes that one could have an early start to their lives instead of wasting time and money chasing a degree that most likely will have nothing to do with one’s career. Steinberg refers to Murray as well as other economists in their effort to steer some students towards an intensive, short-term vocational career training that could replace college. Steinberg also explores the opposing side of his argument that this skipping college alternative could “lower expectations for some students” (Steinberg) which could in turn not allow students to experience a new