The examples used to support Reeves' argument are great, but he could have provided more exciting scenarios. Reeves did a great job of describing other solutions outside of four-year universities, such as professional studies, community college enrollment, and raising admissions standards. While he made many great examples and arguments, he also had notable flaws. Reeves' tone and use of emotionally charged words; for example, referring to ESL students as “homegrown functional illiterates” can distract the reader from your argument. The reader may feel offended by his voice, while others may say he is using specific language to convey his emotions that his job and the future of education are in jeopardy. Another flaw in his article is the paragraph that includes “the college years are a time that will never return.” That sentence is completely absurd! Rebecca Mead, a New Yorker writer, would not completely agree with Reeves because in Meads' article "Learning by Degrees," she argues that college should be used for intellectual enrichment. Mead would state that college should be available at any time to anyone who is open to expanding their knowledge. Outside of these flaws, Reeves made a