Applied English Language Studies: Further
Explorations - ENG2601
Assignment number: 03
Unique number: 150924
Due: 4 August 2025
Total marks: 50
, Title
How Informal Tone and Loose Structure Weaken the Academic Standing of “Is College
Worth It? Is This Even the Right Question?”
Introduction
Academic writing is expected to convey complex concepts with precision, objectivity, and
organization. These features distinguish scholarly texts from journalistic commentary or informal
opinion pieces. In their article “Is College Worth It? Is This Even the Right Question?”, authors
Josipa Roksa and Richard Arum evaluate the effectiveness of U.S. higher education, arguing that
college graduates are frequently unprepared for both the workforce and civic life. While the issue
they explore is undeniably important, the article’s casual tone and fragmented structure fail to
meet the formal standards of academic writing. This essay evaluates how these stylistic and
structural choices undermine the persuasiveness of the authors’ argument. Referencing principles
outlined in the University of Sydney’s video What is Academic Writing? (2020), the essay
concludes that the article’s informal presentation detracts from its academic credibility and
overall impact.
Tone: Conversational Style and Lack of Objectivity
A formal and unbiased tone is essential in academic contexts. It requires precise language, an
absence of colloquialisms, and a commitment to presenting information with clarity and
impartiality (University of Sydney, 2020). However, Roksa and Arum adopt a tone that is overly
casual and emotionally charged, which weakens their authority as scholars.
For example, the article opens with the rhetorical question, “Is a college degree worth it?” and
responds immediately: “Yes, on average, college graduates fare much better in the job market
than high school graduates.” This approach imitates spoken conversation rather than academic
reasoning. Informal expressions such as “fare much better” and “make it through four years of
college” (Roksa & Arum, 2015, para. 12) contribute to a tone that lacks the precision and
neutrality expected in scholarly work.
Moreover, terms like “aspiring adults adrift” borrowed from the title of their earlier publication
add a layer of subjective judgment. As explained in What is Academic Writing? (University of
Sydney, 2020), academic language should be cautious and allow room for interpretation,
typically using hedging phrases like “may,” “might,” or “suggests.” Roksa and Arum, however,
make conclusive statements without such nuance. For instance, the claim that many students
finish college without “substantial improvement” in critical skills is presented without
acknowledging potential variations across institutions or programs.
Explorations - ENG2601
Assignment number: 03
Unique number: 150924
Due: 4 August 2025
Total marks: 50
, Title
How Informal Tone and Loose Structure Weaken the Academic Standing of “Is College
Worth It? Is This Even the Right Question?”
Introduction
Academic writing is expected to convey complex concepts with precision, objectivity, and
organization. These features distinguish scholarly texts from journalistic commentary or informal
opinion pieces. In their article “Is College Worth It? Is This Even the Right Question?”, authors
Josipa Roksa and Richard Arum evaluate the effectiveness of U.S. higher education, arguing that
college graduates are frequently unprepared for both the workforce and civic life. While the issue
they explore is undeniably important, the article’s casual tone and fragmented structure fail to
meet the formal standards of academic writing. This essay evaluates how these stylistic and
structural choices undermine the persuasiveness of the authors’ argument. Referencing principles
outlined in the University of Sydney’s video What is Academic Writing? (2020), the essay
concludes that the article’s informal presentation detracts from its academic credibility and
overall impact.
Tone: Conversational Style and Lack of Objectivity
A formal and unbiased tone is essential in academic contexts. It requires precise language, an
absence of colloquialisms, and a commitment to presenting information with clarity and
impartiality (University of Sydney, 2020). However, Roksa and Arum adopt a tone that is overly
casual and emotionally charged, which weakens their authority as scholars.
For example, the article opens with the rhetorical question, “Is a college degree worth it?” and
responds immediately: “Yes, on average, college graduates fare much better in the job market
than high school graduates.” This approach imitates spoken conversation rather than academic
reasoning. Informal expressions such as “fare much better” and “make it through four years of
college” (Roksa & Arum, 2015, para. 12) contribute to a tone that lacks the precision and
neutrality expected in scholarly work.
Moreover, terms like “aspiring adults adrift” borrowed from the title of their earlier publication
add a layer of subjective judgment. As explained in What is Academic Writing? (University of
Sydney, 2020), academic language should be cautious and allow room for interpretation,
typically using hedging phrases like “may,” “might,” or “suggests.” Roksa and Arum, however,
make conclusive statements without such nuance. For instance, the claim that many students
finish college without “substantial improvement” in critical skills is presented without
acknowledging potential variations across institutions or programs.
