- Which reason was the most surprising and least surprising?
I am surprised that family and friends posed a considerable challenge to the completion of college. Typically, the family is a motivating factor that encourages students to enroll and attend college. Friends are also peers that available in the school environment with whom most students study. According to the survey, 11 percent of students who reported this challenge claimed that their families did not support their decision to go to college. It is easier to think of family as a supportive factor in the education of kids rather than destructive elements. This is because a considerable number of parents urge their children to complete their training and could even pay for it if they are capable.
On the other side, I was least surprised by paying expenses. College charges are expensive for most students in America, and consequently, most students rely on student loans to pay their tuition fees as well as living costs. Most students are forced to work part-time jobs to keep themselves afloat during the semester. We must note that the time available for side hustles is limited as some students take demanding courses. This has a toll on the rate of completion as some are completely drawn into hustling since survival is the primary instinct of a human. The top two reasons for work and paying expenses are tied at the hip as one could affect the other.
- How is this challenge an inductive generalization?
Inductive generalization posits that what has been derived in an instance is used to conclude the whole thing. The research was conducted in nine states and covered ten colleges and about 6000 students only. This sampled data was used to conclude that all community colleges experience these problems and in their order of merit. This could be false as a study on all students across the USA could reveal different things. There is a high possibility that these problems are specific to these ten colleges only or the six thousand students and that the majority do not suffer the same issues and could be experiencing different matters.
- Is this a strong inductive generalization?
The inductive generalization can be substantial if there are enough sample results and characteristics. The sample result is strong if it occurs as frequently as the conclusion. The study displays averages from the 6000 participants and makes the percentages in comparison with the other reasons mentioned in the survey. The tallied reasons are the most frequently recurring to individual students, thus allow the inductive generalization drawn in the instance. Sample characteristics are sufficient if they are not biased and are proportional to all the crucial features. The results of the study showed two correlated reasons topping the graph. This eliminates any suspicion of bias. Reasons also tallied close to each other, giving the impression of proportionality. E.g., work and paying expenses. Therefore this inductive generalization is strong.
- The survey includes nine states; can it be a representative of the 50 states.
The survey cannot be a correct sample of the whole group and cannot be used to conclude. Nine states represent approximately 20 percent of the entire population and could represent the remaining 80 states. However, the community of students that were interviewed was little and should be reconsidered for more accurate results. Some states could have taken steps to remedy some of the problems mentioned in the report; thus, students interviewed could not say them. Using the nine states for a definitive conclusion is wrong and probably misleading. The more accurate method would be to draw student samples from all states in the country.
- Evaluating analogy strength.
The first parameter we will use to evaluate the analogy is the relevance of the similarities mentioned in the premises to the similarity that is drawn as a conclusion. In the example, the fact that marijuana and alcohol have adverse effects on psychomotor skills is actual. However, the similarity is negative and cannot motivate an argument that will imply the conclusion. It is also irrelevant to the general reasons for legalizing things.
We shall also analyze the argument by the degree of relevant similarity of the premises. The case states that alcohol and marijuana are both addictive. There is a similarity, as put forth by this argument. However, there is little relevance to the similarity indicated in this premise. Finally, we shall look at the number and variety of instances that form the basis of this analogy. That both products could have medicinal value could be true. However, the amount of time alcohol or marijuana is used as a treatment is questionable and mostly unpopular. This creates a weak premise to conclude. Therefore the analogy is a weak one.
- The analogy for pain.
When I have a headache, it feels like a barbaric operation where somebody is driving a wooden wedge against my ribs. Imagine the instance when someone casually pokes your ribs with a stick or their elbow. Now think about a wedge going through your ribs and separating the bones. My head feels like the wedge is pulling aside the ribs to create entry space for itself. The blood vessels on my side are gushing the blood around the wound, creating the feeling of a hot liquid that aggravates the pain. That is how my head feels.
- Is the relationship between average earnings and education causation or correlation.
According to the graph, having a doctorate increases your chances of getting employed but does not guarantee the best pay across the industries. The income levels for an associate degree holder and a college dropout are also not so different though the employment rates are different. However, there is a considerable income difference between bachelor’s degree holders and associate degree holders. The statistics generally point to a clear cut relationship between the level of education and the chances of getting employed. However, there is no convincing relationship between education level and income as someone with lower qualifications could end up earning more like in the case of the doctorate holder versus the professional degree holder. This means the relationship between education and income is correlational and that another factor such as the specific industry remunerations or required skill set could be the factors affecting the type of income.