Jones 1

Jane Jones

Professor Davis

ENGL1302.32E06

17 March 2021

Rhetorical Analysis of Addison’s “Two Years are Better Than Four”

In the article “Two Years are Better Than Four,” published in 2007 in the New York

Times Magazine, Liz Addison addresses an audience with very little knowledge of community

college and argues that community colleges deserve more attention and praise because they are

the only place left that students can get the true “college experience of self-discovery:

(366).  Addison explains that students accepted into 4-year colleges have already proven

themselves “worldly, insightful, cultured, mature” (367 ) by completing rigorous entrance

requirements.  Community colleges, on the other hand, will accept anyone.  There are no

placement tests, and for students who might not otherwise have a chance at higher-education,

community colleges provide “accessible hope, and an option to dream” (368).

Ultimately, Addison views community colleges as a great American institution that deserve more

respect and recognition for the opportunities they provide to the American public.  While

Addison relies on a rebuttal to set-up her argument, most of the article is an evaluation based on

personal experience and logical reasoning, where Addison effectively praises community

colleges and explains their positive features.

Addison uses a rebuttal to begin her essay.  She spends the first three paragraphs

explaining the position of Rick Perlstein, who argues in an opinion piece that students today can

no longer have a true college experience like those in the 60s.  In the “University of Privilege”

today, he sees students “working and studying and working some more” (365); they graduate
 Jones 2

with a resume, not a book list. Therefore, he concludes that “the college experience – a rite of

passage as it was meant it to be—must have come to an end” (366). Perlstein’s argument is the

perfect example of Addison’s point that community colleges are overlooked, and Addison

notes that his argument is incorrect because most likely “Mr. Perlstein has never set foot in an

American community college” (366).  Addison’s use of Perlstein as a counter-argument sets up

her argument, and she can spend the rest of the text explaining why he is wrong. The

presentation of Perlstein's ideas provides the reader with evidence that community colleges are

often over-looked, which then leads smoothly into Addison’s main argument that they need to be

acknowledged and appreciated. She relates her personal experience to bolster her argument. She

considers herself lucky to have attended a community college. It gave her opportunities she

might never have had and now. It is the “priceless springboard” (366) that gives her admission to

the University of Privilege.

Although Addison refers to Perlstein throughout the essay, she focuses on evaluating

community colleges.  She argues that they are a great American institution, using some of

Perlstein’s criteria, but also some of her own.  Perlstein argues that college students today are

overly prepared and therefore are incapable of having true personal growth experiences in

college.  Addison counters that community colleges still welcome those that are un-prepared,

explaining that it allows students to “just begin” (366) and that any students can begin their

higher education “as a rookie”(366)  However, Addison adds her own criteria to the evaluation,

explaining that community colleges deserve respect and appreciation because they offer students

who otherwise “would never breathe the college experience”(368) a chance at their dreams.

Addison repeats this pattern--community colleges are great because...-- throughout the essay,

presenting the reader with clear logical reasons to support her evaluation of community colleges.
 Jones 3

Although Addison makes an excellent point here--community colleges are unique in

allowing any students a second-chance at a higher education--I do not like her tone in this piece.

She makes a good point that Perlstein was wrong not to consider community colleges in his

original argument.  However, she doesn't need to be so arrogant about it.  The mocking tone that

she uses to point out Perlstein's omission undercuts her own point.  Her argument would have

been stronger is she had treated the opposing viewpoint with more respect.  This is an error of

ethos--her tone might make her seem unreasonable to some readers.

 Jones 4

Work Cited

Addison, Liz. "Two Years Are Better Than Four." 2007. They Say/I Say: The Moves

     That Matter in Academic Writing, by Gerald Graff et al., 4th ed., Redshelf  ed., W.W.

Norton, 2018, pp. 365-68.