Neal-Richardson Case Analysis

Neal-Richardson (2000) argued that college students should be responsible for paying their own tuition versus depending on their parents for financial support. Neal-Richardson believed that relying on parents to pay tuition creates laziness in students and a feeling of obligation in parents. The first point that Neal-Richardson raised is the sense of entitlement that students feel about having their parents pay for college. She noted the resentment that she felt toward students at their shock in discovering that she was paying her own way through college without her parents’ assistance. The second point that Neal-Richardson raised is that if she paid her own way through college, so should others. She described working full time, making $4.75 an hour to pay her way through school and successfully earning all A’s. The third point that Neal-Richardson raised is that not being responsible for tuition makes one take their education for granted. One of Neal-Richardson’s classmates expressed that she was too busy to go to school and work simultaneously. As a result, because her classmate lacked multitasking skills, she only earned B’s and C’s.
Most students today either have their tuition paid for by their parents or receive grant funding or a loan. What makes her second point successful is that other students can find inspiration in learning that she paid her own way through college. What makes her third claim successful is that many students often take their education for granted because it is not their money being wasted if they fail a class. The weakness in Neal-Richardson’s claim is that she should not hold everyone up to her standard and consider everyone who chooses to accept their parents’ financial assistance as