Arguement and Counter- Arguement

My argument in this paper is that students are not saving money by attending a community college with the intention of transferring to a four year institution. Transfer students face many obstacles when attempting to transfer to a four year institution. These barriers include lack of academic preparation, lack of information, lack of financial information as well as students suffer "transfer shock".

The counter argument to this would be that students are saving money by attending a community college. This is partly true if the student takes on the responsibility of gaining all the information needed for a smooth and not stressful transition. If students don't take on this responsibility they face many obstacles when transferring. One of the most frustrating obstacles is credit transferring. Students who are lacking information will take classes that will be on transferable and the student will ultimately be wasting time and money.  As stated by Zamani, "… when only some credits were accepted, the degree-completion rate fell to 42 percent. And more than half of the students who transfer to four-year institutions receive only partial credit for their previous coursework" (Zamani). 

State government encourages students to attend two year colleges by programs such as the NJ Stars Program which gives students a "full ride" through community college, but if students are not academically and financially prepared, not informed on information needed such as financial advise, and go through a phase called "transfer shock", then students could ultimately increase their time at a four year institution by retaking classes that the student has taken already. This sets the student back academically and increases their time at the four year institution therefore increasing their expenses.