A Review of Margaret Wente’s “Inside the Entitlement Generation” Essay

Margargont Wentes domain and Mail article on the existence and characteristics of the entitlement generation in Canada is both horizonated and thought provoking. The first strongly retains that the entitlement mindset is quite prevalent in Canadas universities, has been nurtured by its preceding generation and has led to students unrealistic ladder expectations. Although Wente effectively communicates her opinions regarding the entitlement generation, her arguments argon compromised by poor use of appeal to authority and a polarized come on to the takings.Those who have stepped onto one of Canadas many university campuses may have discover the student psyche encompassed by its definition. Wente credits Dr. Ken Coates, a prof of history and former Dean at the University of Waterloo, with elucidating the mindset of the entitlement generation the kids whove unceasingly been told theyre smart, and never pushed too hard (par. 3). With the assistance of Dr. Coates expertise, th e author argues that the breeding and existence of this generation of students has led to their unrealistic work expectations and disappointment post-graduation. She contends that this mentality is derived from student disinterest and laziness, yet nurtured by a former generation. Wente make head steerings her opinion on the windic of the entitlement generation very clear by employ a theater tone, which may be misinterpreted as condescending by the wrong audience. She makes implications regarding the entitlement generation and their work ethic.Applying these implications to a sizeable population is Wentes fundamental flaw. Moreover, she bases many of her arguments on the shared opinion of Dr. Coates and does not warp from this source. Implications that apply to large populations and the use of only a single source leads to generalizations that consequently contribute to error in appeal. These characteristics of Wentes writing make many of her claims questionable and open to cr iticism, even though they may be valid arguments. The author uses Dr. Coates apparent expertise on the entitlement generation to support her arguments. She reassures her reader that Dr. Coates is an expert on the entitlement generation by indicating that his book, Campus Confidential is a guide to the mindset of the entitlement generation (par. 3). Wente presents Dr. Coates opinions as if they were her own, demonstrating her concurrence.Her agreement can be seen in her support of Dr. Coates statement that students bring assignments in late and speak up that professors will mark them without penalty (par. 4). Wente claims that this attitude is predictable because thats the way its been all their lives (par. 5). Wentes editorial is riddled with this type of accord, which may be criticized by the reader. The author only introduces the audience to Dr. Coates who is assumed to be the expert-on-the-topic and needinesss an indication that there is adequate agreement among other experts. A dditionally, there is no mention of the opinions held by Dr. Coates students regarding his credibility and competence in his role as a professor. It is possible that his opinion of the students he has encountered during his career has been shaped by their attitude towards his teaching ability, popularity or subject of expertise.Finally, Wente adopts a polarized antenna to the topic by implying that students are either a part of the entitlement generation or the top 15 to 20 per cent of their class (par. 10). Wente argues that only the top of the class, can realistically anticipate jobs with a first annual pay that exceeds $50 000 (par. 11). She implies that the remaining students are encompassed by the definition of the entitlement generation and are considered both uninterested and lazy. Furthermore, the author suggests that only the entitlement generation expressed their liking for unrealistic work/life balance, vacation time and a starting annual in the recent survey of unive rsity students (par. 11).She fails to acknowledge the possibility of a group of students who do not achieve a GPA that militia them a spot at the top of the class yet let a genuine desire to learn and be challenged. These are the students who might devour the works of Frantz Fanton, Karl Marx and Gloria Steinem (par. 7), but may also be involved in extracurricular activities, which take time away from their studies. Dr. Coates and Wente, do not severalise important attributes that students gain from being involved in clubs, sports or organizations. This lack of consideration contributes to the polarized approach adopted by the author.Wentes holds a firm opinion regarding the entitlement generation and their characteristics. Her article brings public attention to a park mindset of Canadian students, which may help to explain the unrealistic work expectations of the current generation. This information may help employers who draw from Canadian institutions accept candidates that will integrate well into their organization based on their attitude. Employers should be wary, though, of the information presented in Wentes article as it adopts a polarized approach to the topic of the entitlement generation with poor use of authorities.Works CitedPrinsen, Jean. Mind good Open Critical Reading. Kingston Queens University, 2011. 1-6.Wente, Margaret. Inside the Entitlement Generation. Toronto The Globe & Mail division of Bell Globemedia Publishing Inc., 17 September 2011. F9.