Review: In or out?

Further education has been considered one of important and effective approaches to finding a future job in Britain. However, it has witnessed a considerable increase in dropping out ratio recently. In the article titled In or out, the author points out causes of and possible solutions to this issue. In the study, based on his background knowledge, coupled with using the information from reports by organizations and others researches, the author argues that British further education universities didnt originally have any anxiety over the number of students dropout because students who suddenly left universities are likely to harm their career. Since people have been more conscious of equal chances, colleges encourage students from under-represented groups as a move to widening participation. The first reason why students had left colleges the author states is that the political situation in the UK demanded a vigorous tax reduction, causing public-funded for further education. In addition, the report named Unfinished Business indicates that the school abandonment caused the waste of public money. Furthermore, the author shows barriers in improving retention, composed of the lack of research data to base strategies and slowness in student data computerization not knowing what their retention rates were or any patterns involved. Finally, on the basis of Martinezs work, the key manners are laid out in his study, namely sorting activities, supporting activities, connecting activities and activities transform the students. The authors argument is quite informative and interesting and the author succeeded in providing some reports to reasonably strengthen viewpoints. Many of them make it clear the reasons why the number of students got involved in further education has been on the decrease. They are also trustworthy and common, which provides clear statistics and proofs on this issue. However, several limitations must be considered in interpreting the study findings. The first limitation is on the studys scope. For strategies and possible solutions to improve intention ratio, the author pointed out ones by Martinez (1996), restraining the arguments verifiability. Another minus of the study is its methodology. The author had accessed the issues on the subject of figures without more specific perceptions or statements, in only political situation, hadnt mentioned the social situation. In summary, it has to be admitted that the current study is still far from being conclusive. Although the authors article is a useful one and provides some insights into the decrease of the enrolment, it has yet to suggest more specific strategies on intention improvement. Therefore, it is required to conduct further approaches to this issue.