No, I just started at the beginning and did the first few pages. I really don't want to spend the time parsing through the whole thing pointing out all of the flaws and mistakes. I'll give a few more examples:
Pages 4 to 7 are rambling drivel. They do nothing to advance the paper's thesis or position. For example, take this lengthy paragraph on page 6:
It is offered without a single shred of evidence, proof, reference, or anything else. Some of it is nothing but personal opinion like:
Where does she get this data from? It's never explained. That's basic to any academic paper. It's the whole basis of an academic paper. You gather facts, evidence, and information then present it, documenting where it came from, then draw conclusions from it.
Then, as I previously have pointed out she drifts off into a history of community colleges on pages 7 to 13 that is totally irrelevant to the paper's thesis. This amounts to nothing but filler. It has no purpose within the paper, draws no conclusions, and isn't used elsewhere in the paper.
On pages 13 and 14 she brings in the topic of "Pre-Tech students." The key two sentences (badly written) that are salient here are:
She then provides a table for the fall 2005, spring 2006 semesters to show the pre-tech classes versus college level ones. This does nothing to prove the claim she made in the statement I provided. She'd have had to provide say 5 years of data showing how the pre-tech classes have grown in number each year, or the like, to do that. What she provides is one semester's worth of data. That is, a single data point which as anyone even cursorily versed in statistics knows is meaningless.
She doesn't show that pre-tech classes have "continued to increase."
This is typical of the whole paper. She blithely tosses out some statement or conclusion and then fails completely to offer any sort of corroboration or supporting evidence to back it up. That is academic failure at its most basic level.