In light of the peer reviewing, I need to change my enthymeme. My original enthymeme was: The current Utah voucher plan will exclude the poorest students from higher quality education in a competitive educational marked because the current Utah voucher plan will not provide sufficient monetary means for the poorest students to attend any school of their choice in a competitive educational market. As we peer reviewed, I realized that the voucher system could possibly provide a better quality education for the poorest students; however, the Utah voucher system does not provide equal opportunity for the poorest students to have access to the most expensive education, which is often assumed to be the best education.

The point of the voucher program is to improve education. I believe the voucher system would improve education; however, the playing field is not even: the poorest students would not have all of the options all of the other students above them would have with the edition of vouchers. They would need to be given more money in order to have all of the options the other students have. My enthymeme also errs because there is an assumption here that might be invalid. Most people in America think that the private school sector has better quality education than the public school sector. I need to find out if this assumption is actually valid. If private schools have better education than public school systems, then in order for this voucher system to be a fair system, all students would need to have the option of attending private schools.