Giving students little to no choice about their clothing makes for a mass of children with barely any ability to express themselves. Giving a school full of children one or two kinds of things to wear does not create unique individuals -- it creates labeled groups with little distinction between them. Many people use their clothes as an outlet for self-expression, so when that avenue is taken away from them, it obstructs individuality and unique
They will negatively affect students who really want to study and work hard. Some students in high school who care more about going to the university and they cannot wait to go there and be with people who work hard and take it seriously. Another reason why higher education should not be free is that students would not be able to handle the stress. Also they will drop out easier and this is wrong! Students will never work hard and they would mess around.
In discussions of athletes, a controversial issue is why certain athletes are able to receive athletic scholarships compared to others, why schools are not funding athletics enough money to supply these student athletes with essentials while they travel from place to place, and the limited amount of educational options. You would think that students with high academics and grade point averages would be offered a scholarship that is too suitable to refuse rather than those who go to school, do no work, and just depend on playing sport(s) to help them further their career. Well, this is the complete opposite. Student athletes that actually want to get an education and work hard at their sport(s) are overlooked by those who are just athletic, which is highly unfair. Why should any athlete who puts little time and effort into studies be capable of being awarded a full or partial scholarship to a division 1 or 2 school?
Schools are debating on whether or not to take away sports. Students are constantly getting serious injuries from playing them. Therefore, recreational exercise should be eliminated because they cost too much , students will have better grades, and schools are being distracted by sports and are not focusing on education. Schools are spending great deals of money on new equipment for sports and they don’t realize how much cash they are actually spending. According to Amanda Ripley in her article “Should Your School Get Rid of Sports?” She said “New bleachers can cost half a million dollars” (10).
One possibility is arming teachers which would provide a good deterrent to school shootings. Arming teachers would be a bad thing because It will cost a mass amount of money, the teachers will need a great deal of training, and guns make the school environment very menacing and very uncomfortable. Arming teachers will cost a heap of money because there are a lot schools in the USA.Donald Lee Sheppard wrote this sentence in his article “My Daughter is a teacher, not a security guard “There are more than
Do you want them to have to handle even more pressure? If kids could get money for good grades there’s a huge chance that they would cheat more often. Even if they did get the money, parents could also steal it from them. As far as kids know, parents would use the money for paying off their cars, houses, etc. But what’s the point for kids to work so hard just so their parents can get a little extra
Final Sports Essay Schools everywhere have sports and Sometimes they're helpful and Sometimes they're not. Districts spend so much money on sports they often don't realize when they need to buy supplies because their funds have all been spent on extracurricular activities.Therefore, schools should not have sports because it costs a great deal of money, would give students more study time, and will reduce stress on the children. Schools universal have sports, but they cost a great deal of money. Schools don't realize how much money they spend on sports when they “travel for games they have to pay for hotels, busses, substitute teachers, meals,” also sports are a big distraction from the actual school work. (Ripley 3) Although sports are very helpful and could get students into great places, maybe sports aren't meant for all school the costs of sports are too much and districts could be saving thousands of dollars every year.
“As I see it, the debate between summer vacation vs. year-round school glosses over the most important questions namely, how can we bring play back to our nation’s schools?” (Darell Hammond) Year-round schooling would cause many problems if implemented at shattuck because Year-round schooling cost to much money and Kids need free time, and time with family and friends, also If you go to year-round schooling you won 't learn more than traditional schooling. Year-round schooling cost to much money. With the loss of these extracurricular activities, the school would then lose money that the activity brings in. Like With all the activities not being there anymore than they are losing money the activity brings so this is a crime. (JD Smith) And
Those kinds of students will take up space and over populate the classrooms and lecture halls. Consequently, lessons will not be as effective when there are too many students for one instructor to handle (http://www.trade-schools.net/articles/should-college-be-free.asp). Simply put, too many students will crowd and disrupt the learning environment for the entire group. The chance of students being distracted during class can increase and take away from other who truly long to be there. In the end, college should not be gratise since it is not a good fit for
Why Students Should Not Go to College The progression from high school to college is one that requires maturity, independence, and responsibility. While there are ways to help prepare for it, such as getting a part-time job or internship, touring the campus and nearby towns, and planning long-term finances, the drastic changes in a lifestyle of dependence to one of independence that students are forced to go through can be shocking. Because college focuses on highly specialized training for jobs that will inevitably be monotonous and low-paying, and because it drains money from young adults who have little to no source of income, students should consider alternative options after high school. Colleges stress the importance of a higher level
This could still happen if players feel that they have been mistreated, which is why players should not be allowed to unionize. The main reason players should not be allowed to unionize is players could get whatever they want if they went on strike. A nationwide strike of NCAA athletes would not only upset the school, but also the millions of people who watch college sports every year. Besides making masses of people upset a strike would lose millions of dollars of revenue for schools, affecting the whole school not just the athletes. “This threat has to do with the position of these so-called "premier" sports as part of a continuing and dramatic revolution in the culture of sport in America(Hearn)”.
Schools Shouldn’t Keep School Sports Do they really need to keep school sports? If schools cut some school sports they would save a lot of money. The problem is some schools are poor but they still can have sports. Schools would benifit a lot if they canceled school sports plus there are club sports on weekends after school. Schools should cancel sports.
Now let’s go back to the reason that I’m writing this paper, the negatives. First of all, if after school sports were taken away, kids wouldn’t be able to work on their social skills. Next, if after school sports were taken away that would lead to other extracurricular activities would not happen, like cheerleading and pep band. Finally, kids would not be able to get college scholarships for sports. These are just a few more negatives to this, but there are countless more.