Although there should be policies in place to ensure equal opportunity for all students, regardless of race, affirmative action gives an unfair advantage to students of color, and does not solve the institutional disadvantages that minorities have. Affirmative action is a messy, brute force method of trying to close the enrollment gap. Although on paper it may seem like a good idea to require colleges to admit a certain number of students of color, it actually gives an unfair advantage to minorities. A white student and a student of color with identical grades, test scores, and resumes do not have an equal chance of getting into the same college because one student belongs to a minority. Affirmative action causes the same problem it attempts to solve in reverse.
Affirmative action was first proposed by Vice President Richard Nixon in 1959, and would be expanded upon during the civil rights era in the 1960s to end discrimination, and be away for white people to atone for what they had done to minorities in the past. Affirmative action allows minorities who are stricken by poverty to be accepted into school that they would otherwise not be. Thought this program had good intentions and heart, in reality it would only cause discrimination to become worse. Affirmative actions must be abandoned due to the negative impact it has on our colleges. There are a lot of arguments that defend the use of affirmative action and advocate its effect on college campuses.
Nemko, Marty. "America 's Most Overrated Product: Higher Education". The Chronicle of Higher Education, June 2008, Web.Feb.28, 2017 Marty Nemko 's main argument in his article "America 's Most Overrated Product: Higher Education" is that college education is not necessarily needed in order to achieve a greater success in the future. He in fact argues that college education just creates a bigger debt that will be very hard to pay in the future for students. Nemko includes a vast number of statistics in order to help support his main argument; he appeals to the reader ' logos.
Many believe it is absurd to still consider the NCAA amateur sports after all it has become but just as many think the exact opposite and that college athletes already receive fair compensation for their participation. This is a big decision that could impact the lives of thousands nationwide and revolutionize sports as we know it. College athletes should not be paid because of the many benefits that come with being a student athlete and because it is not a realistic resolution. One reason college athletes should not be paid is because of the many benefits there already are to playing a collegiate sport. One being reduced or free admission also known as a scholarship.
Shiell, the author of “Campus Hate Speech on Trial,” opposes speech codes on campus and insists the importance of a university to “distinguish genuine harassment from mere offensiveness” (169). In order to achieve equality, a university must adopt “educational and economic measures” instead of imposing punishments due to the fact that educating has a better result in the long run (169). Also, universities must make sure that due process rights are under the protection, meaning that you might not be sinful although you are accused of disobeying speech regulations (169). Shiell believes that universities should come up with some policies that are concentrated on conduct rather than speech since speech is tolerable but not the action (169). Even if a university must set up rules to regulate, it should regulate speech that is a “targeted, intentional, repeated verbal abuse serving no legitimate academic purpose” (171).
Student athletes are not professional athletes or entertainers, and should not be paid for playing on a college team. Although, I no longer play sports the debate of college athletes and whether they should be paid or not still interests me. As a lot of people from Neuqua play sports, many of them should be concerned about the argument, because this could affect them in the future. When deciding what college to sign with, one factor is the amount of scholarship money that they are going to receive. College’s spend much more on athletes scholarships compared to academic scholarships that they give out.
The No Child Left Behind law was created for this reason, because no parent want to see their child fail, and think that they can’t receive a good education. In the United States, it is believed that if you get good grades you will get into a good college and obtain a degree and a high paying job. Education is the great equalizer among students to achieve upward mobility many think. But is this true? Is the racial gap in education really something to worry about?
1 Many kids graduate school wondering what college they want to go to and if they want to spend so much money on it. Though some people think that college isn’t worth it I’d like to respectfully disagree. I think that college is worth it. The evidence I have behind my reasoning is that people with a diploma that are not going to college won’t be able to experience amazing social gatherings than people with a degree, and people with a diploma make less money than people with a degree. 2 First, people with a diploma that are not going to college won’t be able to experience amazing social gatherings than people with a college degree.
The schools where more students of color were allowed had funding issues, thus making it difficult to have the latest tools and labs to teach in. Douglass list points of which admission of any would prove the argument: “If prejudice in nature, then there will always be an issues when to races are brought together […] if there is anywhere in the world where white and black don’t clash, then this will prove that prejudice is not natural […] If prejudice if race and color is natural, the ignorance then they to strive to place it away from human relations as a enemy to the peace, happiness […] if color is an offense, it is so, entirely apart from the manhood it envelope. There must be something in color of itself to kindle
Free college tuition for everyone is not fair to those who earn their degrees by working hard with patience to affect their societies, others might just work to improve their lives and are not always concerned about the world around them. For example, student who pays to buy their books, protects and values what's in the book than those who are in school with free primary education. Free college tuition has no motivation on students to accomplish their career. So student will take free education for granted. As was previously stated, "'free' is about much more than money."
Do you think college athletes should be paid? This controversy is debated in Opposing Viewpoints: Sports and Athletes. Al Woods titles his argument College Athletes Should Be Paid because the schools are making money off the players, some athletes are being paid under the table, and athletes are giving up on education. However, Krikor Meshefejian titles his argument College Students Should Not Be Paid because students receive scholarships, the payment system is “problematic”, and the experience is payment enough(98-99.) Meshefejian has the better argument that students should not be paid.
University of Texas two prospective freshmen Abigail Fisher and Rachel Michalewicz sued the University of Texas because they failed to gain admission into the university. They girls claimed they were discriminated because of being white. Prior to the Fisher case, the number of minorities enrolling at University of Texas increased drastically. The reason behind such numbers is for the school to become “race-neutral” meaning to make the presence of minorities at the university equal. Before the Fisher case, in 1996, in HOPWOOD, the Fifth Circuit of Appeals ruled that the University of Texas could not use race as a factor for attaining diversity.
This is because the players are the main aspect of college sports so without them the school would be losing money. “The NCAA, in particular, was an enormously complex and decentralized body and was not under the direct governing authority of presidents. Second, the principle of academic integrity aimed to prevent the widespread exploitation of student-athletes(Hearn)”. The NCAA was formed to fight the problem that could happen which is players going on strike. This could still happen if players feel that they have been mistreated, which is why players should not be allowed to unionize.