She is beauty, she is grace, she’s wearing a pink dress. She can do anything. This is Barbie, the girl living not just the American, but every dream. She is the person most children look up to. With her impressive resume of more than 200 careers, Malibu dreamhouse and over 9 million subscribers on her YouTube channel, Barbie is one of the biggest role models for children. Is she a good one though? Even with her success in everything she does, her surreal, nearly emaciated body sends a very different message to the world. There have been countless debates about Barbie brainwashing children into thinking that the ideal body type is stick thin and blonde. For a long time, Barbie has come under flames for ethical stereotyping and gravely mistaking cultures around the world through incorrect portrayals. Is this what is Barbie teaching children to be? An ignorant person stuck in the mindset of a 1940’s white lady, unknowing of the world around her? All while doing this, Barbie is also a feminist with almost every career in the book and her boyfriend Ken, just as an accessory. With the conflicting actions of the doll comes the question: Is Barbie a good or bad role model?
Barbie is notorious for her unrealistic body and extreme proportions. When asked about her unconventional body, Mattel Inc. replied that “the proportions were created for ease of dressing and undressing the doll, not replicating an adult figure”. While this is the case for dolls, the portrayal of Barbie in her movies, TV shows, books and video games is identical to the thin yet tall body, if not more so. By representing only one body type in all her movies, TV shows, etc., children are learning that the ideal body type, is the thin type.
Furthermore, research published in the journal Body Image found that “girls who played with thin dolls experienced higher body size discrepancies than girls who played with full-figured dolls”. At a young an age, children remember things they are exposed to often and find inspiration in it. The exposure “perpetuate stereotypical messages about weight, beauty, and appearance” and if they are exposed to a pretty doll very often, they become inspired to be just like the doll, even her thin body. One of the most appalling moment regarding Barbie’s body image was when Mattel Inc. released the Slumber Party Barbiethat came with a weighing scale permanently set to 110 pounds and a weight loss book with the sole instruction “Don’t Eat”. It is needless to say that Barbie became the poster image of a bad role model after this stunt.
Before her big mistake, Barbie was created by Ruth Handler in 1959 to promote the idea that “a woman has choices”, and to break stereotypes. In the beginning, Barbie was a teenage fashion model, but has ever since evolved into more than 200 professions ranging from firefighter to a paleontologist to the first female presidential candidate. The most ambitious of these careers were created in times when a woman was nothing more than housewives. The first Barbie Miss Astronaut was released in in 1965, 4 years before the first man stepped foot on the moon. This was a source of great inspiration for many young girls because for the first time, they were not how to be a mother and a wife. Instead, they were taught to dream and be anything they want.
In January of 2020, Mattel Inc released 176 new Barbies, including a doll in a wheelchair, with prosthetic limbs and a doll without hair. Most popularly, they also released a doll with vitiligo, an autoimmune condition where skin loses its pigment cells resulting in discolored patches all over the body. By doing this, Barbie is well on its way of achieving its goal of inclusivity and diversity by showing a “multidimensional view of beauty and fashion” (Lewis). In 2017, Barbie came out with the first Hijab-wearing doll based on the Olympic fencer Ibtihaj Muhammad and gave a new meaning to their idea of women being anything, they want. In doing so, Barbie is breaking free of stereotypes and by teaching children the progressivity of life, is modeling the frontier of opportunities for women.
Mattel Inc. has taken many steps to redeem themselves. Most notably, coming up with a diverse collection of Barbie dolls in an attempt to be more inclusive. The new dolls will be available in “7 different skin tones, 22 eye colors, and 24 hairstyles” (NBC News). This action alone has appeased many of its critics, and coupled with Barbie’s new YouTube channel, where the doll herself has spoken about issues like depression and racism, Barbie is on her way to redemption. It is no surprise that Barbie is controversial. She is everything, from a housewife, to a princess to a model to the first female president of the United States. She is also the alien like woman with a “a 39” bust, an 18” waist, 33” hips and a size 3 shoe”. Due to the constant push and pull on Barbie’s actions, the question still remains: Is Barbie a good or bad role model?
“Barbie Hails Astronaut Sally Ride with New ‘Inspiring Women’ Doll: CollectSPACE.” CollectSPACE.com
Bellis, Mary. “Biography of Ruth Handler, Inventor of Barbie Dolls.” ThoughtCo,.
Grenoble, Ryan. “PHOTOS: TERRIBLE Advice, Courtesy Of A Barbie From 1965.” HuffPost, HuffPost, 5 Dec. 2012,
Jellinek, Rebecca D., et al. “The Impact of Doll Style of Dress and Familiarity on Body Dissatisfaction in 6- to 8-Year-Old Girls.” Body Image, Elsevier, 24 June 2016,
Lewis, Sophie. “Barbie Dolls with No Hair and Vitiligo Added to Mattel’s ‘Most Diverse Doll Line’ Yet.” CBS News, CBS Interactive, 28 Jan. 2020,
O’Kane, Caitlin. “First Hijab-Wearing Barbie Based on Olympic Fencer Ibtihaj Muhammad.” CBS News, CBS Interactive, 14 Nov. 2017,
Senior lecturer. “Is Barbie Bad for Body Image?” The Conversation, 12 May 2020, “1965 Barbie Comes With ‘Don’t Eat’ Diet Book and Scale That Reads 110 Lbs.” Obsessed Magazine,
A question that has been circling through society for many years is whether the death penalty should remain a punishment. Currently, in the United states, the death penalty is executed through lethal gas, lethal injection, firing squad, hanging, and electrocution. Many see these as brutal, inhumane things to do to any person, while the other side sees this as a reasonable punishment for certain actions. Many people have different but strong views of this subject, while both sides have valid arguments. But the question still remains, should we abolish the death penalty?
As shown, the United states is pretty divided regarding capital punishment. There are currently 28 states in the U.S., that have the death penalty in affect. A main question asked, is the death penalty effective?
Abolish Capital Punishment
People arguing against the death penalty present some main points like how it is ineffective and an inhumane method of punishment. The feeling of taking one’s life does not sit well with many. This idea is expressed by the governor of California, Gavin Newsom.
“I know people think eye for eye, but if you rape, we don’t rape,” he said. “And I think if someone kills, we don’t kill. We’re better than that.”
Gavin Newsom
This idea is expressed from a leader, and someone with strong feeling of the subject. He wants his audience, the people of California, to join him and help portray his message. He bring effectiveness to his statement by relating the subject to rape, another idea in which people feel strongly about. tying this together he shows the image of what it means to be against this type of punishment. He states that us as people are better than that, there are ways for justice and more effective ways to execute a punishment. He continues to effectively represent his idea,
“I cannot sign off on executing hundreds and hundreds of human beings, knowing — knowing — that among them will be innocent human beings.”
Gavin Newsom
Another idea of the message against the death penalty is represented in the statement by Mr. Newsom. He starts off saying that we are better than that, meaning we do not need to kill to prove a pint or gain justice. He then effectively ties in a reason behind his meaning. Many argue that capital punishment is effective, but statistics show there are some flaws with this from of punishment. Although mostly accurate, there are innocents executed from the death penalty. This is the idea that Newsom wants to get across. That innocents are executed and it is not okay.
“We can’t give back a life once it is taken, and for one I would prefer a cautious approach to even the slightest possibility of taking an innocent person’s life”
Geo Ilyin
This idea does not sit well with the protestors of the death penalty. People are already against this method of punishment, and that is for the given criminals. When the idea of now executing innocent people comes to mind, it brings a different level of passion to the subject.
Signe cartoon
TOON30
Death Penalty Crimes
This cartoon brings the next argument for those against capital punishment. Shown in the cartoon is a woman teaching a class about the death penalty. While teaching, she shows the crimes that result in the death penalty. Race is the idea of this lesson, and the idea behind the argument against the death penalty. On the board, you can see that white people go on trial for the death penalty only for very serious crimes, like murder treason and spying. While black people get the same punishment for not only those crimes, but things so simple like getting in to your car, or jogging. Now the idea isn’t that black people get capital punishment for walking with skittles, it is that when race comes in to play in the courts, the situation gets handled differently. People against the death penalty argue that this is not okay. They see a minority group being targeted with these extreme punishments and claim it is unacceptable. People argue that people of color are targeted with the fact that,
“Blacks make up 12% of the U.S. population, but they make up 48% of those on death row (55% of those on death row are people of color)”
Brad Bushman
Now this is one of the larger arguments people have against the death penalty. When it comes to the controversy of whether to keep the death penalty or not, many use the idea of racism to back their claim. The unfortunate truth is that racism still exists. Although there has been great progress towards civil rights, it does exist. Although there isn’t much people can do that, arguers against the death penalty fight that this is on racist procedure that can be abolished.
Keep Capital Punishment
Now as strong as people feel to abolish the death penalty, the other side to keep the penalty feel just as passionate. Many feel that this is the only method to punish those who have done the most inhumane crimes, like murder. People, especially the families of victims, feel the opposite as governor Newsom. That in these situations, it is necessary to go eye for an eye, and set the image that there are some crimes are simply unacceptable. A main argument to keep the death penalty is that it is an effective deterrent. People supporting this believe that knowing that the death penalty is an active method of punishment, they will think twice about committing a murder, in fear that they will lose their life in the process. This idea is best expressed by a proffesor at Fordham University,
“Even though statistical demonstrations are not conclusive, and perhaps cannot be, capital punishment is likely to deter more than other punishments because people fear death more than anything else. They fear most death deliberately inflicted by law and scheduled by the courts. Whatever people fear most is likely to deter most. Hence, the threat of the death penalty may deter some murderers who otherwise might not have been deterred. And surely the death penalty is the only penalty that could deter prisoners already serving a life sentence and tempted to kill a guard, or offenders about to be arrested and facing a life sentence. Perhaps they will not be deterred. But they would certainly not be deterred by anything else. We owe all the protection we can give to law enforcers exposed to special risks.”
Ernest van den Haag
This idea expresses the feelings of those in favor of capital punishment. The feeling that those who are willing to commit such horrid crimes, fear, if anything, death by law. Supporters also argue the danger that other inmates and guards face by keeping these types of people around. They argue that the death penalty provides safety for the individuals that would be surrounded by the people who should be executed.
“I don’t think you should support the death penalty to seek revenge. I don’t think that’s right. I think the reason to support the death penalty is because it saves other people’s lives.”
George W. Bush
President Bush has an effective way of expressing this idea. He explains his main point in supporting the death penalty is to save lives. When saying this he appeals to his audiences pathos. He puts it in perspective showing that by carrying out capital punishment, lives are saved.
Recidivism is another large factor that the people supporting the death penalty argue. Wether it is in prison or not, people are scared; individuals willing to commit a horrible crime once, are more than likely willing to do it again. This argument behind the supporters of the penalty is explained in the statistic,
“About 68 percent of 405,000 prisoners released in 30 states in 2005 were arrested for a new crime within three years of their release from prison, and 77 percent were arrested within five years”
STEPHANIE SLIFER
This statistic is a reason that drives the supporters of the death penalty to fight to keep it. It is very common once a prisoner is released for them to reoffend. So not only are people worried that these criminals willing to murder will be released and be able to murder again, but that if these criminals are kept alive, they have nothing but time to do the same thing. Murderers kept in jail have the rest of their life to spend in prison, so they have nothing to lose. it is feared that because of that, everyone planning on getting released as well as guards, are in danger when surrounded by these people
The question
Both sides to this controversial topic have points that are worth being heard on both sides. Now while both ideas behind the subject are strong, valid, and passionate, it is hard to tell wether the U.S. will come together for a common decision. Because while these ideas are valid to both sides, this sensitive subject has sides too passionate to agree in the other. It is tough to get every one on the same side of this argument when the people involved can be anywhere from the family member of a victim to a religious individual that simply can’t support the idea. So the question will remain, should we abolish the death penalty?
Both are golfers, is one an athlete an one not? How can you tell?
The debate over whether or not golf is a sport wages on the internet, in bars, amongst sportswriters, and even on the golf course.
Proponents reason that golf meets the definition of “sport” found in the dictionary, requires physical exertion and coordination, and is recognized as a sport by sporting goods companies, athletic associations, fans, the media, and more (Bailey). Opponents say golf is better described as a “game” rather than a sport. They claim it does not require rigorous physical activity, particularly in the cardiovascular sense, and can be played professionally by people who are overweight, injured, or “non-athletic” (Potts Harmer). They point to golf’s role as a social, leisurely activity throughout history.
Golf isn’t a sport, it’s a game. I’m not saying it’s not a difficult game, with lots of mental stuff. But it’s not a sport like mine. Where is the combat, the intensity of what we do?
Conor McGregor, Mixed Martial Artist
I treat golf as a sport. I let other people treat it like a hobby.
Tiger Woods, Professional Golfer
For people who are not particularly interested in golf, this debate may seem very trivial. Why does it matter what you call the activity? The truth is, the debate is much deeper than the overt arguments laid out by these sports writers.
Throughout history and especially today, sports are highly valued in society for all sorts of functions. From social gatherings to gambling to simply being entertained by the skills of specialized individuals, people spend mass amounts of time on sports. They form rivalries and establish geographic pride behind teams. The Fox Corporation reported that in 2018 sports accounted for 88 of the 100 most watched television broadcasts of the year. According to PwC, in 2018 the sports industry in North America was valued to be worth over 71.06 billion dollars. The scope of sports is so massive that you could argue it impacts almost every person in some way.
But don’t just look at the statistics; think back to when the Covid-19 pandemic started causing panic in the United States in March of 2020. It was a direct result of the coverage of large sporting events reporting on athletes contracting the virus. Specifically, Rudy Gobert of the Utah Jazz served as a catalyst, halting the NBA. As soon as sports began shutting down, schools and workplaces did too. Amid the pandemic, many people were bored senseless without their regular dose of live sports.
People love sports. So, for people wondering why the proponents of the golf debate are wanting to be included as a sport so badly, it seems to me the answer is clear. Respect.
This is a very convenient image.
Sports in our society are thought of as a pathway for people who are highly skilled and work hard. We show these perceptions by idolizing the athletes and traditionally paying them handsomely. It’s a privileged lifestyle for those who are talented enough to have it.
But how does society value “games”? In many cases, “games” are something for your free time. A thing for fun, not for productivity. This is the difference the proponents of the golf debate are set upon. By describing their passion as a “game”, they feel they are being belittled—told their passion is not a worthwhile pursuit, and that it does not deserve idolization and praise.
The violence of some proponent’s reactions to is surely a result of golf’s role as a major sport in the past, and their large presence today. They feel they are being downgraded. According to Forbes, golf in the United States perpetrated 84 billion dollars in economic activity in 2016. A 2016 poll by Public Policy Polling found that twenty three percent of Americans, which applied to the population would estimate about 75 million people, said they were fans of golf. Among other things, preparators cite this as their reasoning for why golf is a sport. They have the media, the sponsorships, the audience, the revenue, the celebrities, etcetera; they feel entitled to the same title, and innate respect, because they are doing many of the same things. When we consider the “ego” of the golf like this, it almost seems like a fight for equality. So why is there a population of opponents trying to gatekeep the title of “sport”?
Surprise. The answer is respect again. Or perhaps “ego” if we’d like to call it that. If you look into the debate, the majority of the opposition consists of people who higher value other “sports”. This is where their ego comes into play. The opposition feels putting golf next to a more physically rigorous one, like say football, and calling them both sports detracts from the image of sports, commanding less respect. This is shown through language like “golf requires nowhere near as much effort physically or calories as almost any other sport” (Potts Harmer).
This language brings another value to light as well.
Why would the comparative level of cardiovascular activity be put at the forefront of this debate? Because in our idolization of people throughout history, athletes have been the image of a healthy, attractive body. Standards of beauty are set based on those who spend their time on activities that just so happen to shape their bodies a certain way. And as the columnists of the Sportster say, “you only need to look at some golfers to see that they are quite clearly not athletes at the peak of their physical conditioning” (Potts Harmer). The opposition in the golf debate fears that if these more average people, as far as physical condition, are labeled “sports athletes”, the sport athlete will no longer carry the same association with being the model body type. This, in turn, would lower their image and perhaps command less respect.
Do average people need all that muscle? What purpose does it serve in everyday life?
Though we may feel a small urge to side with inclusion, both sides of the argument have valid points. Who is to say for sure how respect might shift with a change in language? The debate seems trivial in nature but is riddled with complexities as we wonder how people have developed to include sports into their identities and attach them to their own egos, as well as how we value “athletic” body types as a model for our own and offer those body types more respect. It doesn’t matter if you don’t care about golf, or even if you don’t care about sports, because if you participate in our society at all, the principles of this debate affect you too.
One topic that is constantly discussed around the time of election is significantly relevant at this time is the debate surrounding abortion. Like the election this year, people’s views on abortion are quite split in the United States. One side being pro-life which supports the idea that all unborn humans are humans and share the same rights as someone who is living outside their mother’s womb. The opposition of this is pro-choice which supports the values surrounding women’s fertility rights. This topic is often debated because both sides of this argument have strong reasoning to support their claims. Everyone’s view on this topic is somewhat different because everyone is exactly that, different. The perspective of a woman on this controversial topic is often contrasting a man’s view. People in our society should listen to each other’s views and seek to find information on their oppositions point of view.
“Pro Lifers” believe that when a child is aborted, murder is transpiring. Their opinion on an unborn baby being a human being revolves round four main aspects. The first being distinction. These babies have physical and internal distinctions like a human being would. These unborn children have DNA, body parts and even a nervous system. The development of the nervous system allows some children in the abortion process feel pain. The next aspect supporting an unborn child being a human being is that the child is living. A child inside the stomach of a woman scientifically meets the criteria for life. The child can repeat cells like any other human being and the child also has a running metabolism. The third point in this argument is that these children are not just living beings, they are human beings. All unborn children have a specific human genetic signature, no two children have the same genetic signature. In the eyes of pro lifers this further extends their views on how special and fragile life is. They believe that each human life is just as important as the next and each life should be celebrated and loved. The last leg of this discussion on whether or not an unborn child is a human being or not is that the child is an organism. The child is not just a group of tissues or organs, the child is guided by a genetic code that is specific to each child. This is further explained by MCCL when stating “Human development begins at fertilization when a sperm fuses with an oocyte to form a single cell, a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marks the beginning of each of us as a unique individual”. These positions on what is a human being or not leads the discussion to the next significant reason supporting pro-life, rights.
People that tend to lean towards pro-choice often believe that just because we are so different than unborn children we should not share the same rights. Pro lifers believe that the differences between us and unborn children have no relevance with whether or not someone has rights. An article by the MCCL makes a really valid point surrounding this view when saying
“Appearance has nothing to do with value”
MCCL, pg. 2
This quote in the eyes of pro lifers is exactly what they are trying to get across to their oppositions. Whether someone looks similar to you or not should not determine your value. If rights and values were only permitted to people who look similar to you than equality for all would be something unattainable. Pro lifers believe that if you share the four aspects of a human being then rights should be granted to you.
The MCCL article does a really good job at explaining exactly what it means to be pro-life. The text goes through the scientific view of this issue, the justice behind abortion, and arguments against abortion. What is really missing from this article is the question “Why?”. Why are these women getting these abortions’ and that is the important question. The MCCL does a poor job with empathy when addressing the other side of this argument. This article, though it is quite informational, needs to feel for these women getting abortions, even if in their minds it is wrong. The tone is unforgiving. It seems as if there is nothing worse in this world then getting an abortion. An example of this is when the author uses the words “Tough Circumstances” to describe a situation evolving rape. For someone who is trying to learn more on this topic, this article could easily drive them away.
Transitioning to the other side of this argument, pro-choice supporters believe that women have the right to decide whether or not they want to carry a child. The majority of people that are against this movement are men. This is so significant because men are often a significant factor in the decision of whether or not a woman is going to abort a child. It is common for men to leave their partner when they found out about the pregnancy. Pro choice believers think that women should never have to face the consequences of what she did not solely do alone. When a child is created there is a dual responsibility between the man and woman to take care of that baby if the parents are ready. One should not be put in the position to raise a child alone. Women often are and this leads to an abortion. It is drastically important in the eyes of pro choice supporters, that women have options with their fertility. Having options puts women on the same grounds as men, compared to having no options and being vulnerable to getting taken advantage of. Misogyny plays a large role in whether or not a woman gets an abortion. Some pro choicers believe that misogyny and abortion go hand and hand. In a essay by MIT named Pro Choice: Know the Facts, the author further explains this issue when saying
“I’m pro-choice because it’s the only option that isn’t poisoned with misogyny. I believe that we are responsible for justifying our beliefs, and just as one cannot claim that a given race is inferior to another because “it’s what I believe”, I don’t think one can argue that old white men can assert control over a woman’s uterus — and future — because they claim to believe that a fetus is comparable to a human life. That belief is so clearly a result of the fact that only women can get pregnant and only women would ever have to carry an unwanted fetus to term that I find it laughable that anyone claims being anti-choice has anything to do with concern for potential life. Can anyone really believe that abortion would even be an issue if men had to face the possibility of giving birth to and raising a child because of one night of failed contraception?”
MIT, pg 1
This quote goes into depth on how this is more of the women’s decision rather than the mans. Again, people supporting pro-choice do believe that the decision should be discussed between both male and female parties.
A topic of importance for people who support pro choice is that women should always have the right to control their fertility. They believe that women have the right to choose what they do with their body. Women should want to bring a child into this world. If a woman gets pregnant and does not want to conceive the child, pro choice supporters believe that the baby should not be brought into this world. Each mother should love their newborn as if they were a gift not a burden. Another aspect of this process is responsibility. Abortion is responsible to pro-choice believers. On the other hand, bringing an unwanted child into this world is irresponsible.
The pro-choice article by MIT and the pro-life artilce by MCCL both describe and illustrate exactly what it means to be on their specific side of thise argument. The MIT article unlike the MCCL article shows a little more emotion in their writing. It is clear that they are attempting to create some sort of a connection with the reader. The author is trying to put herself in the shoes of someone who is thinking about an aborition. This is very effective because this allows the reader and writer to share a connection which ultimately leads to the reader being more engaged. Relatability is something that is important to address when writing an article. The author wants to relate to the reader which is an aspect of writing that is not found in the MCCL piece. The MCCL article feels more like an instruction log or to do list rather than an informational piece. The MIT article has a comfortable tone to it, almost an inviting tone. The author does not want the reader to feel ashamed for being there while compared to the MCCL text, the reader feels almost bad about themselves for just reading what is written.
The Need For Discussion
There is something missing from both pieces and both sides of the argument and that is showing empathy for the other side. People on both sides of this argument believe strongly in what they believe in. In order for this argument to be less hostel questions need to be asked and voices need to be heard. Aspen Baker in a TED talk does exactly that. She describes the importances that comes with asking questions and learning about something that you are not fully familiar with. As political as this topic is, she explains that we are missing the bigger picture here. People are going through harsh times and are having to make some really tough decisions. There should not be any argument here she explains, there should only be choice and discussion. Society warped this conversation into a battlefield where no fighting is needed. This conflict should not be a conflict at all but instead a conversation. A conversion between people of both sides expressing what they believe is right and wrong. This way we can fully understand one another and ultimately feel empathy for each other.
One in three women have an abortion in their life. This means someone everyone knows will likely have one in their life. What is important is that the people that do understand that it is okay. There are people to talk to, loved ones, friends or even someone you may have just met. The need for discussion and the expression of one’s feelings is something that needs to be implemented in this argument. This topic of discussion is fogged with what is right and what is wrong. This argument will continue to survive if we tell eachother what we are doing is wrong. Aspen Baker’s TED talk summarizes what is needed perfectly in her TED talk. Baker says “Finding ways to shift the conflict to a place of conversation is the work of my life”. If everyone in our hatred filled society lived the same way, there would be no argument to be had.
When nearing the end of your junior or senior year in high school, the question of whether you’re going to college is asked frequently. Some, if not, the majority will answer yes and go on to tell you about their future plans, but what about those that choose not to go to college, what questions are asked next? Do they ask you what your future plans are, if so, then what if you don’t have any? Are you looked down upon because you aren’t furthering your education in pursuing a degree? There are so many questions and uncertainties and that is okay, everyone walks their own path. Factors of normality, expenses, or just the question of if a degree is needed anymore come into play on the decision of if you should attend college.
College isn’t for everyone, it shouldn’t be forced upon young adults who know what they want to do and would rather get on with their life and skip that college experience. As of 2015, only 69 percent of students graduated in the previous spring and attended college that following fall, that leaves 31 percent of those students who have chosen to go a different direction. It is becoming more normal to not attend college and the choice of doing so is becoming more normalized. In this article by Raychelle Cassada Lohmann, she furthers the question some more, “Is college really for everyone, and does a degree lead to true happiness?” The exposure of different job opportunities in high school that doesn’t require a degree could be the reason why some students choose to forgo college amongst other variables and that is where Lohmann is coming from. There are many examples, although maybe extreme examples, of people who are very successful and didn’t attend college; Steve Jobs, Ellen DeGeneres, Rachel Ray. They all have very different professions but goes to show that there are so many opportunities out there that don’t require you to spend thousands of dollars and halt your life for four years. Ask around, I am sure there are more people than you think that did not attend college, and that gives you a mentor in your journey.
The image below shows the percentage of how often college graduates use their degree or major in their job field post-grad. As you can see, it is not guaranteed that you will need your degree in your career, so seeing these statistics can make students wonder what is the point of attending a university if you aren’t even going to use it in yours future. This is something everyone who is deciding to go to college or not thinks about and wishes they had a valid answer, is getting my degree needed to be able to get a job? Everyone has a hope to be happy and successful and it is scary thinking that this decision could altar your life one way or another. Everyone’s story is different, no one is guaranteed a job no matter if you went to college or not, that is important to keep in mind.
Is the cost of college a factor for people choosing to skip college? It is no shock that when you go to college it will be expensive and you want to make sure you get the most out of every penny while you’re there, but what about those who can’t afford to go and are forced financially to skip out on college? Almost one-fifth of students who were admitted to their top choice of college or university in 2016 but decided not to go there turned it down because of the cost of attendance. One-fifth may not sound like much, but when you think about the 19.6 million college students, one-fifth is more than you think. Imagine if the price of college was cheaper, some may argue that college should be free, but if the cost wasn’t an issue there would be a substantial amount of more college students on campus earning their degree and furthering their education. This rhetoric comes from the standpoint of cost and the effects it plays on the decision of going to college or not, which is one of the most fears high school graduates have when looking into their future. This is one of the top reasons why students choose to go a different direction after high school, with good reason, financial aid can only help so much and the fear of that debt can push young adults away from the idea.
I recently watched a TED talk by Eric Lee called, “You Don’t Need to Go to College, but..” and his stance on the topic was that with the internet and the tools we are presented to us today, we don’t need college, with the exception of medical fields and professors. Google and Wikipedia are amazing search engines that allow us to get our hands on the knowledge needed to start our own business or how to teach you to build anything you set your mind to, so why go through college and pay the money when you can learn for free. Lee went to college and he earned his degree and he still believes there are alternative ways to go about learning how to do a profession and earn a career. The “but..” in his speech is the 4 things that college can provide you that the computer or books cannot and those are; soft skills, safe space to fail, discover yourself, and a place for ideas. Lee’s presentation hits on the primary points for why young adults choose to go to college for those 4 reasons I have just mentioned, but he counters it with the fact that those skills can be learned without it. Yes, college can be that safe space and the world won’t always be as forgiving as your professors, but you learn and you grow from your mistakes. The biggest trait that stands out to me for the people who choose to not attend college and pursue a career on their own, is their drive and perseverance. Those who choose that path don’t have a degree to fall back on, all the have is their knowledge and their character to get them through life and I think that is special in itself.
The final question that I will leave you with is if a college degree is needed anymore? In 2010, only 62 percent of U.S. college graduates had a job that required a college degree. That is a little over half of the students who spent a minimum of four years at a college, spending thousands of dollars to get a degree that they potentially didn’t even need to get. Granted, there is the other 38 percent left that chose a field that needed their diploma and it all was “worth it”. In the end it makes you wonder what is the point of going to college if you can find a job that doesn’t require that degree. Brad Plummer, the one who wrote this statistic, is someone that believes that the job you end up with is based on where you live. The bigger the city you live in, the more opportunities you will have for yourself. Does that mean the more chance you could get a job that doesn’t require a major? No one can predict the future, you are taking a chance to start a life right out of college and those who do will find their way, college or no college. The ones that do choose college will say it’s the “college experience”, which is important to most, but some could say they like the challenge and they think it prepared them well for the real world. Everyone has their reasons as to why they attend college, but the choice to not attend college shouldn’t be frowned upon.
The nature of this conversation is very controversial and is highly talked about because it is the future of so many lives. The information given is all on the side of “your life, your choice” and I think that is how it should be. College is a choice, it is not required, getting that degree doesn’t guarantee you success in the world, it can only potentially open more doors for you. No matter what path you choose to pursue towards your future neither should be looked down upon nor questioned because that is the path you are destined to take and that should be your decision and your decision only, no questions asked. There are thousands of jobs out there and at the end of the day, if you have that drive and ambition to be successful in life and you work towards your goals and achieve them then you can go back and answer the question, is getting a degree necessary?
Have you ever wondered what it’s like to be a women in a society like today? Women are pressured by not only the opposite gender, but the norm of society that discriminates their rights and voice in many aspects. For abortion being one aspect, women should not have to feel guilty or entirely criticized for doing what’s best for them in the moment they’re in. Topics like abortion are important to acknowledge and understand the real meanings as to what makes it so significant in the world today.
Abortions are a controversial topic worldwide with divided sides. One side believes in pro-choice, while the other side believes in pro-life. This divide is seen throughout life and it is especially prominent in religion and politics. The article What Can I Do About Abortion? talks of the all the bad and issues abortions cause. The article Abortion Bans Strip People of Their Human Rights. Here’s Why We Must Stand In Solidarity Against Them, talks of the reasons why abortions should be protected. Regardless of where someone stands, it is important to understand the thoughts and beliefs from both sides.
What Can I Do About Abortion?
Brian, who is a Christian, uses his religious views as a way to influence his audience. Most religions and churches do not condone abortions, saying they are killing innocent life. About half of all Americans do not condone abortions, however, they do nothing for the fight for pro-life. The author wants his audience to stand up against abortions, so he uses the Book of James as a form of persuasion. He went on to say, “Certainly, fighting for life in a post-Christian society is a crucible for the activist, but he or she will almost always reap huge spiritual benefits from fighting for life.” The Book of James from the Bible and the statement contain examples of logos. Logos are seen when he talks of the Bible and of the benefits from God that would come from fighting for pro-life. Often, religious people believe that abortion is a sin. Murder of innocent life is a sin. His statement would persuade them logically, based on their prior beliefs surrounding murder and abortions (Clowes).
Clowes stresses the importance of the audience’s help in standing against abortions. He says to start by educating yourself on the topic. The knowledge learned will help you to become an advocate but also educate you on the importance of life. The author states the most important thing the audience can do to help would be to pray and to recruit others into the pro-life movement. He lists many sources, groups, and resource centers that help to educate and prevent. He talks of safe centers where people help mothers with their decision to not have an abortion. They list other options, like adoption or keeping the baby. This helps list other options than abortions and offer to counsel for the mothers. These resources listed are an example of logos. They help to logically strengthen the point of this article (Clowes).
Overall, this article is used to persuade an audience to the pro-life side of the abortion divide. The author believes that abortions are religiously and morally wrong. He discusses ways to support the fight, offering sources and resources that help to end abortions. The tone of the paper was seen as a cry to help. The language used was powerful and driving. The author did not shy away from his use of words. Instead, he used them proudly and relentlessly. The article showed pictures of “pro-life” headers and smiling people. The tone, wording, and imagery seen in the article helped to add to the appeal of logos and pathos.
Abortion Bans Strip People of Their Human Rights
The article, Abortion Bans Strip People of Their Human Rights. Here’s Why We Must Stand In Solidarity Against Them, by Mishra-Newbery and Todd-Gher discusses the reasons why safe and legal abortions must be protected. Their first argument says that abortions will occur whether they are legal or not. It is important to protect safe abortions. If abortions were illegal, people would resort to hangers and toxic medications, causing the mother harm. The authors say, “When governments restrict access to abortion, abortions continue to take place at roughly the same rate, according to the World Health Organization.” This example shows how logos are presented in the argument, giving logical information on the effects of restricted access to abortions (Mishra-Newbery and Todd-Gher).
The authors next present the idea that abortion bans in other countries and some U.S. states. Mishra-Newbery and Todd-Gher said that the bans are meant to control females, forcing them to conform to their stereotyped gender roles. The article stated, “They are an affront to their human rights and dignity and constitute gender discrimination.” The authors also state that queer and transgender people who need abortions face more laws that are an attack on their freedoms. The attacks on women and members of the LGBTQ+ community help to add to the pathos of the article. The statements made against the above populations are seen as an attack on basic human rights. This is used as a way to persuade the audience.
The article states that “any person who does not control what happens to their body cannot be free.” The authors say that there are many reasons for an abortion. They go way beyond the harm of a mother. It is a human right to decide what to do with your own body. The authors stated, “Governments must not only decriminalize abortion and ensure access to safe abortion in practice but also create social conditions in which people can make pregnancy-related decisions free of oppression, discrimination, stigma, coercion, violence, lack of opportunities or punishment.” This statement is a great example of how logos can be seen in the article. They use logical information on basic human rights to persuade their audiences.
The article talks about the importance of speaking out on the issue. Women activists from the U.S. and other countries speak out about the stigma surrounding abortions, sharing their stories. Marches and protests occur often, with women and people demanding to be heard. Educating yourself, donating, supporting, and protesting for pro-choice rights is what is needed for women to reclaim their rights. This is an example of pathos. The words used in this paragraph, like rights, protests, and so on helps to emotionally pursue an audience.
In conclusion, this article supports the pro-choice movement. They speak out on the reclaiming of rights of women and members of the LGBTQ+ community. The many reasons for an abortion were discussed, helping to explain why some people chose to receive one. The article also speaks of the many ways to help support the pro-choice movement. The tone of the article was seen as empowering. The language used was powerful and inspiring. The authors used captivating words like freedom, human rights, and more. The article showed pictures of protests supporting pro-choice. The tone, wording, and imagery seen in the article helped to add to the appeal of logos and pathos.
Through the conversation on such a heavily debated topic, abortion should be acknowledged in the right perspective. No matter the debate, there is more to change and focus on with the development of protecting and legalizing abortion. The decision lies in the hands of the individual and their right to make the decision for themselves should be protected and safe.
Mishra-Newbery, Uma, and Jaime Todd-Gher. “Abortion Bans Strip People of Their Human Rights. Here’s Why We Must Stand In Solidarity Against Them.” Time, Time, 27 Sept. 2019, https://time.com/5684858/international-safe-abortion-day/.
People say that playing a sport in college is like having a job. So, should these players be paid as such? in 2019 when Zion Williamson (the eventual #1 pick in the NBA draft) was required to wear Nikes due to Duke’s affiliation with them and broke through the shoe, causing Nike’s stocks to plummet. Nike may have lost money using Zion’s image and likeness but overall every year the company gains money from their equipment deals with the universities. Colleges year in and year out get millions of dollars off the image and likeness of the players they recruit to be a part of their program. Heck even companies paid the universities to have them in their video games and used the very same players of those teams in the game only to not pay them or list their last names on the jerseys. To me it seems like quite a double standard.
The colleges and video game companies can use them to get money but they themselves aren’t given a cut. The argument about a free education is valid. However, if the players were given a percent of the money made off of them they’d be able to pay for their own education and then some. Back in June, a class action lawsuit was made by multiple players against the NCAA. The article talks about how nike displays the highs and lows of using a players image and likeness, yet the universities build multi-million dollar arenas, pay coaches millions of dollars, and have billion dollar tv deals all because of the colleges athletes. The first instance this was brought to light was July, 2013. In this instance many players came out and said how they completely disagreed with the fact EA Sports was using their image and likeness without compensation. They eventually won the legal battle and the games are no longer made. Now I ask, how is it fair to understand that they should be paid for that but not their actual ability? Their skills are showcased throughout their college seasons yet don’t get a percentage of the money they make the university.
The video above from CNN’s crossfire discusses both sides of the story listing good arguments for why student athletes shouldn’t be paid while also sort of freezing the opposition into one point. The analysts discussed how the universities gain millions of dollars off of college football, however only 23 out of 208 of the schools in 2012 actually turned a profit. This meaning that the millions of dollars that these universities receive just off of college football wouldn’t be able to go towards player salaries if only a few of the universities can pay them. The other issue that is yet to be in question is what would happen to the other sports that are at the universities if they decided to pay the men’s college basketball and football players. If the universities chose in the end to pay these student athletes some of the sports that don’t bring in revenue for the school but give other student athletes a chance at more manageable education would suffer. The argument for paying athletes from Kareem Abdul-Jabaar on the segment was that the universities million dollars that come in from the players should go to them is almost entirely debunked. If only 11% of the schools actually turn a profit however big or small it is, how would they have all student athletes get paid for the schools that don’t turn a profit?
In high school the athletes don’t get paid and instead get and education, however they still have to pay for the education. Those same athletes also don’t get a cut of the money granted high schools are much smaller than universities but they still provide the school with revenue. In college, the student athletes receive a free education along with having a place to outlet their talents and gain more publicity than ever before. It is unfair to put a salary on a student athlete trying to pursue not only their dreams but an education. Full scholarships are up to $53,000, which is a significant portion of the NFL minimum rookie salary of $465,000 and the NBA minimum salary of $815,615. That being said only 1.1% of the college football players and 1.5% of the college basketball athletes end up going to the NBA or NFL. Therefore, 97.4% of the other student athletes are getting a scholarship at a prestigious college but won’t end up achieving the dream they intended. Why would the universities pay these athletes if they already barely turn a profit, and 97.4% of them aren’t deemed good enough. If colleges pay their players in addition to scholarship, some colleges might go into a financial crisis. Eight of the Big 12 conferences schools were in debt in 2014. The university of Texas was over 200 million dollars in debt. If these universities were to pay the 480,000 student athletes a salary, it would only make the situation worse for the colleges already empty pockets. Colleges also give the student athletes a chance to show their talent and possibly get to the next level, whether it be the NFL or NBA. Colleges may not pay the players with actual money but they pay the players with experience. If they are interviewed or their games are broadcasted its giving them the small experience of what life as a professional could be like. Gaining a lot of publicity from college eventually gets these players endorsements that help them in the future. “Among the 30 players who got drafted first round in the 2017 NBA draft, 16 already had endorsements deal without playing 1 season in the NBA.” (Jamisen Ma) The universities have professional coaches, athletic trainers, and nutritionists, resulting in money being funneled to the athletic program benefitting the players. Giving the student athletes a salary to go along with all of that would be going a little too far. If colleges were to pay their student athletes it would only worsen the sports we love. Yes the bigger schools usually get the top recruits and make the most amount of money. However, the players decision usually comes down to the coach and whether they’re a fit with the program. Instead if the colleges were to give the student athletes money it would come down to who the highest bidder is. Referencing what Kareem Abdul-Jabaar said in the above video on March Madness alone tbs and cbs split a billion dollar profit just on the tournament. If the players are paid it’s well within the realm of possibility that college sports would turn into an amateur version of the NBA. The elite institutions such as Duke and Kentucky ,who put 15 million dollars into their basketball programs, to create superteams like we see in the NBA. Our beloved March Madness would turn from something with cindarella stories into the tiny colleges being pounded by the heavily funded superteams. This in the end would most likely cause less viewership, like we saw in the bubble this season in the NBA, hurting the colleges as well as tbs and cbs’ pockets. The final point is that if the athletes are in desperate need of money they can play overseas but most student athletes decide not to because of the publicity colleges give these students. So, if everything is working out why change it?
Under NCAA rules student athletes are able to lose their scholarships after an injury, leaving them with the payment of their education and their hospital bills. The NFL does not allow teams to release players of their contracts while being injured, unless a settlement is made by the team and the player. An easy way for the NCAA to correct this problem is to pay the players a salary. If the players are granted a salary that would mean just like the NFL does they can create a settlement opportunity with the player possibly giving them enough money to cover their hospital bills and then some. The article above also shows how sometimes team doctors mess up and miss a serious injury. When that happens and they go to a second opinion, at their own expense, and it does reveal a serious injury those players have to pay for their recovery time. In the case of Hardrick, his scholarship was dropped and has severe knee pain to this day. What Huma’s goal is to try to help these cases and make sure these student athletes will never have to pay out of pocket for these injuries. Once again though we fall back into the fact that because these student athletes are not paid even if Huma succeeds in their goal they won’t be able to afford college without their scholarships forcing these once student athletes to drop out.
Due to the NCAAs subborn behavior towards paying student athletes universities will suffer the cost of top talents going to the NBA early. Yes this happened once before and required students to go to college for at least one year. However, the NBA has created a new policy in the G League (NBA’s minor league) allowing players to have one year in the development program while also being paid upwards of 500,000 dollars. Not only do we have the NBA making a change but in 2007 the NCAA required athletes to go to college for a year bringing about the one-and-done. In 2018 only 11 out of the 60 players drafted were seniors. Due to the NCAA not paying these student athletes and the age restriction on the NBA we see kids instead of staying all four years and getting a degree like many players did back in the 1980s, go one-and-done. If the NCAA were to pay the student athletes any sort of salary I think the one-and-done era would end and we would see more athletes going to the NBA as mature adults instead of kids who weren’t worried about getting an education. Many will say the scholarships are a way of paying the players yet the one-and-done era has basically ended those claims because these students don’t end up finishing their education.
In the end
Student athletes have lost the era of getting an education and without payment these student athletes won’t stay to get it. Their image and likeness is used for publicity of the school however they’re able to showcase their skills on a higher level being in college. These students are given many tools at their disposal to gain an education and let their skills shine on the brightest stage at the moment. 97.4% of these athletes will never make it but 100% of them are given the opportunity to show what they can do. So I ask you, should student athletes be paid?
It is an unprecedented time in our world. No one has experienced a global pandemic before, nor knows the proper way to handle the ongoing situation. With the most challenging task learning how to proceed with our daily lives while being conscious about the safety of those around us.
Of those multiple challenging tasks, we are all trying to face and conquer together, there is one in particular that needs addressing. How are students supposed to continue their eduction at a time when normal classroom settings are becoming obsolete?
The answer was found in the social media app Zoom. However, the next question is, does it provide the students with the same educational values and resources as being in the classroom does?
Zoom has had an impact on our schooling system in a multitude of ways, with the abrupt switch to remote learning leaving many teachers unprepared for how to teach in a new format and the inability to provide the proper resources students previously relied on. However, besides the teachers being unprepared and unfamiliar with how to navigate Zoom and transfer their classroom setting to an online format, how the students’ ability to learn has changed since being online needs to be considered.
Having never experienced a pandemic before, many schools struggled with the proper way to handle the increasing outbreaks in their communities, and it left many unprepared with how to continue provide an education to their students remotely. In the article, “Impact of Coronavirus on Education” by Taylor Christie, she discusses the new roles parents and teachers have found themselves in since the pandemic disrupted learning across the nation. While technology was previously instated at many schools, going completely virtual has ultimately taught many parents and instructors how to fix those pesky technological issues we often face and landed them in roles they weren’t used to. Christie discusses the rough transition from in person learning to online learning, as well as the unavoidable technological problems.
Teachers were forced to adapt all their lessons to fit in an online format, like Zoom and Microsoft Teams, while making sure their lesson didn’t fall short of any material or experience the students would have received if in person. Along with transferring all their lessons online, teachers also had to find a way to keep their students actively engaged in the classroom. As being at home leads to more distractions and less motivation to attempt their schoolwork. Christie mentions the absence of an instructor in the students’ homes as a possibility for the lack of motivation or self-discipline to attend school on an adjusted schedule or in a classroom setting many are unfamiliar with.
It has also left many parents taking on more roles to help their children succeed. Parents now have to act as teachers, not necessarily to help with homework or teach their children, but are acting as the instructor would to keep the students on task throughout the day and making sure the students continue to exemplify proper classroom behavior.
Obviously, technological problems happen and are unavoidable, and with online schooling it has been an adjustment for students, parents, and teachers to communicate and teach virtually. However, Christie has hope for less technological disruptions as people become more familiar with the technology they are using.
While being able to meet and conduct the days lesson over Zoom has seemed like a saving grace to many people who were worried about the abrupt stop to in-person classes and the negative effect it would have on students’ education, Zoom has still come with its own set of challenges.
Without the presence of an instructor and with parents who may not be home or are unable to keep their child on track with their schoolwork, it is harder for instructors to encourage their students to attend class. It is also harder for the instructors to provide the necessary resources to each student in their class as every student has a different way of learning, and another important aspect of school that is hard to duplicate over Zoom, is the normal human interaction and group activities.
It is very easy for students to chose to shut their videos and microphones off and to show up for attendance points but to not actively participate. Teachers will need to find new ways to keep students engaged with the material, whether that is more group activities or participation points.
When considering the reopening of schools, students are not the only ones who need to be kept safe. The faculty, which can consist of more susceptible ages, need to be considered as well. In the article, “America is not prepared for schools opening this fall. This will be bad” by Siva Vaidhyanathan, she discusses the new adaptations to learning and how teachers are feeling more overworked and unsafe than ever before.
Vaidhyanathan discusses her concern of many teachers resigning from their posts as they find it extremely difficult to keep everyone safe and teach their required material without the proper resources at hand. With most of the nation’s concern on how to continue providing adequate education to our students so they don’t fall behind, and as it should be a concern, we also need to consider the thoughts and concerns of the faculty at the schools who are on the front lines when dealing with the pandemic, trying to normalize online schooling, as well as dealing with the unknown future that we all find ourselves in.
Transferring to online schooling or hybrid learning, where a few days a week students are in person and then online the other days, it has led to many teachers feeling frustrated and having even more work than before without any compensation for their extra time and effort.
Not only do we need to be concerned with how faculty are able to handle more work in their already overworked lives, but we need to consider the parents who may be struggling more than ever to provide for their children.
Vaidhyanathan talks about schools who decided to split attendance, so half the students attend Mondays and Wednesdays, and the other half attends Tuesdays and Thursdays. This can be a burden to families who rely on after-school or morning care to watch their children when they need to be at work. It also means parents who work full time are struggling to find a person to care for their children more frequently , and some parents have lost income due to the shutdowns and are struggling to find another source of income.
With online education also comes the concerns for students who rely on school for more than earning an education. According to a New York Times article “Is Closing the Schools a Good Idea?” by Aaron E. Carroll, one and a half million students are homeless with thirty million children dependent on school lunch programs, and about fifteen million are dependent on the school breakfast programs as well. Not only is it crucial to evaluate new potential ways to teach these students, but it is important to find a way to continue to provide these services when schooling is conducted remotely. If these schools chose to conduct schooling over Zoom or other forms of online learning, students who normally rely on meals from their school may not receive a meal at home in place of the one they would be missing. For many families, adding more meals is not an affordable option and they have no other choice but to rely on their children’s school for meals, so they won’t go hungry for the day.
Another impact of Zoom is the possibility of an increased rate at which students are not attending classes. There will always be students who choose not to attend class or who don’t care about their grades. However, Zoom is providing a new reason for students not to attend class. Besides making it easier for students who don’t want to attend class, it has made it more challenging for the students who do want to actively participate, but don’t have the resources to do so.
The New York Times article “Remote Learning Is Often an Oxymoron” by Nicholas Kristof states roughly seventeen million students in America do not have access to a computer. This only proves Zoom makes it easier for students to not actively attend class if they don’t want to because they can use a lack of resources as a reason, and most schools have very limited resources and can’t provide a computer to all their students to eliminate that excuse. Ultimately, it leads to less accountability of students and more of a reason to skip classes.
Kristof refers to “online learning as an oxymoron.” Stating that schools with the most resources are the ones who impose these new standards on the other schools who don’t match in resources and funds. The problem is the new standards placed by the private, well-funded schools, are imposed on public schools with very limited budgets and resources even before the pandemic began. In his article, Kristof gives the example of President Trump’s son, Barron, who attends a private school that can provide adequate resources to all their students, so they are able to continue their educational journey from the safety of their homes. For many students this is not an option, their school may not have the resources to provide each student with internet and a computer to those who don’t have one in their home.
Kristof goes on to advocate for the reopening of schools stating, “our children are worth it.” Meaning online school is too much of a challenge and provides no real educational benefit as being in the physical classroom does, and while Kristof does agree it is important to consider the elderly. He mentions other key factors to consider as well. For example, children are of those least susceptible to Covid-19 meaning they would be less likely to be transmitters to the elderly faculty at their schools and to their grandparents. Another thing to consider is the safety standards schools put in place as well to help combat the spread of Covid-19. If schools are taking the necessary precautions and ensuring the safety of both students and faculty, there seems to be enough procedures in place for students to safely return.
Kristof wants people to consider other nations and how they have safely handled the reopening of schools without drastic rises in cases, but also notes in places like Sweden where they have reopened their schools but have not seen a significant rise in cases among teachers. Which ultimately means children are not this giant transmitter many people have feared. The fears are understandable since flu season tends to run rampant in schools, but because of how contagious and dangerous Covid-19 can be to the more susceptible, many more health and safety procedures have been put in place. Which would be a factor for students who may contract the virus for not spreading it as much as they would the flu.
All in all, it is an unheard-of time for everyone. No one knows the correct way to combat the spread of Covid-19 nor how to properly get our students back in the classrooms, whether that’s virtually or in-person. However, we do know the online setting won’t be as beneficial to our students education as the physical classroom, and that are issues that need to be addressed. Including providing students with the necessary resources to engage in online learning, provide students the meals they would normally receive, and ultimately how to keep their education on track so no student falls behind.
“From Chalkboards to Zoom Rooms: Teaching During COVID-19: Poorvu Center for Teaching and Learning.” From Chalkboards to Zoom Rooms: Teaching During COVID-19 | Poorvu Center for Teaching and Learning, 24 Mar. 2020, poorvucenter.yale.edu/news/chalkboards-zoom-rooms-teaching-during-covid-19.
Cardenas, Yasmine. “Cut the Cameras: Students Opt to Shut Off Camera During Zoom Classes.” The Sundial, sundial.csun.edu/161943/arts-entertainment/cut-the-cameras-students-opt-to-shut-off-camera-during-zoom-classes/.
College is the plan after high school for many Americans as it is an investment in their future, but when this investment cripples them for the decades to come is it worth it? In the United States, there are 45 million borrowers of student loans who owe collectively 1.6 trillion in student debt. This puts student loan debt second in the category of consumer debt with mortgages coming in at first. This is becoming a problem in the United States as millions of students are taking on the next steps towards college millennials and Gen Z generation making up a huge portion of those who do take those next steps, but also taking the challenges that come with it like student loans. Taking a closer examination at the student loan crisis one must put in question what the problems could be causing this could it be the millennials fault, government, or is this just a process millions of Americans must go through to get ahead in life?
Student loans are types of loans that students take out to help pay for post-secondary education including tuition, fees, textbooks, or anything else that a student may need help paying for while in college. Many of these loans come with an interest rate depending on the type of loan that one decides to take out and don’t have to be repaid till after graduation. Currently, there are 45 million borrowers of student loans who owe collectively a total of 1.6 Trillion in student debt. The average student will come out of college with about 33,000 in student loans and while many argue that this is an investment student must take to get a future education other Americans like Nick believe millennials are to blame for such an outstanding student loan debt.
“It is getting harder and harder to feel sympathy for kids born between 1981 and 2012.” Millennials have been the scapegoats of many things wrong within America as they are often labeled as lazy. The article “Are millennials to blame for their own student debt” Nick Gillespie attempts to blame on students for ringing up such an enormous debt when graduating. He makes some valid points like its students’ responsibility to know how much money they are going to borrow, how much should be repaid, and how long these payments will continue after graduation. This is a valid point as student loans are investments that stick with you through all of college and for many Americans stick with them for years after college. Although this is a valid point other people like Nick Ducoff argue that the lack of knowledge of student debt is the government’s own fault.
In an article written in CNBC, Nick Ducoff writes “government spends a great deal of money to prevent teen drinking, but we are still enablers of student loan use” while Gillespie argues that the blame is all on millennials Ducoff pushed back on this idea as he believes that there is not enough information being put out in the media, schools, states to show how exactly student loans work. He furthers his point stating that there is not an adequate education, information, and system to help students and families make smarter choices when it comes to these loans. While both articles have valid and strong points some flaws that come with each as Wisley Whistle states in an article “Millennials and student debt.” She strengthens Gillespie’s argument about millennials being at fault as she argues the poor performance students have in college. “Institutions are plagued with dismissals, thus creating low job placement” here we see the common theme of the label that gets put on millennials in this case she hints at the idea that the reason these student loans are not getting paid is that these students don’t work hard enough. She strikes two more valid points as to why the blame of student loans is all on millennials stating, “when millennials with no college degree, lost their job some decided to pursue a graduate degree, often with loans.” This point strengthens both Gillespie and Whistle’s argument as this shows millennials adding more loans to the loans they already had.
While both arguments do indeed have valid standing Anie Doris from “ChicagoBoothReview” takes the pressure off the millennials and instead puts that pressure on the government just like Nick Ducoff. Dorris takes a close examination of government policy. “1980s and 2000s education policy increased eligibility for loan programs, raised borrowing limits, which drove a surge in new institutions especially for-profit ones.” The close examination looks at what happened when a change in policy altered the way student loans worked and in this case, a change in the policy skyrocketed the students able to take out loans and increased the amount a student could take out. While this did create new intuitions it also created a problem within the student debt. “Peaks in student loan defaults are driven by federal policy” is the conclusion that Doris came to while looking at the past year’s loans chart.
Ducoff furthers her argument by pointing out “90 percent of private loans have an adult co-signer” which means that not only did the number of loans taken out increase but so did the number of parents co-signing. The co-signing is a way to have a safety net for those establishments lending out loans for if the student cannot repay, the burden falls on the parents. This statistic shows that even before the loans have been taken out and the degree has been earned there is already some doubt that the student will be able to repay the loan. This pushes back on the idea that millennials are not working hard enough while in college as there is already a systematic problem before they even get into college. While these interesting points hint at the system being at fault Nick Gillespie shuts down these ideas by looking at where student loans go. “Student debt can be accumulated from all aspects” meaning that it’s not just tuition that students use loans for certain aspects of college like housing, food, transportation, and entertainment play a huge role in the accumulation of debt. He continues to point out that millennials should be responsible for knowing how much money they need. Continuing to say that millennials lack of budgeting is the problem with how much debt they accumulate, while this point valid Ducoff argues that budgeting gets thrown out the window as students need as much many as they can get in order to live a healthy college life.
Ducoff continues to challenge Gillespie pointing out that budgeting a loan is not a simple thing every student can do as some students need to borrow more money than others. “Black millennials borrowed 17 percentage points higher than their white peers” this statistic shows another problem connected to the government which is the racial wealth gap. The more a student’s family is struggling the more loans that that student is going to take out and possibly get a job while in school. As stated earlier the dismal rate Whistle brought up can be challenged with a poorer student not being able to keep up while working during their college careers.
Several points have been brought up while examining these articles from millennials creating problems in student debt to the government itself bringing the college debt crisis on itself. While these four articles create the debate of who is to blame both sides bring up rather simple solutions for what they believe is the problem. On the side of Gillespie and Whistle, they argue that responsibility needs to be taken when millennials take out these loans while holding them accountable. This side sees loans as an investment that will pay itself off in the future if done right. On the side of Ducoff and Doris, they argue that the government must change some policies while also raising the amount of information that is put out to the public on the topic of student loans. Funding for information on student loans just as much as the government funds for teen drinking awareness. While both arguments had some valid points it all comes down to the students who are wanting to further their education who must make these tough decisions regarding student loans.
Works Cited
Doris, Aine. “Government Policy Has Created a $1.5 Trillion Student-Loan Crisis.” Chicago Booth Review, review.chicagobooth.edu/finance/2020/article/government-policy-has-created-15-trillion-student-loan-crisis.
Gillespie, Nick. “Are Millennials Responsible for Their Own Student Debt?” Reason.com, Reason, 21 May 2019, reason.com/2019/05/21/are-millennials-responsible-for-their-own-student-debt/.
On a typical weekday the average young adult follows the same story: They wake up, turn off the alarm on their phone and begin the day by scrolling through social media. They are looking for everything they missed in the eight hours that they were asleep. As they continue their day they will periodically look for time to check social media, and if they actually do something exciting it is imperative they take pictures to share with followers later. They will then edit the photos and plan the perfect time to post; however, it does not end there. They will obsessively check the post and monitor it to make sure it has the appropriate amount of likes and comments. When they are ready for sleep again, they will end the night the same way they started it: By scrolling to see everyone else’s day. How did this become the new normal? Does this actually show what is going on in people’s lives? Does this make others miss out on life or enjoy it more because they can share it with others? The idea of social media and its influence has been debated between health professionals, parents, and different generations. Social media has many benefits and yet to some it is still dangerous how often people are on social networking sites. While it can seem like a surface problem, there are multiple viewpoints that do not create an easy answer.
Generation Z is known as the generation that grew up on technology. This is a group of young adults who grew up and learned to stay connected through social media. Being the generation to grow up on technology, Gen. Z strives for accessibility and ways to complete tasks while being fast and efficient. Social media is an easy way to connect with people around the world. It allows for followers to see hobbies and accomplishments of specific users. Furthermore, it can connect individuals from different backgrounds or cultures.
The picture above shows how people around the world can connect through the media. Individuals are able to share stories and pictures with others who live far away and even those living down the street. With all of this communication through technology, it is easy to see why social media has become a huge influence in users’ lives. With friends and family living in different parts of the state and across the country, social media allows friends and family to stay connected and check in while maintaining a relationship through technology. As we currently deal with the Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19), social media is providing people with a way to stay connected and involved during a time of isolation. This is allowing individuals to use smartphones to see family through a screen. According to author Marina Koren, apps like facetime and zoom are helping families communicate during a time when in person communication needs to be limited. It is imperative to stay in touch with loved ones even when families can not be together.
Similarly, social media also allows users to voice their opinions across different platforms. Recently, the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement has been sweeping social media. Whether on Facebook, Instagram, or Twitter, users of all ages have been making their voices heard and sharing information with the world. Users are calling for major social changes from the government and policies that were not there before. Social media has given people who have not had the ability to be heard the platform to do so while sharing their story. Back in June there was a day called “Blackout Tuesday” which happened nationwide to demonstrate against police brutality where for a 24 hour period, any social media users restricted posting any content that was not a black screen with links to raise awareness for BLM. The New York Post article analyzes the impact of the BLM movement and how Blackout Tuesday has connected communities. This was a protest which took place over social media and created a space for ideas. When the social equality movement was first started in the 1960s there was not a place where opinions could be voiced and shared as easily as the BLM movement is doing now. Technology has opened the door and made voicing opinions available to individuals and their followers even if they can not go out and protest for this change. It allows for people to get involved and gives them information to help. Overall, it is a place for support and calling others to action showing no one is alone.
With all the positives it can be hard to see the negatives of social media; however, some argue social media has blocked real communication, and people do not know how to communicate face to face in society anymore. With technology at our fingertips, users find it easier to start a conversation or relationship, but it turns into words without any emotions. This is harming the younger generations because it leads to the inability to separate face to face communication and communication through phones. This video entitled I Forgot My Phone shows a woman who spends a day without her phone. As she goes through her day she realizes the people around her are more focused on their phones or taking pictures for posting purposes than actually enjoying the company around them. This lack of communication is harming young adults because there is no connection, empathy, or authenticity. Rather, it is a couple of sentences or pictures back and forth with no context. When individuals have a face to face conversation it allows for a connection and for others to see one’s true self. But when talking through direct messaging and posts, it is easy to put on a fake persona in order to get others to perceive them in a perfect way. Instead of letting a conversation flow the way it is supposed to, young adults tend to rethink and retype every response so they can try to get the “best” outcome.
Furthermore, young adults browse through social media to see what everyone is doing with their life, and they browse with a purpose: They want to know if what they posted was better. People strive to have the best story, the most perfect picture, or even the funniest joke. This creates a false reality, and leads young adults to believe the perfect lives of their friends. This also creates the fear of missing out (FOMO). This anxiety can lead to the feeling of needing to take a picture whenever they go out or even making them feel as though they need to do things so they can seem more involved in the “perfect” lives around them. This can cause multiple problems and will lead the younger generations to think their life is inadequate to those who show a “perfect” life. Actually having a perfect life is rare and in most cases individuals will actually miss opportunities to show off the best aspects of their life. When going to a concert all that can be seen are phone screens recording rather than the audience actually enjoying the artist. The videos will spam social media with terrible quality and blurry images, yet a person can show that they were indeed there. All they care about is the picture. Sherry Turkle shows how close this problem is when she explains that social media allows, “us to present ourselves as we want to be. This means we get to edit, and we get to delete.” Turkle points out how this can create a harmful mindset that likes or comments should dictate someone’s life. She points out how this is incorrect because social media holds impossible standards and she warns how people should enjoy life for themselves rather than taking pictures and likes. Users have the ability to edit out flaws and delete the posts that do not get the desired results. By always trying to be the best it can lead to people missing people and missing moments that they would have enjoyed otherwise.
All in all, social media has many benefits; however, there are also some setbacks. The importance of social media is that it is a marketplace of ideas for a younger generation to stay in touch, post about life, and bring sweeping changes to a present society. Generation Z is a generation that grew up with technology and it surrounds their daily lives. But although it can seem like it brings good to the world there are also setbacks. These include the fact that it creates a false reality which young adults feel as though they need to achieve. However these standards are impossible which can leave young adults feeling left out and alone. They no longer can communicate face to face and they are just waiting for a notification to come through. Technology is now a part of the new normal. Tomorrow generations of users will turn off their alarms and begin the daily process of scrolling, liking, commenting, and sharing to ensure they miss out on nothing from the prior day and attempt to start the long battle of making positive impactful changes for generations to come.
Works Cited
Charstarlene, director. I Forgot My Phone. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OINa46HeWg8&t=23s.
Cosner Rhetoric 
