A. Is the university actually qualified to deal with sexual assault?
B. Silbaugh, Katherine. "Reactive to Proactive: Title IX's Unrealized Capacity to Prevent Sexual Assault." EBSCO. Boston University Law Review, 1 May 2015. Web.
This was by far one of the best texts I've ever read concerning this topic. The author looks at Title IX and its origins/functions and explores how to properly prevent- as opposed to simply treat after the fact- sexual assault on campus. Silbaugh explains that there are two available approaches to dealing with sexual violence: law-enforcement and public health. Herein lies the innate problem with the setup for Title IX. Because of its foundation and ties with the Department of Education, Title IX is forced to take a law-enforcement approach. That is, instead of working to prevent sexual violence from ever occurring, it focuses heavily on addressing acts which have already been committed. Even more dire, many colleges are not properly equipped for the role they are called upon to complete: often those making decisions on the matter, despite levels of training and education, are not lawyers and are unfamiliar with legalities that surround a crime such as sexual assault.
It is interesting that Title IX doesn't take on a public-health approach, as suggested in the text. After all-- we are talking about public universities. This final article plays nicely with questions I've brought up previously. Now, instead of asking what external factors in population contribute to campus sexual assault rates, I'm asking: is the university actually properly prepared to deal with this issue? After all, multiple issues have been brought up along the way. Inability to educate, prepare, and protect students have all been discussed. Perhaps the root problem is not in the details of how the university deals with it, but instead the actual nature of it. The university can't actually stop sexual assault from happening until it begins working completely and fully preventing the crime to the best of its abilities. No, the likelihood of extinguishing rape from society and college campus is very slim. But the university can do its role of establishing a safe environment by focusing on preventing sexual violence before it happens, instead of after.
-- because (public) colleges are public institutions, they innately think better in 'public health' terms and must be allowed to address sexual assault in that way
Wednesday, May 11, 2016
Brittany Kurtz Source 4
A. What is the other side to the story? Is the rape epidemic truly an epidemic? How valid are the claims?
B. French, David. "The Campus-Rape Lie." Academic Search Elite [EBSCO]. N.p., 6 July 2015. Web.
This was an interesting read, to say the least. French combats the attack on campus assailants with an arsenal of counter-statistics and logic. He argues that there is no 'rape crisis' or even a 'rape culture', There is simply a large number of radicals 'Lefts' who are jumping on the rape epidemic bandwagon as a new source of passionate activism. French explains how largely-cited statistics are not reliable and that true numbers related to campus rape are far lower than widely advertised. In addition, he advocates for innocent male victims who are denied due process and charged with sexual crimes that ruin careers and lives-- on the basis of preponderance of evidence, as often decided by school staff.
This article was written with passion, and even if I cannot fully agree with its content, I respect the argumentative nature of the author. I think that it's important to take much of what French is saying with a grain of salt. Many of his points are dual-ended, with him only exploring one side (perhaps because he feels that liberal media has done a sufficient job with the other viewpoints; nonetheless...). For example, French states that there is no rape crisis because there's been a consistent decline in reported assaults since 1997 (31). Just because there's a decrease, however, doesn't mean a problem has disappeared; the crime is still being committed. Many of statistics stem from very blurry lines on exactly what crime they are addressing. Although all are sexual crimes, rape, sexual assault, harassment, or misconduct, dating violence, sodomy- all of these distinctions affect the statistics. Actual rape (by the legal definition) may not be as frequently committed as sexual misconduct; thus some statistics can be used more favorably than others. Another arguing point that French spun concerned the famous "1 in 5" statistic, stating that nearly 20% of women will be sexually assaulted during their undergraduate college career. This is commonly cited in awareness campaigns across campuses. French points out that the own administrators of this study warn against using the statistic to draw any conclusions. The study was given to only two colleges and was administered online, without many guidelines. The Department of Justice produced a more reliable and more valid survey that produced a statistic of 6.1 rapes per 1,000-- this, however, did not include other sexual crimes, whereas the previous study did.
Although this article doesn't fully expand properly on several points, it does start a good conversation. It must be difficult for university administrators to dance the delicate line between serving justice to both the alleged victims and the accused, especially when governmental agencies are demanding crackdowns left and right. Is this really the university's job though? It is certainly important for universities to do all they can to prevent such an atrocity from happening to its students; but once the crime has been committed, shouldn't higher, more fit authorities become involved? The previous articles would dismiss this text as a manifestation of men's rights and the endorsement of rape culture. I believe, however, that a new idea can emerge from the culmination of all of these readings: why, if rape is such an epidemic, does the school restrict its investigation to simply an academic setting? Why aren't the police involved, if this is such a heinous crime of an exponential magnitude? Questions like these could help the university streamline how it handles sexual assault cases within its campus.
B. French, David. "The Campus-Rape Lie." Academic Search Elite [EBSCO]. N.p., 6 July 2015. Web.
This was an interesting read, to say the least. French combats the attack on campus assailants with an arsenal of counter-statistics and logic. He argues that there is no 'rape crisis' or even a 'rape culture', There is simply a large number of radicals 'Lefts' who are jumping on the rape epidemic bandwagon as a new source of passionate activism. French explains how largely-cited statistics are not reliable and that true numbers related to campus rape are far lower than widely advertised. In addition, he advocates for innocent male victims who are denied due process and charged with sexual crimes that ruin careers and lives-- on the basis of preponderance of evidence, as often decided by school staff.
This article was written with passion, and even if I cannot fully agree with its content, I respect the argumentative nature of the author. I think that it's important to take much of what French is saying with a grain of salt. Many of his points are dual-ended, with him only exploring one side (perhaps because he feels that liberal media has done a sufficient job with the other viewpoints; nonetheless...). For example, French states that there is no rape crisis because there's been a consistent decline in reported assaults since 1997 (31). Just because there's a decrease, however, doesn't mean a problem has disappeared; the crime is still being committed. Many of statistics stem from very blurry lines on exactly what crime they are addressing. Although all are sexual crimes, rape, sexual assault, harassment, or misconduct, dating violence, sodomy- all of these distinctions affect the statistics. Actual rape (by the legal definition) may not be as frequently committed as sexual misconduct; thus some statistics can be used more favorably than others. Another arguing point that French spun concerned the famous "1 in 5" statistic, stating that nearly 20% of women will be sexually assaulted during their undergraduate college career. This is commonly cited in awareness campaigns across campuses. French points out that the own administrators of this study warn against using the statistic to draw any conclusions. The study was given to only two colleges and was administered online, without many guidelines. The Department of Justice produced a more reliable and more valid survey that produced a statistic of 6.1 rapes per 1,000-- this, however, did not include other sexual crimes, whereas the previous study did.
Although this article doesn't fully expand properly on several points, it does start a good conversation. It must be difficult for university administrators to dance the delicate line between serving justice to both the alleged victims and the accused, especially when governmental agencies are demanding crackdowns left and right. Is this really the university's job though? It is certainly important for universities to do all they can to prevent such an atrocity from happening to its students; but once the crime has been committed, shouldn't higher, more fit authorities become involved? The previous articles would dismiss this text as a manifestation of men's rights and the endorsement of rape culture. I believe, however, that a new idea can emerge from the culmination of all of these readings: why, if rape is such an epidemic, does the school restrict its investigation to simply an academic setting? Why aren't the police involved, if this is such a heinous crime of an exponential magnitude? Questions like these could help the university streamline how it handles sexual assault cases within its campus.
Brittany Kurtz Source 3
A. It's obvious that sexual assault on campus is an issue- but how exactly can the university take a stronger lead on preventing it?
B. Richardson, Bradford, and Jon A. Shields. "The Real Campus Sexual Assault Problem- And How to Fix It." Academic Search Complete [EBSCO]. N.p., Oct. 2015. Web.
After revising and simplifying my search while doing research, I finally found a helpful piece of work. Up until now, I had been spending far too much time trying to do far too much. My process was too complicated, my thesis too broad. Instead of working to identify factors that contribute to sexual assault on campus, I've now morphed my focus towards assessing how universities are addressing sexual assault and if they're successful in doing so. From there, I can synthesize a contribution to the conversation. To begin this process, I simplified my search to the bare minimum: "campus sexual assault". Lo and behold, the first article to appear was the exact one I'd been searching for this whole time. Real Campus Sexual Assault aimed to pinpoint implemented structures at different universities to determine assault rates at aforementioned universities, focusing specifically on students who lived on-campus. It discovered that campuses with stricter regulations such as those regarding 'dry' campuses, curfews, and overnight visitors reported lower assault rates than those that did not strictly regulate any or all of those social factors. The authors go forward to argue that "social limits and limits on alcohol" are the way to go if universities truly want to address the 'rape culture' that seems to thrive on their campuses. They explain that allowing students such unbridled freedom, especially so early on in their newly found 'adulthood', sacrifices student safety (on more than just the sexual level) in the name of sexual revolution.
This article contains the information that I had been hoping to find. I'm relieved to know that some research has been done that reveals the impact that certain factors have on sexual assault. It's interesting to note that in the first articles I read, nothing was said about the role that social regulations play in this situation. They focused on the role of the university as: 1) an educator, failing to educate students on what constitutes sexual assault and 2) a protector of students, failing to protect students from threats within school grounds. This is a new perspective on the issue. No matter where they're coming from, however, all three article say something in common: the school system is failing its students. But how can it improve?
Perhaps the university does need to focus more proactively on prevention rather than education; after all, the majority of rapists and sexual assault perpetrators display antisocial and narcissistic personalities (29) -- education won't easily change that. In addition, alcohol plays such a huge role in college sexual assaults. As many as 76% of college rapists confess to using alcohol to intoxicate their victim (29). Enforcing social rules, even if they do seem unfairly conservative or anti-progressive, would certainly help to combat that last statistic by removing students from potentially unsafe environments. To address the topic of education/prevention: perhaps educating students on the role one can have as a bystander could be of use? Educating both men and women on how sexual assault is defined, as well as on how to prevent this crime from being committed against oneself or those around would also be beneficial.
B. Richardson, Bradford, and Jon A. Shields. "The Real Campus Sexual Assault Problem- And How to Fix It." Academic Search Complete [EBSCO]. N.p., Oct. 2015. Web.
After revising and simplifying my search while doing research, I finally found a helpful piece of work. Up until now, I had been spending far too much time trying to do far too much. My process was too complicated, my thesis too broad. Instead of working to identify factors that contribute to sexual assault on campus, I've now morphed my focus towards assessing how universities are addressing sexual assault and if they're successful in doing so. From there, I can synthesize a contribution to the conversation. To begin this process, I simplified my search to the bare minimum: "campus sexual assault". Lo and behold, the first article to appear was the exact one I'd been searching for this whole time. Real Campus Sexual Assault aimed to pinpoint implemented structures at different universities to determine assault rates at aforementioned universities, focusing specifically on students who lived on-campus. It discovered that campuses with stricter regulations such as those regarding 'dry' campuses, curfews, and overnight visitors reported lower assault rates than those that did not strictly regulate any or all of those social factors. The authors go forward to argue that "social limits and limits on alcohol" are the way to go if universities truly want to address the 'rape culture' that seems to thrive on their campuses. They explain that allowing students such unbridled freedom, especially so early on in their newly found 'adulthood', sacrifices student safety (on more than just the sexual level) in the name of sexual revolution.
This article contains the information that I had been hoping to find. I'm relieved to know that some research has been done that reveals the impact that certain factors have on sexual assault. It's interesting to note that in the first articles I read, nothing was said about the role that social regulations play in this situation. They focused on the role of the university as: 1) an educator, failing to educate students on what constitutes sexual assault and 2) a protector of students, failing to protect students from threats within school grounds. This is a new perspective on the issue. No matter where they're coming from, however, all three article say something in common: the school system is failing its students. But how can it improve?
Perhaps the university does need to focus more proactively on prevention rather than education; after all, the majority of rapists and sexual assault perpetrators display antisocial and narcissistic personalities (29) -- education won't easily change that. In addition, alcohol plays such a huge role in college sexual assaults. As many as 76% of college rapists confess to using alcohol to intoxicate their victim (29). Enforcing social rules, even if they do seem unfairly conservative or anti-progressive, would certainly help to combat that last statistic by removing students from potentially unsafe environments. To address the topic of education/prevention: perhaps educating students on the role one can have as a bystander could be of use? Educating both men and women on how sexual assault is defined, as well as on how to prevent this crime from being committed against oneself or those around would also be beneficial.
Tuesday, May 10, 2016
Brittany Kurtz Source 2
A. What roles do the university as an institution play in regard to sexual assault?
B. Parnitzke Smith, Carly, and Jennifer J. Freyd. "Dangerous Safe Havens: Institutional Betrayal Exacerbates Sexual Trauma." Wiley Online Library. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 16 Feb. 2013. Web.
This article explored one of the roles that the university plays as far as sexual assault is concerned. The contributors explain how trauma resulting from interpersonal abuse (including sexual harassment, and assault) has been shown to often produce far more severe and long-lasting damage to the health and disposition of victims. They go on to state that institutions often cultivate interpersonal relationships that build on promises of trust, care, and safety to those involved. These interpersonal relationships are often very similar to those involving partners, relatives, and close friends; therefore, so are their consequences when those promises of well-being are disturbed.This is termed "institutional betrayal" and especially relevant to students who are assaulted on campus property (for example, residence halls), assaulted while participating in Greek Life, or assaulted by students or professors of the university in question. Institutions discussed in the article are notably those residing at the military and university level. The women surveyed and involved in this study belong to a northwestern university, making the information gathered pertinent.
I thought it was interesting to explore the role of the university through this perspective: as having the same interpersonal role as close loved ones. In the sense of sexual assault, however, this makes perfect sense. It is, after all, the university extends to its students the opportunity for living/ working conditions that should, in theory, be of an appropriate nature; I don't think it's unreasonable for that nature to entail reasonable protection from violent crimes, especially of this magnitude. This is particularly true for students who live in residence halls of the university. Any sort of sexual violence is a crime that involves cruelty against one of the most private and sacred parts of human nature: the self. The trauma experienced in this sort of crime is magnified when it is committed in the midst of perceived trust, whether trust from a partner or friend, or from a university. Both promise commitment and safety.
I want to further explore the role of the university in relation to sexual assault. I hope to find more information on the role of sexual education in sexual assault prevention. In the meantime, I thought that this was a good piece to help me more profoundly understand how universities impact assault on college campuses.
B. Parnitzke Smith, Carly, and Jennifer J. Freyd. "Dangerous Safe Havens: Institutional Betrayal Exacerbates Sexual Trauma." Wiley Online Library. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 16 Feb. 2013. Web.
This article explored one of the roles that the university plays as far as sexual assault is concerned. The contributors explain how trauma resulting from interpersonal abuse (including sexual harassment, and assault) has been shown to often produce far more severe and long-lasting damage to the health and disposition of victims. They go on to state that institutions often cultivate interpersonal relationships that build on promises of trust, care, and safety to those involved. These interpersonal relationships are often very similar to those involving partners, relatives, and close friends; therefore, so are their consequences when those promises of well-being are disturbed.This is termed "institutional betrayal" and especially relevant to students who are assaulted on campus property (for example, residence halls), assaulted while participating in Greek Life, or assaulted by students or professors of the university in question. Institutions discussed in the article are notably those residing at the military and university level. The women surveyed and involved in this study belong to a northwestern university, making the information gathered pertinent.
I thought it was interesting to explore the role of the university through this perspective: as having the same interpersonal role as close loved ones. In the sense of sexual assault, however, this makes perfect sense. It is, after all, the university extends to its students the opportunity for living/ working conditions that should, in theory, be of an appropriate nature; I don't think it's unreasonable for that nature to entail reasonable protection from violent crimes, especially of this magnitude. This is particularly true for students who live in residence halls of the university. Any sort of sexual violence is a crime that involves cruelty against one of the most private and sacred parts of human nature: the self. The trauma experienced in this sort of crime is magnified when it is committed in the midst of perceived trust, whether trust from a partner or friend, or from a university. Both promise commitment and safety.
I want to further explore the role of the university in relation to sexual assault. I hope to find more information on the role of sexual education in sexual assault prevention. In the meantime, I thought that this was a good piece to help me more profoundly understand how universities impact assault on college campuses.
Tuesday, April 12, 2016
Brittany Kurtz Source 1
A. How do college students recognize sexual assault? What factors must be present?
B. Franiuk, Renae. "Discussing and Defining Sexual Assault: A Classroom Activity." College Teaching. 3rd ed. Vol. 55. Abingdon: Taylor & Francis, 2007. 104-07. JSTOR. Web.
Sixty-one college students were presented with scenarios involving sexual contact and asked which ones were sexual assault. They were presented with these scenarios in a classroom setting for a course in which they were enrolled; before completing the activity, they read a chapter from their textbook involving violence on women. The students provided a definition of sexual assault written in their own words. They then labeled eight scenarios as to whether or not they fit their individual definition of sexual assault. After this, the students discussed with one another their decisions. To end the activity, the students rewrote their definition and understanding of what constitutes a sexual assault. Results of the study shows that the discussion and contemplation fostered by this activity gave students a better idea of what a sexual assault is. The author of the study voices her opinion that activities such as this one should be utilized throughout universities, perhaps even taught in a mandatory course for incoming students. She blames the lack of understanding of what can be identified as a sexual assault on lack of communication and overall education on the topic. Franuik's solution is simple: educate. Appropriately sanctioning sexual assault on a societal level is immensely important in the war against such violence and is an excellent first step. This, however, can only be achieved and worthwhile when the perpetrators, victims, and bystanders are properly educated on the subject and recognize certain behaviors as acutely unacceptable.
Although this article is written to explain research done and is not purely argumentative in nature, I think it is an excellent starting point for what I am hoping to achieve throughout my exploration of the topic. Education is undoubtedly important. It's what we students are here at the University of Missouri to achieve. Here is what is interesting- here is what I never would have thought of without this study pointing fingers at it. There is such a social stigmatization revolving around sexual crimes: so much a stigma that it seems to go largely unaddressed. While I was in high school, I received minimal sex education and certainly no education on what constitutes a sexual assault. Now: other crimes are seen as widely obvious. I'm sure the majority of children will recognize that hurting or killing another person is wrong and that stealing is not okay, among other examples. These are issues that are addressed at a very young age, issues that our culture indoctrinates. It makes sense that parents do not address kindergartners on the criteria that constitutes consensual sex. At some point, however, that education does need to take place. Is it the role of the parent? Of the school? Of society? Perhaps it is a combination of the three. We cannot control what each parent teaches their children, and we can't ensure that the parent is adequately educated on the topic of sexual violence; nor can we wholly dictate societal views on the issue. Change in a culture is a slow process and requires a generation and more to do so. Therefore, it is up to the schools to which we send that generation to educate and prepare those students for the life ahead of them. This should include proper education on sexual assault.
This initial source of exploration brings several points into play. I thought that the lack of sexual assault education was the culprit of campus sexual violence, but am now questioning what role even basic sexual education plays here. Should sexual education include education concerning sexual assault? Are there universities who offer or mandate courses for their students that deal with sexual assault prevention/education? How can we begin to de-stigmatize the mere topic of sexual assault and therefore allow society to reshape how it addresses sexual assault victims? So far I have come to the conclusion that the current rate of education on this topic is inadequate. It's shocking to me that sexual violence is so prevalent (there are around 293,000 sexual assaults every year (rainn.org) compared to 16,121 homicides in 2013 (cdc.gov)) and yet, so little is done to address it.
B. Franiuk, Renae. "Discussing and Defining Sexual Assault: A Classroom Activity." College Teaching. 3rd ed. Vol. 55. Abingdon: Taylor & Francis, 2007. 104-07. JSTOR. Web.
Sixty-one college students were presented with scenarios involving sexual contact and asked which ones were sexual assault. They were presented with these scenarios in a classroom setting for a course in which they were enrolled; before completing the activity, they read a chapter from their textbook involving violence on women. The students provided a definition of sexual assault written in their own words. They then labeled eight scenarios as to whether or not they fit their individual definition of sexual assault. After this, the students discussed with one another their decisions. To end the activity, the students rewrote their definition and understanding of what constitutes a sexual assault. Results of the study shows that the discussion and contemplation fostered by this activity gave students a better idea of what a sexual assault is. The author of the study voices her opinion that activities such as this one should be utilized throughout universities, perhaps even taught in a mandatory course for incoming students. She blames the lack of understanding of what can be identified as a sexual assault on lack of communication and overall education on the topic. Franuik's solution is simple: educate. Appropriately sanctioning sexual assault on a societal level is immensely important in the war against such violence and is an excellent first step. This, however, can only be achieved and worthwhile when the perpetrators, victims, and bystanders are properly educated on the subject and recognize certain behaviors as acutely unacceptable.
Although this article is written to explain research done and is not purely argumentative in nature, I think it is an excellent starting point for what I am hoping to achieve throughout my exploration of the topic. Education is undoubtedly important. It's what we students are here at the University of Missouri to achieve. Here is what is interesting- here is what I never would have thought of without this study pointing fingers at it. There is such a social stigmatization revolving around sexual crimes: so much a stigma that it seems to go largely unaddressed. While I was in high school, I received minimal sex education and certainly no education on what constitutes a sexual assault. Now: other crimes are seen as widely obvious. I'm sure the majority of children will recognize that hurting or killing another person is wrong and that stealing is not okay, among other examples. These are issues that are addressed at a very young age, issues that our culture indoctrinates. It makes sense that parents do not address kindergartners on the criteria that constitutes consensual sex. At some point, however, that education does need to take place. Is it the role of the parent? Of the school? Of society? Perhaps it is a combination of the three. We cannot control what each parent teaches their children, and we can't ensure that the parent is adequately educated on the topic of sexual violence; nor can we wholly dictate societal views on the issue. Change in a culture is a slow process and requires a generation and more to do so. Therefore, it is up to the schools to which we send that generation to educate and prepare those students for the life ahead of them. This should include proper education on sexual assault.
This initial source of exploration brings several points into play. I thought that the lack of sexual assault education was the culprit of campus sexual violence, but am now questioning what role even basic sexual education plays here. Should sexual education include education concerning sexual assault? Are there universities who offer or mandate courses for their students that deal with sexual assault prevention/education? How can we begin to de-stigmatize the mere topic of sexual assault and therefore allow society to reshape how it addresses sexual assault victims? So far I have come to the conclusion that the current rate of education on this topic is inadequate. It's shocking to me that sexual violence is so prevalent (there are around 293,000 sexual assaults every year (rainn.org) compared to 16,121 homicides in 2013 (cdc.gov)) and yet, so little is done to address it.
Wednesday, March 9, 2016
Brian King Source 5
Brian King Source 5
What is the worth of sorority / fraternity life?
DeSantis, Alan D. Inside Greek U.: Fraternities, Sororities, and the Pursuit of Pleasure, Power, and Prestige. Lexington: U of Kentucky, 2007. Print.
This source covers many different problems within sororities and fraternities, from hypermasculinity, elitist attitudes, insensitivity to the LGBT community, and eating disorders among sorority members. It also covers how sororities and fraternities often bolster traditional and often harmful views of sexuality and gender, and how these gender roles lead to things like eating disorders, date rape, homophobia, etc. The author does not, however, believe that fraternity and sorority members are malicious, but rather he explores why the greek letter organizations may reinforce such roles onto men and women and why it leads to such destructive behavior.
This source made me think about a perspective that I had not yet considered; the effect that sorority life has on women and eating disorders. Its perspective on gender and sexuality within the greek organizations went to a depth not discussed in previous sources which helped form a greater understanding of the subject. This source makes me continue questioning what the best course of action is to correct the fraternity and sorority structure to help diminish the hypermasculinity and insensitivity to the LGBT community. Surely programs telling students to simply "stop being homophobic" will not be effective in its goals. And what is the root of the problem for greek letter organizations?
This source helped form the big picture by adding materials that I had not yet considered. It does, however, argue that hypermasculinity and being "a real man" is a product of fraternity life while one of my previous sources found no correlation in its studies. While the study conducted in a previous source may have found no correlation, I believe that, as many of my other sources suggest, that a certain masculine identity is found within the fraternities that is not as present outside of geek organizations.
While much of my topic is now covered, I still must explore various sources to get extra information to form a decision on many topics covered throughout my sources. So far, I can conclude that greek life may inhibit academic success and help social abilities, have no effect on cultural insensitivity, have negative effects on attitudes toward LGBT individuals, and form unhealthy tradition gender and sexual roles.
Tuesday, March 8, 2016
Braden Rucinski: Source 5
What are some positive ways that the power of Greek organizations can be harnessed?
Becker, Carolyn Black, and Eric Stice. The Sorority Body Image Program : Group Leader Guide. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008. eBook Academic Collection (EBSCOhost). Web. 9 Mar. 2016.
In "The Sorority Body Image Program", Becker and Stice attempt to equip sororities with knowledge and exercises to empower these young women to feel good about their bodies. They explain that the Body Image program was actually founded by young women from a sorority from Trinity College (especially Delta Delta Delta). Becker and Stice believe that sororities are the best demographic to target to change college and popular culture about body image, because they are the largest self-governed organizations on college campuses. Thus, the Sorority Body Image Program is an example how sororities and fraternities can use their connections to make college campuses a more safe and healthy place.
Reading the Sorority Body Image Program was a relief for me. After mucking through all of the negative sludge about fraternities and sororities, I finally found some proof about the good things that Greek organizations are doing to help college culture. Of course, it is important to keep in mind that this program is run by sororities, not male fraternities. The more information I ingest about fraternities and sororities, it really does appear that male fraternities are the bigger problem on college campuses. Males, especially fraternity males are quick to "fat-brand" women, so even if a sisterhood runs Body Image event and these women feel good about themselves for a few weeks, how long will these good feelings last? I am no feminist, but it really appears men run the sexuality and body image show. It seems that women who try to embrace a healthy body image will merely be castigated by men, and women will push these "fat" female friends away to be desired by attractive men. If all of women were on the same page, even if all sorority girls were on the same page, they could push to change body image standards. But women are catty and compete against eachother. The existence of the "DUFF" (Designated Ugly Fat Friend) seems to confirm this-- many women are so insecure about their body image that they feel better when they look better than their friends.
This source builds up on Source 4, the other book source that I used that interviewed many fraternity males and females. Source 4 held conversations with females about their body image and mentioned DUFFs. It also mentioned that selective sororities keep out "fat" females from their organizations, because they are worried about maintaining their super sexy reputation for the best and hottest fraternities. Body image and the hyper-sexualization are themes that are redundant in both fraternities and sororities-- males are also objectified for their cut abs, their ripped pecs, and they buy expensive fat-burning products and gym memberships just to get big and keep up. The result is that the members of both fraternities and sororities are super self-conscious about their body image, and this causes a few things. First, it makes them insecure, but the end result is even worse-- they put down others that don't meet their body standards. For females, this means castigating "fat" girls, and for males, this means putting down people who "don't lift". The sense of superiority these groups allegedly feel may really originate from an inferiority complex, which means that these elite campus groups may not really be too different from the schoolyard bully in some cases.
This is my last source, and I think it has helped me obtain more of a balanced view of fraternities and sororities. There is a lot of diversity among these groups (there are many different kinds of Greek organizations), but I think identity and body image and conformity are important to these groups. The types of students who join fraternities or sororities may pretend they are joining because they are more social, but maybe they lack an identity, and don't feel confident about making new friends on campus, so they surround themselves with superficiality. It is unfortunate that in these moments in vulnerability (many leave their state and finds themselves alone and unknown in a big new college), these students pay money to buy friends. The real price is conformity, a price they will pay for the next four years but feel for the rest of their lives, for they completely miss the chance to explore themselves and the other cultures and experiences that college has to offer. They will graduate and only feel comfortable with those who feel and look like them, but hey, maybe this conformity will prepare them for the corporate world.
Becker, Carolyn Black, and Eric Stice. The Sorority Body Image Program : Group Leader Guide. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008. eBook Academic Collection (EBSCOhost). Web. 9 Mar. 2016.
In "The Sorority Body Image Program", Becker and Stice attempt to equip sororities with knowledge and exercises to empower these young women to feel good about their bodies. They explain that the Body Image program was actually founded by young women from a sorority from Trinity College (especially Delta Delta Delta). Becker and Stice believe that sororities are the best demographic to target to change college and popular culture about body image, because they are the largest self-governed organizations on college campuses. Thus, the Sorority Body Image Program is an example how sororities and fraternities can use their connections to make college campuses a more safe and healthy place.
Reading the Sorority Body Image Program was a relief for me. After mucking through all of the negative sludge about fraternities and sororities, I finally found some proof about the good things that Greek organizations are doing to help college culture. Of course, it is important to keep in mind that this program is run by sororities, not male fraternities. The more information I ingest about fraternities and sororities, it really does appear that male fraternities are the bigger problem on college campuses. Males, especially fraternity males are quick to "fat-brand" women, so even if a sisterhood runs Body Image event and these women feel good about themselves for a few weeks, how long will these good feelings last? I am no feminist, but it really appears men run the sexuality and body image show. It seems that women who try to embrace a healthy body image will merely be castigated by men, and women will push these "fat" female friends away to be desired by attractive men. If all of women were on the same page, even if all sorority girls were on the same page, they could push to change body image standards. But women are catty and compete against eachother. The existence of the "DUFF" (Designated Ugly Fat Friend) seems to confirm this-- many women are so insecure about their body image that they feel better when they look better than their friends.
This source builds up on Source 4, the other book source that I used that interviewed many fraternity males and females. Source 4 held conversations with females about their body image and mentioned DUFFs. It also mentioned that selective sororities keep out "fat" females from their organizations, because they are worried about maintaining their super sexy reputation for the best and hottest fraternities. Body image and the hyper-sexualization are themes that are redundant in both fraternities and sororities-- males are also objectified for their cut abs, their ripped pecs, and they buy expensive fat-burning products and gym memberships just to get big and keep up. The result is that the members of both fraternities and sororities are super self-conscious about their body image, and this causes a few things. First, it makes them insecure, but the end result is even worse-- they put down others that don't meet their body standards. For females, this means castigating "fat" girls, and for males, this means putting down people who "don't lift". The sense of superiority these groups allegedly feel may really originate from an inferiority complex, which means that these elite campus groups may not really be too different from the schoolyard bully in some cases.
This is my last source, and I think it has helped me obtain more of a balanced view of fraternities and sororities. There is a lot of diversity among these groups (there are many different kinds of Greek organizations), but I think identity and body image and conformity are important to these groups. The types of students who join fraternities or sororities may pretend they are joining because they are more social, but maybe they lack an identity, and don't feel confident about making new friends on campus, so they surround themselves with superficiality. It is unfortunate that in these moments in vulnerability (many leave their state and finds themselves alone and unknown in a big new college), these students pay money to buy friends. The real price is conformity, a price they will pay for the next four years but feel for the rest of their lives, for they completely miss the chance to explore themselves and the other cultures and experiences that college has to offer. They will graduate and only feel comfortable with those who feel and look like them, but hey, maybe this conformity will prepare them for the corporate world.
Ashley Yong Source 5
How does socioeconomic affirmative action differ from race-based affirmative action.
This study research through simulation models to analyze how race and class play a part in the college admission process and takes into account a number of variables not commonly evaluated like "uncertainty over college or student quality, learning over time, and strategic application submission." The simulations found three major things: (1) unless SES-based affirmative action policies use a very large bump, these policies are unlikely to result in the same racial composition in colleges as under current race-based affirmative action policies; (2) socioeconomic affirmative action results in a moderate-to-substantial reduction in the average resources of students enrolled at elite colleges, and are thus effective at increasing socioeconomic diversity; and (3) information plays a large, and perhaps previously unrecognized, role in the sorting of minority students into colleges; the application behavior of students responded much more effectively to affirmative action policies when those policies were made explicit to students."
After Source 4, I became very skeptical of race-neutral alternatives to traditional affirmative action. But, after Source 5, increasing socioeconomic diversity seems like a viable option. It also made me wonder about the transparency of affirmative action policies of universities across the nation. And if they keep it hush-hush, why? Affirmative action, I believe, is something higher education should be proud of. Is keeping their policies under wraps a result of illegal activity or questionably immoral activity? The study looks at affirmative action in a way I never considered: as something universities can openly disclose to their applicants. I agree that universities need to be more transparent with their policies, especially after reading the positive implications it has for students' application behavior. I agree with the article in saying socioeconomic differences is something we need to look at over race. '
This agrees with both Source 2 and 4 in providing alternatives to race-based affirmative action. Source 4 says it doesn't work but this source provides concrete data and says it does. I tend to agree more with this source because intuitively, providing opportunities for those socioeconomically disadvantaged, not just by race, is the best. Looking just at race can result in people, like Obamas daughter, getting undue benefits because of their race.
This has now led me to ask, in what other ways can we use socioeconomic status as a factor in the college admissions process? Can it be implemented in both admissions and financial aid-and is that fair? I will explore this and more in my next source-which I know will be a book.
This has now led me to ask, in what other ways can we use socioeconomic status as a factor in the college admissions process? Can it be implemented in both admissions and financial aid-and is that fair? I will explore this and more in my next source-which I know will be a book.
Daniela Berlinski Source 5
How does motivation influence first generation college
students in their route to academic success?
Petty, Tanjula. "Motivating First-Generation Students
to Academic Success and College Completion." College Student Journal 48.1 (2014): 133-38. MU Libraries. Web. 5 Mar. 2016.
In the
introduction of this article the author comments on the factors that are
drawbacks related to success within higher education for first generation
students. The author cites the
definition of motivation, noting that motivating students is the key to academic
success. Petty states that obstacles related to higher education begin before
the student even leaves for college. The author offers a differing view from
the side of the families who didn’t attend college by commenting on the fact
that these families don’t understand the benefits of graduating college. Low-income
families are more focused on work and tend to put their focus on that rather
than higher education. The author then states two motivation theories, which
will help in overcoming these barriers. She starts with Maslow’s Hierarchy of
Needs, which is a theory that deals with motivation. Designed as a pyramid,
this theory asserts that the lower level needs need to be met before moving
onto higher levels. The needs are as follows: psychological needs, safety
needs, social needs, esteem needs, and self-actualization needs. The most
relevant need in relation to higher education is self-actualization.
McClelland’s Need for Achievement, the other theory Petty describes, states
that one who has an increased level for a need to achieve leads to increased
level of self-esteem. He notes that if a need is powerful enough it will
positively affect the motivation. Finally the author goes into detail about
many levels within Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, as well as intrinsic and
extrinsic motivation.
I think this article is unique
because it entails taking a step towards enhancing these first generation
students lives in a more psychological approach. I agreed with the author in
that motivation is what leads to academic success. This also relates to the
increase in level of self-esteem, which in turns helps the student reach his or
her potential. I disliked the way the author ended the article, she mostly summarized
what she stated in the paper rather than showing some sort of new finding or
how it relates to higher education.
Petty references what was written
in the most recent article I researched; both articles comment on the influence
of identification within the two differing cultures of home and higher
education. However, these articles
differ in their approach to defining factors that affect these first generation
low-income students. Engle defines most of the factors as being resources that
these students are left out of, such as knowledge about university processes or
how to manage time. However Petty centralizes her argument on psychological
setbacks, such as the lack of motivation, self-esteem, and self-actualization.
I think looking forward I could research
differing perspectives of first generation low-income families versus first
generation low-income students. I think it would also be interesting to
research more psychological setbacks felt by first generation low income
students in regards to higher education. Finally I plan on looking at
dissertations related to the impact of social capital on the successful completion
of college and experiences on academic success.
Ashley Yong Source 4
Is there a “workable” race-neutral alternative to affirmative action in college admissions?
Long, Mark C. "Is There a "Workable" Race-Neutral Alternative to Affirmative Action in College Admissions?" Journal of policy analysis and management 34.1 (2015): 162-183. Web. 8 Mar. 8.
The U.S. Supreme Court defined in the 2013 Fisher v. University of Texas how it is legal to consider an applicant's race in the college admissions process. They said it is allowed when there is “no workable race-neutral alternatives would produce the educational benefits of diversity.” The abstract says that, "replacing traditional affirmative action with a system that uses an applicant’s predicted likelihood of being an under-represented racial minority as a proxy for the applicant’s actual minority status" can bring in a class with a lower predicted GPA and likelihood of graduating, suggesting race-neutral alternatives may not work. The workings and results of several studies are detailed in the journal.
I was initially a supporter of the race-neutral alternative to affirmative action, especially after the last article when Obama talked about how he didn't think his daughters should benefit from affirmative action. It made me remember when a girl in my school was admitted into Stanford. She was the daughter of the former McDonald's CEO and everyone accused her of getting in because she was black. But, the data did make me double take. While I don't think GPA matters that much, especially one that was only slightly lower according to the research, I do think the lower likelihood of graduating is concerning. It makes me wonder why it is lower and if that reason is good enough to continue trying the alternative to traditional affirmative action. I also wonder how the journal defines workable and what colleges' ultimate goal in affirmative action. If it is to give disadvantaged students an opportunity at higher education, it should not matter that much that GPA is lower. We also need to look at why GPA is lower. Is it a general trend that results from poor lower education? All in all, I think more research has to be done before we can concretely decide on traditional affirmative action or the race-neutral alternative.
This source responds most to my source 2 because of the Obama parallel I drew earlier because they both talk about race-neutral alternatives to affirmative action. I tend to agree more with source 2 because I do think the advantages of race-neutral alternatives outweigh the disadvantages of an average lower GPA. A new approach I can look into from putting these ideas in synthesis with each other is what are some advantages/disadvantages not explored in these journals?
This source has led me to ask what are some advantages/disadvantages of a race-neutral alternative to traditional affirmative action not explored in these journals? And after assessing these advantages/disadvantages, which one should be implemented into our college admissions process and how does the public feel about it? This is important to ask because I have been looking at public reaction and opinion on certain court case decisions during my exploration.
Matt Bowman Source 5
How does the system of student loans work?
Mohadeb, Praveen. Student Loans Schemes in Mauritius: Experience, Analysis and Scenarios. Paris: International Institute for Educational Planning (IIEP) UNESCO, 2006. ERIC PlusText [ProQuest]. Web. 8 Mar. 2016.
This book offers an in-depth evaluation of the student loans schemes in Mauritius. It then recommends how to set up a national scheme that is most likely to avoid the downfalls seen in other countries’ schemes. It proposes that such a system would be cost-effective and valuable for students and the government alike. In doing the included research, the author used a literature search and desk study for the compilation of secondary data sets, as well as a survey and interviews for the collection of principal data sets. The book splits its findings into an introduction, a profile of Mauritius, a rundown on the country’s higher education system, their demand, supply, and sustainability of higher education, student loans as an alternative to funding, the main features of their current student loans, considerations in a design of a scheme, and proposals for a student loans scheme.
After my last bit of research, I wanted to return back to earlier lines of thought on how to fix the system of student loans. This short book goes into great detail about what kind of country the system it discusses is placed, how they came up with their system, and some implications of the system. This, in my opinion, answers a lot of questions regarding how student loans even come about in the first place. This seemed important to me because I was at a point where I wanted to look at how our current system of student loans might be fixed. Thus, I needed to better understand how a system such as that worked. By using this source I can pick apart the pieces of the student loan puzzle and see its inner workings. This will help me assess where I think damage is being done and where more emphasis needs to be placed. I am still airing on the side of emphasis being placed on better education of student loans. However, I think this article is helpful in seeing other potential areas of need. This source helps answer my question about how student loan systems work very well. It doesn’t provide a ton of opportunities for critical thinking but it provides beneficial empirical findings that help me assess my solutions.
This source converses nicely with almost every source I have found thus far. It is really more of an overarching understanding to student loans as a whole, not on a basic level but on a higher thinking level that helps me see how student loans actually work, beyond book definitions. This added piece of the conversation is important because it goes beyond what other sources tend to say (simple definitions) and provides a rundown of how those definitions work in the real world. Not much conversation takes place directly but it does occur. I think this difference in subject matter is the biggest takeaway for me. This leads me to further my emphasis on education because this article alone helped clear so much up, I can only imagine what educational pieces like this could do on a more widespread scale.
This source doesn’t provide a lot of different routes for me to explore, it really serves the purpose of showing how the loan system works. However, I do think I will now finish off my research by furthering my study of the implications of a solution. This book does a great job explaining some implications so I will use that as I search more.
Michael Murphy Source 5
Documentation:
How do athletics influence the college life of a typical student?
This book expresses the belief that higher education is too obsessed with money and has lost track of its original mission---education. The book frequently argues that every noneducational part of a university must defend itself. Hacker and Dreifus believe in a simpler university. The chapter about athletics was very informative. College athletics began nicely as recreation but has distracted the university from many of the things it should be focused on. This chapter is trying to argue that "the athletic incubus" is a wide-reaching. There are many troubling facts regarding college athletics. Sports become an athlete's main activity and takes their time first. Travel costs are a lot. Coaches are paid way too much. 113 out of 118 top tier football teams lost money. Title IX and smaller sports have caused schools to recruit athletes from other countries. Many myths about college athletics can also be busted. The book argues that sports are not needed to build school spirit/pride, pointing at low turnouts for many schools. Athletics do not necessarily create more diversity or good diversity because many schools have a lot of white athletes and increasing diversity through athletics is not effective because it is such a low percentage of the student body. The authors do not support varsity sports and only support club teams with volunteer coaches. The information for profit of sports is interesting because colleges submit money data to the NCAA so we really do not exactly know about the money. Profits from football do not help pay for other teams that much. Less than half of the basketball teams and 10% of football teams collect as much money as they spend. Huge recreational facilities should not be provided by the university and the school should not spend so much money on an athlete. Students miss too much class through athletics. Varsity sports do not increase loyalty or donations because they only get support when the teams win and upgrading to a better division will increase the admissions of athletes with questionable records. Donations do seem to rise if a big team does extraordinarily well in the post season but it is so rare that schools should not depend on athletics for money. Additionally, through some programs, athletes get proportionally more assistance than academic students. Colleges with football do not see an increase in alumni contributions. The authors want teams' athletic programs to all mimic Cooper Unions': no athletic admissions decisions, playing a sport for fun after start of freshman year, low budget, rented gym, and public transportation.
Because this book is so broad, it helped me learn other information more than helping me answer my question. I agree with the book's overall argument, that higher education must get back to its original intend of educating. However I disagree with the authors' perspective that every noneducational part of a university must defend itself. I believe that although many things are extra commodities, many of these are vital to a positive atmosphere on campus and can all come together to help attract potential students. But the focus does need to be realigned with education. All of the basic facts stated at the beginning of the athletics chapter all seemed accurate and credible except one. It said that 113 out of 118 of the top divisional football teams have a deficit but later talks about how only about 40 out of 618 football teams make money. The book should have been more specific when to clarify to the read and therefore lost some of its credibility to me. I agree that it is bad that schools recruit students from other countries to play sports. I get that its the American Dream to come from another country but our nation should focus on providing an education for our own kids before inviting kids from abroad, just for athletics. If a student from another country wants to go to school in USA, he/she must be completely qualified, without athletic factors, because if not, then we are hindering our country's potential to have more and equally educated citizens. Although the book argues that sports are not needed to create school pride, I still believe that they can enhance spirit. From personal experience at college football games, it is pretty special to be able to sit in the student section surrounded by fellow classmates. The comradery I believe strengthens the attitude on campus, even if the team loses. The books points out concrete facts to disprove this but does not take into account the emotional aspects. This could all be irrelevant if we did not have college sports though. I agree that athletics do not makes significant positive effects on diversity, because the stereotype of athletes provide harm to the student-athletes. I think the author's idea of having club teams only is possible but the coaches must get paid a little, because I think a volunteer coach would be useless. We do not know enough about the profits from sports because universities could be hiding some of that information. The money from football (or lack there of) does not seem worthy enough for the sport to attract so much attention. The fact that student-athletes miss so much class is disturbing. This cannot be happening for the majority of kids who are going to need an actual job in their future. Athletic conferences should have the same breaks and these big athletic events should be over those breaks so students do not miss much class. The book's point about football not bringing in more alumni money does not seem to credible because the data did not include football powers. Schools must stop trying to overuse sports or depend on sports for money. Athletes should not be able to get more assistance than regular students. It seems like the authors' Cooper Union opinion is very radical for schools where athletes have a chance to become pro. Overall, this article helped me create more general conclusions regarding college athletics but also shed a little bit of light on campus life.
Source 4 says that the majority of athletes see injury as a stressor in their lives and recommends the athletes to use counselling more as a stress reliever. This source establishes that students miss too much class and sports are too much of a priority in athletes' lives, and it would be better for these athletes to play recreationally and for universities to spend very little money on athletics. What this whole situation comes down to is how important the sport is in a student-athlete's life. There still needs a way for talented athletes to transition from the high school level to the pro level. This could be solved through an alternate training method but what if these athletes are also very intelligent and could have a great professional career after their pro sports career? These talented people are going to have to pursue their business career later. Developmental sports leagues should become bigger because sports are so big in popular culture and athletes must still be able to have the opportunity to make it to the biggest level. Students should not have "injury" as a major stressor. "Students" (who are really only athletes) should not be taking space at a higher education institution from other kids who actually need to become trained for a career. Developmental leagues should become available for kids out of high school
I believe I am beginning to come to my conclusion that sports seem overall bad for universities and they might be able to work on their own in a developmental league. University athletics only really increase public relations with people who do not care about higher education, provide student athletes with a bad classroom environment, do not use university money fairly, negatively affects athletes' mental health, and creates a less safe campus environment. I still have not found the full answer to the effect on campus life from sports so I need to finish that research and round up other useful information on the way. How is campus life effected by university athletics?
How do athletics influence the college life of a typical student?
- Hacker, Andrew, and Claudia Dreifus. Higher Education?: How Colleges are Wasting our Money and Failing our Kids--and what we can do about it. 1st ed. New York: Times Books, 2010. Print.
- Exploration:
This book expresses the belief that higher education is too obsessed with money and has lost track of its original mission---education. The book frequently argues that every noneducational part of a university must defend itself. Hacker and Dreifus believe in a simpler university. The chapter about athletics was very informative. College athletics began nicely as recreation but has distracted the university from many of the things it should be focused on. This chapter is trying to argue that "the athletic incubus" is a wide-reaching. There are many troubling facts regarding college athletics. Sports become an athlete's main activity and takes their time first. Travel costs are a lot. Coaches are paid way too much. 113 out of 118 top tier football teams lost money. Title IX and smaller sports have caused schools to recruit athletes from other countries. Many myths about college athletics can also be busted. The book argues that sports are not needed to build school spirit/pride, pointing at low turnouts for many schools. Athletics do not necessarily create more diversity or good diversity because many schools have a lot of white athletes and increasing diversity through athletics is not effective because it is such a low percentage of the student body. The authors do not support varsity sports and only support club teams with volunteer coaches. The information for profit of sports is interesting because colleges submit money data to the NCAA so we really do not exactly know about the money. Profits from football do not help pay for other teams that much. Less than half of the basketball teams and 10% of football teams collect as much money as they spend. Huge recreational facilities should not be provided by the university and the school should not spend so much money on an athlete. Students miss too much class through athletics. Varsity sports do not increase loyalty or donations because they only get support when the teams win and upgrading to a better division will increase the admissions of athletes with questionable records. Donations do seem to rise if a big team does extraordinarily well in the post season but it is so rare that schools should not depend on athletics for money. Additionally, through some programs, athletes get proportionally more assistance than academic students. Colleges with football do not see an increase in alumni contributions. The authors want teams' athletic programs to all mimic Cooper Unions': no athletic admissions decisions, playing a sport for fun after start of freshman year, low budget, rented gym, and public transportation.
Because this book is so broad, it helped me learn other information more than helping me answer my question. I agree with the book's overall argument, that higher education must get back to its original intend of educating. However I disagree with the authors' perspective that every noneducational part of a university must defend itself. I believe that although many things are extra commodities, many of these are vital to a positive atmosphere on campus and can all come together to help attract potential students. But the focus does need to be realigned with education. All of the basic facts stated at the beginning of the athletics chapter all seemed accurate and credible except one. It said that 113 out of 118 of the top divisional football teams have a deficit but later talks about how only about 40 out of 618 football teams make money. The book should have been more specific when to clarify to the read and therefore lost some of its credibility to me. I agree that it is bad that schools recruit students from other countries to play sports. I get that its the American Dream to come from another country but our nation should focus on providing an education for our own kids before inviting kids from abroad, just for athletics. If a student from another country wants to go to school in USA, he/she must be completely qualified, without athletic factors, because if not, then we are hindering our country's potential to have more and equally educated citizens. Although the book argues that sports are not needed to create school pride, I still believe that they can enhance spirit. From personal experience at college football games, it is pretty special to be able to sit in the student section surrounded by fellow classmates. The comradery I believe strengthens the attitude on campus, even if the team loses. The books points out concrete facts to disprove this but does not take into account the emotional aspects. This could all be irrelevant if we did not have college sports though. I agree that athletics do not makes significant positive effects on diversity, because the stereotype of athletes provide harm to the student-athletes. I think the author's idea of having club teams only is possible but the coaches must get paid a little, because I think a volunteer coach would be useless. We do not know enough about the profits from sports because universities could be hiding some of that information. The money from football (or lack there of) does not seem worthy enough for the sport to attract so much attention. The fact that student-athletes miss so much class is disturbing. This cannot be happening for the majority of kids who are going to need an actual job in their future. Athletic conferences should have the same breaks and these big athletic events should be over those breaks so students do not miss much class. The book's point about football not bringing in more alumni money does not seem to credible because the data did not include football powers. Schools must stop trying to overuse sports or depend on sports for money. Athletes should not be able to get more assistance than regular students. It seems like the authors' Cooper Union opinion is very radical for schools where athletes have a chance to become pro. Overall, this article helped me create more general conclusions regarding college athletics but also shed a little bit of light on campus life.
Source 4 says that the majority of athletes see injury as a stressor in their lives and recommends the athletes to use counselling more as a stress reliever. This source establishes that students miss too much class and sports are too much of a priority in athletes' lives, and it would be better for these athletes to play recreationally and for universities to spend very little money on athletics. What this whole situation comes down to is how important the sport is in a student-athlete's life. There still needs a way for talented athletes to transition from the high school level to the pro level. This could be solved through an alternate training method but what if these athletes are also very intelligent and could have a great professional career after their pro sports career? These talented people are going to have to pursue their business career later. Developmental sports leagues should become bigger because sports are so big in popular culture and athletes must still be able to have the opportunity to make it to the biggest level. Students should not have "injury" as a major stressor. "Students" (who are really only athletes) should not be taking space at a higher education institution from other kids who actually need to become trained for a career. Developmental leagues should become available for kids out of high school
I believe I am beginning to come to my conclusion that sports seem overall bad for universities and they might be able to work on their own in a developmental league. University athletics only really increase public relations with people who do not care about higher education, provide student athletes with a bad classroom environment, do not use university money fairly, negatively affects athletes' mental health, and creates a less safe campus environment. I still have not found the full answer to the effect on campus life from sports so I need to finish that research and round up other useful information on the way. How is campus life effected by university athletics?
Rachel Whitaker Source 5
A) Are there ways for Universities to save themselves from the danger of the 90/10 rule?
B) "Strategic Considerations for New Income." ASHE Higher Education Report 41.1 (2014): 97-109. Education Full Text. Web. 8 Mar. 2016.
There are six types of budgeting: incremental, zero-based, activity-based, responsibility center management, centralized, and performance-based. Although some of these are better than others, they take a lot more time and resources to implement. Each type of budgeting does have negative sides. Though some might believe that decentralizing the budget would be beneficial, centralized budget means that knowledgable administrations can make better decisions about what to do with the money they have. RCM and performance-based are the most promising. By using creative budgeting methods, colleges on the brink of closing can save their institutions.
A possible solution finally arises. Different types of budgeting to fix gaps in federal aid. There are pros and cons, of course, but each university knows the state in which it is in, so finding the best budget for them out of six should be relatively easy. It would be great for colleges and universities to be able to keep their tuition low because of these budgets and allow federal aid not to scare them with the 90/10 rule
As this coincides with my other articles, this is definitely team higher education, in a way. It points out that there are ways for higher education to get on track and not be the bad guys in the situation. Policymakers don't even have to play a part in this at all. Universities can do as they please under the guidance of these budgets and everyone will win.
Further questions:
What budgeting methods are the most successful colleges using? Can Universities in danger of breaking 90/10 use these methods to drag themselves out of danger? If these models exist, why are universities still raising tuition?
B) "Strategic Considerations for New Income." ASHE Higher Education Report 41.1 (2014): 97-109. Education Full Text. Web. 8 Mar. 2016.
There are six types of budgeting: incremental, zero-based, activity-based, responsibility center management, centralized, and performance-based. Although some of these are better than others, they take a lot more time and resources to implement. Each type of budgeting does have negative sides. Though some might believe that decentralizing the budget would be beneficial, centralized budget means that knowledgable administrations can make better decisions about what to do with the money they have. RCM and performance-based are the most promising. By using creative budgeting methods, colleges on the brink of closing can save their institutions.
A possible solution finally arises. Different types of budgeting to fix gaps in federal aid. There are pros and cons, of course, but each university knows the state in which it is in, so finding the best budget for them out of six should be relatively easy. It would be great for colleges and universities to be able to keep their tuition low because of these budgets and allow federal aid not to scare them with the 90/10 rule
As this coincides with my other articles, this is definitely team higher education, in a way. It points out that there are ways for higher education to get on track and not be the bad guys in the situation. Policymakers don't even have to play a part in this at all. Universities can do as they please under the guidance of these budgets and everyone will win.
Further questions:
What budgeting methods are the most successful colleges using? Can Universities in danger of breaking 90/10 use these methods to drag themselves out of danger? If these models exist, why are universities still raising tuition?
Hannah Stratman Source 5
Is corporatization compromising our college education?
Cotê, James, Allahar, Anton. Lowing Higher Education: The Rise of Corporate Universities and the Fall of a Liberal Education. 2011. Web. March 8 2016
This book is written mainly to show how this corporate shift in universities has lead to the decrease in degrees such as humanities and encourages degrees in other areas, like hard sciences because administrators see this as an edge to get a higher paying job. This book focuses on convincing the revivalism of a liberal arts education. Over time, fewer fund were donated to the liberal arts programs and more to the STEM disciplines. With the expansion to higher education, the authors begin to question the quality of education. Are grades the only way to judge academic success? Why do we believe that graduating on time is a good thing? How long does it take to become educated? Other focuses in higher education has allowed higher education to become corporatized without anyone questioning it because we have all been distracted. Students need an engaging education and could receive that through a college education. The university is a space for learning and a space where theories, forms, and hypothesis are formed. The university is not a bar, a football stadium, or a cocktail party. Some motivated students believe that they are not being pushed to their full potential...something a college education should be doing for you. Students argue that they are being not being forced to think critically and are only measured by multiple test score. Why spend all that money to learn what you could just read on your own?
My first reaction to this article was that its crazy that someone is complaining that college is too easy!! But when i take a minute, I understand. I personally want to be pushed and learn the most that I can learn and be engaged in my studies so that when I finally get to my job in the real world I am well prepared for any obstacle I face. When all I haves a multiple choice test, I cram the night before and don't actually internalize the information. The way I learn best is when I can ask questions in a comfortable setting and when I am forced to think critically about a problem. When you are engaged, you are a lot more likely to remember the information and probably more likely to enjoy it! To me, this book illustrated the fact that corporatization is straying away from a liberal arts education and students are no longer receiving all the benefits. Admissions promote hard sciences because those are the kids that go longer in school and end up paying the most money and then make the school look good. However, we forget the importance of a liberal arts education.Corporatization seems to have made the overall education of higher education less challenging in a way.
In my Doyle source 4, he argues that a college education isn't really worth the benefits. He claims that the economy doesn't need all of the graduates that higher education is just spewing out. It could save a lot of time money and effort if college wasn't necessary to success. He does state reasons why a college education is helpful because those with a higher education degree are more likely to make more... but i think he is trying t make the point that they don't have too. In Cotê' et. he argues that the only education that matters is a liberal arts one. I think that there has to be some middle road. We need to instead focus on giving students an engaging education that keeps them interested and makes them want to learn and stop encouraging students to only pursue hard sciences because thats what makes the most money. Let students choose their own path.
What is the importance a liberal arts education? Has corporatization really made higher education less challenging? Are kids dropping out in this period of corporatization because its too expensive?
Rachel Whitaker Source 4
A) Why are colleges raising tuition?
B) Bluenski, Goldie. "Colleges Scramble to Avoid Violating Federal-Aid Limit." Chronicle of Higher Education 57.31 (2011): A1-A8. Education Full Text. Web. 7 Mar. 2016.
Corinthian College raised tuition in order to keep students from being able to use federal student aid to cover the complete cost. This has to do with the 90/10 rule. This rule drives universities to create more ways to go around the 10% part of the 90/10 rule. The 90/10 rule was created to make sure that aid was not solely from the government and that they were getting aid from other private sources. GI Bill and tuition assistance to students who were also in active duty do not count as part of the 90%. Most universities are very close to the 90% value, but those that aren't are under exemptions. Universities use the tuition increase to help lobby against the 90/10 rule. Levels of student aid have risen, yet the increase in tuition increases amount of debt. Universities try their most creative ideas in getting around the rule and take advantage of their exemptions. However, thousands of colleges have been able to comply to the law.
For my exploratory paper this has been a very useful find. Not only does it prove that there are laws and rules in place to create a balance between aid and loans, thousands of colleges are having no problem complying with it. The rise of tuition is only there to make it harder for students to get all of their aid federally and cause the university to break the 90/10 rule. The fact that colleges put so much creativity into getting around the rule versus trying to comply to it is disturbing. However, to say that all colleges are doing this is unfair, seeing as above, many universities are having no issue with it.
Here we are again with the finger of blame pointing at the university. Policymakers are giving universities 90% federal aid and yet they still need to raise tuition. I don't know how they are going to get themselves out of this one, but as we have seen so far, colleges are very creative so I'm sure they will find a way to point the finger the other way. This journal has given me a lot of new information about policies in place and ways that universities use their federal aid. I know more about the process and the details which will help me more in exploring.
Further Question:
What would happen if the 90/10 rule was defeated. Does the rule benefit or hurt students?
B) Bluenski, Goldie. "Colleges Scramble to Avoid Violating Federal-Aid Limit." Chronicle of Higher Education 57.31 (2011): A1-A8. Education Full Text. Web. 7 Mar. 2016.
Corinthian College raised tuition in order to keep students from being able to use federal student aid to cover the complete cost. This has to do with the 90/10 rule. This rule drives universities to create more ways to go around the 10% part of the 90/10 rule. The 90/10 rule was created to make sure that aid was not solely from the government and that they were getting aid from other private sources. GI Bill and tuition assistance to students who were also in active duty do not count as part of the 90%. Most universities are very close to the 90% value, but those that aren't are under exemptions. Universities use the tuition increase to help lobby against the 90/10 rule. Levels of student aid have risen, yet the increase in tuition increases amount of debt. Universities try their most creative ideas in getting around the rule and take advantage of their exemptions. However, thousands of colleges have been able to comply to the law.
For my exploratory paper this has been a very useful find. Not only does it prove that there are laws and rules in place to create a balance between aid and loans, thousands of colleges are having no problem complying with it. The rise of tuition is only there to make it harder for students to get all of their aid federally and cause the university to break the 90/10 rule. The fact that colleges put so much creativity into getting around the rule versus trying to comply to it is disturbing. However, to say that all colleges are doing this is unfair, seeing as above, many universities are having no issue with it.
Here we are again with the finger of blame pointing at the university. Policymakers are giving universities 90% federal aid and yet they still need to raise tuition. I don't know how they are going to get themselves out of this one, but as we have seen so far, colleges are very creative so I'm sure they will find a way to point the finger the other way. This journal has given me a lot of new information about policies in place and ways that universities use their federal aid. I know more about the process and the details which will help me more in exploring.
Further Question:
What would happen if the 90/10 rule was defeated. Does the rule benefit or hurt students?
Lindsey Pascoe Source 5
How is the functioning of higher education related to academic success?
Boswell, Martin. Giving effect to quality audit recommendations: a case study from an organisational culture perspective. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 37:5, pages 572-585. (2015). Web.
This article discusses how the US system of higher education is declining in its effectiveness. Research on student choice has revealed that many applicants in higher education make enrollment decisions based on a wide variety of educational, social, and personal factors. This is causing universities to make investments on things that are attractive to prospective students rather than things that can potentially impact student learning. The rise of grades in these institutions has also not been accompanied by growth in student learning. Instead, students who have enrolled in STEM major courses have been shown to change major after beginning school and switch into majors with better grade inflation.
This source changes my thinking regarding higher education because I had not thought about the fact that the way higher education is run can be leading to these increases and declines in certain fields. Because these institutions are aiming to recruit students while not taking into account how well they might do in school, they are causing academic success to go down the drain. Students are no longer challenging themselves in STEM majors but are rather taking the easy way out and switching into classes with better chances of doing well. Thus, universities are not striving to enhance their student's academic success but are instead looking to get the highest enrollment rates. This brings about the new idea that STEM majors seem to be increasing in first year students but their is still a shortage of these specialized individuals due to the switching of major when classes get too hard. I agree with this source that there are many outside factors that influence student enrollment, not just academic success. This source leads me to answer the question for the blog that higher education functioning aimed towards higher enrollment rates causes a decrease in academic success due to students opting out of hard classes.
In response to other sources, this source affirms that personal and outside factors have a huge influence on student enrollment and major choice, such as the ones talked about in Source 2. I agree with both of these sources equally because they both state that these factors are influential in higher education choices. However, I believe source 2 is more valid in regards to this topic because studies were directly held to show which factors and what level of influence and how influential they were in major choice. In addition, I can put this source in conversation with my previous two because it relates to the conversation I created about the seemingly increase of STEM majors, but the still relevant shortage in these individuals.
This source has led me to ask the new question of how does academic success relate to choice of major? Hopefully I will be able to find a source that discusses this topic because I believe it is not too broad of a question to answer. Now I have more answers regarding the functioning of higher education in regards to academic success and how that ultimately influence choice of major, which ties back to the personal factors previously talked about as well as the shortage of STEM professionals.
Boswell, Martin. Giving effect to quality audit recommendations: a case study from an organisational culture perspective. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 37:5, pages 572-585. (2015). Web.
This article discusses how the US system of higher education is declining in its effectiveness. Research on student choice has revealed that many applicants in higher education make enrollment decisions based on a wide variety of educational, social, and personal factors. This is causing universities to make investments on things that are attractive to prospective students rather than things that can potentially impact student learning. The rise of grades in these institutions has also not been accompanied by growth in student learning. Instead, students who have enrolled in STEM major courses have been shown to change major after beginning school and switch into majors with better grade inflation.
This source changes my thinking regarding higher education because I had not thought about the fact that the way higher education is run can be leading to these increases and declines in certain fields. Because these institutions are aiming to recruit students while not taking into account how well they might do in school, they are causing academic success to go down the drain. Students are no longer challenging themselves in STEM majors but are rather taking the easy way out and switching into classes with better chances of doing well. Thus, universities are not striving to enhance their student's academic success but are instead looking to get the highest enrollment rates. This brings about the new idea that STEM majors seem to be increasing in first year students but their is still a shortage of these specialized individuals due to the switching of major when classes get too hard. I agree with this source that there are many outside factors that influence student enrollment, not just academic success. This source leads me to answer the question for the blog that higher education functioning aimed towards higher enrollment rates causes a decrease in academic success due to students opting out of hard classes.
In response to other sources, this source affirms that personal and outside factors have a huge influence on student enrollment and major choice, such as the ones talked about in Source 2. I agree with both of these sources equally because they both state that these factors are influential in higher education choices. However, I believe source 2 is more valid in regards to this topic because studies were directly held to show which factors and what level of influence and how influential they were in major choice. In addition, I can put this source in conversation with my previous two because it relates to the conversation I created about the seemingly increase of STEM majors, but the still relevant shortage in these individuals.
This source has led me to ask the new question of how does academic success relate to choice of major? Hopefully I will be able to find a source that discusses this topic because I believe it is not too broad of a question to answer. Now I have more answers regarding the functioning of higher education in regards to academic success and how that ultimately influence choice of major, which ties back to the personal factors previously talked about as well as the shortage of STEM professionals.
Katie Hanson Source 5
What are the benefits of teach student relationship?
Siming, Luo, Niamatullah, Jianying Gap, Dan Xu, and Khurrum Shaf. "Factors Leading to Students' Satisfaction in the Higher Learning Institution." Journal of Education and Practice 6 (2015): n. pag.ERIC. Web. 8 Mar. 2016.
This was a brief article that was focused on factors leading towards student sanctification. The main factors that the article noted was Student Teacher Relationship, Faculty Preparedness, Experiences, and Campus Services and Facilities. Students were given a survey where they were to circle numbers that best corresponded to their feelings about questions. The article concluded that all these variables contributed to student satisfaction, especially Student experiences. The article also found that there was strong relationship between students and teachers.
I do not think this a good source at all. It feels way to broad for what they're investigating. They are looking at four different aspects of campus that within those are very broad. I also do not think experiences are a valid thing to measure. Not all students go through the same experiences but all students have access to teachers, faculty preparedness and campus services. I am very skeptical of this source. It feels very brushed together. It goes into no detail about what any of these categories are about or what they provide to students. It is an ill writ article. This source does not help me answer the question above. I question this articles validity very much. It is to brief. There it little to no explanation.
This source is in stasis with the previous article about student teacher relationships in that it lessens drop out rates. This source goes into a bit about student satisfaction however this satisfaction for more of a traditional course rather than online. I do not think in any way does the article bring anything new to the table.
I still want to look more into this question. I have requested an article from the library and hopefully I get that soon. I also want to look into what is the type of student who is taking an online course and also work on a survey for current students. I am getting towards idea that in terms of content traditional and online are the same but I think there is something missing from the face to face. Students are not as well motivated or supported and they cannot develop professional relationships wiht their professors which most students need to get a successful job.
Siming, Luo, Niamatullah, Jianying Gap, Dan Xu, and Khurrum Shaf. "Factors Leading to Students' Satisfaction in the Higher Learning Institution." Journal of Education and Practice 6 (2015): n. pag.ERIC. Web. 8 Mar. 2016.
This was a brief article that was focused on factors leading towards student sanctification. The main factors that the article noted was Student Teacher Relationship, Faculty Preparedness, Experiences, and Campus Services and Facilities. Students were given a survey where they were to circle numbers that best corresponded to their feelings about questions. The article concluded that all these variables contributed to student satisfaction, especially Student experiences. The article also found that there was strong relationship between students and teachers.
I do not think this a good source at all. It feels way to broad for what they're investigating. They are looking at four different aspects of campus that within those are very broad. I also do not think experiences are a valid thing to measure. Not all students go through the same experiences but all students have access to teachers, faculty preparedness and campus services. I am very skeptical of this source. It feels very brushed together. It goes into no detail about what any of these categories are about or what they provide to students. It is an ill writ article. This source does not help me answer the question above. I question this articles validity very much. It is to brief. There it little to no explanation.
This source is in stasis with the previous article about student teacher relationships in that it lessens drop out rates. This source goes into a bit about student satisfaction however this satisfaction for more of a traditional course rather than online. I do not think in any way does the article bring anything new to the table.
I still want to look more into this question. I have requested an article from the library and hopefully I get that soon. I also want to look into what is the type of student who is taking an online course and also work on a survey for current students. I am getting towards idea that in terms of content traditional and online are the same but I think there is something missing from the face to face. Students are not as well motivated or supported and they cannot develop professional relationships wiht their professors which most students need to get a successful job.
Lindsey Pascoe Source 4
Why have such dramatic changes occurred in the status of liberal education?
McGrath, Earl James. The Graduate School and the Decline of Liberal Education. New York: Published for the Institute of Higher Education by the Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1959. Web.
In this eBook, I focused mainly on the topics covered in Part 2 because they better related to my research question. This section talks about how the dominance of graduate schools has contributed to the decline of liberal arts colleges. These institutions have, under the influence of graduate schools, shifted their emphasis from the dissemination to the creation of knowledge and from teaching to research. The shortcomings of these liberal arts colleges cannot be reversed until the power of graduate institutions over liberal arts colleges is exposed to the public view and then improved from there. Higher education has confused the purposes of liberal arts colleges and misdirected their efforts. Moreover, they have been deprived of the freedom to determine policies governing their own student's education. This has resulted in teaching at all universities revolving around investigative activities. Most of this is due to the fact that the reins for higher education were originally placed in the hands of graduate faculty whose main interests lay in research. In order for reorientation of the liberal arts college to occur, drastic reforms in graduate education must first take place by revising and clarifying the purposes of graduate education.
This article brings about the new ideas that maybe graduate institutions have not caused an increase in STEM majors but rather a decrease in the effectiveness of resources to achieve a liberal arts education. This would make sense that a seemingly inflation of STEM majors has occurred when less students are pursuing education in liberal arts. I agree with the source that graduate institutions have reoriented teaching in liberal arts colleges to make it less directed towards the arts and more directed towards the research. This source leads me to an answer to the question for this blog because it directly states that the dominance of graduate schools have contributed to the decline of liberal arts colleges from the very beginning of higher education. The source uses direct examples through Harvard University to prove this idea due to the reins for liberal education institutions being placed in graduate faculty's hands. It makes sense that the status of liberal education would be declining when graduate education institutions have taken over and are controlling how these schools educate their students.
This source makes a huge connection for me with a previous source regarding the continuous need for increasing STEM majors. It makes sense that there seems to be an increase in STEM majors even though there is still a shortage because what is actually happening is a decline in liberal arts majors. Also, this source is in conversation with my previous source because it talks about how liberal arts colleges have reoriented their teaching towards more of a research standpoint which would no doubt cause less people to pursue these majors due to ineffective teaching strategies when they could be more successful pursuing a research-oriented major in the STEM fields. This could also effect student autonomy when choosing a major because they are already under the impression that liberal arts colleges are declining in status and so they will be inclined to not choose these majors and will be stuck choosing STEM majors instead.
I have been led by this source to ask the new question of how does the decline in liberal arts education contribute to the functioning of higher education? This question may be too broad to ask for a journal entry so maybe I will restrict my search to the functioning of liberal colleges or simply the functioning of higher education institutions. Answers that I have so far are that STEM majors are still in increasing need but seem to be increasing due to the fall of liberal arts education, which is due in part to the increasing dominance that graduate education institutions have instilled in how liberal arts colleges teach their students. Also, these factors influence student autonomy because they are limited on successful majors choices as liberal arts education declines.
Brian King Source 4
Brian King Source 4
What is the worth of sorority / fraternity life?
Worthen, Meredith G. F. "Blaming the Jocks and the Greeks?: Exploring Collegiate Athletes’ and Fraternity/Sorority Members’ Attitudes Toward LGBT Individuals." Journal of College Student Development 55.2 (2014): 168-95. Web.This source does not explore if college athletics or greek life affiliates are more homophobic, as it states previous studies have already shown that, but rather explores the underlying problem that causes this homophobia among these groups of people. The studies that this article's author previously views and discusses are studies conducted on predominantly white fraternities and sororities. In this article, a study is conducted that examines athletes' and greek members' attitudes toward gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender individuals. In this study, groups of students were given surveys that used Raja and Stokes’s (1998) Modern Homophobia Scale, Mohr and Rochlen’s (1999) Attitudes Regarding Bisexuality Scale, and Hill and Willoughby’s (2005) Genderism and Transphobia Scale to measure the homophobia of the surveyed students. The results displayed that greek life membership is negatively related to supportive attitudes towards gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgender individuals. It also finds being male is negatively related to supportive attitudes towards the groups while being female is positively related to supportive attitudes towards the groups. The author then discusses why males and greek affiliated individuals would display more homophobic attitudes than females and non-affiliated individuals. The author suggests that fraternity affiliation among males promotes a certain type of masculinity that promotes homophobia. The author suggests universities develop programs to promote supportive attitudes toward LGBT individuals.
While the athletic side of this article does not exactly fit with my topic, the study still provides good info on greek members and their attitudes toward the LGBT community. This source reinforces my original thinking that I had before I started my research. I do not know if sororities and fraternities are a direct cause of this or a contributing factor to something bigger. Despite this, I am still closer to an answer as to how worthwhile fraternities and sororities are.
This source covers the topic of LGBT attitudes which closely relates to the previous article which explored cultural sensitivity. I found it surprising that the previous source found no correlation between cultural sensitivity and greek life affiliation, but this source found a correlation between negative LGBT attitudes and greek membership. My previous source stated that there is no correlation between hypermasculinity and greek life membership, but this source suggests that greek life forms a masculinity that discourages homosexuality. These may be in disagreement, or be totally different types of masculinity with their own negative impacts.
I still have questions about fraternity and sorority correlation to drug use, alcohol use, and reinforcing claims to either help previous sources or disprove them. I can conclude from my four sources that greek life may inhibit academic success and help social abilities, have no effect on cultural sensitivity, have no correlation between hypermasculinity and sexual aggression, but have a correlation to negative LGBT attitudes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)