America has long been recognized as the ultimate shrine to the individual. What other country has a long piece of parchment paper dedicated to the unimpeded independence of its citizens? The Constitution is the United States’ most valuable feature. The only country to formally recognize all men are created equal took measures to ensure all men are treated as equals. Arguably the most important right set forth by the Founding Fathers’ pen is the right to free speech. American citizens have a pass to express their beliefs and ideals when and how they choose. A person, corporation, or institution found infringing on free speech is often publicly denounced as unpatriotic and undemocratic. Violations of the Constitution can even result in imprisonment. It seems some establishments of higher learning have forgotten the consequences of flouting the rights of individuals. Students and faculty alike have been denied the ability to communicate freely. Universities exist to provide an environment for further education and self-discovery. Limiting the information available hobbles minds and opinions. Restricting access to the First Amendment right of free speech destroys any chance of diversity and further development of mind. These two elements are crucial to the function of any college or university.
College is not only a time of self-discovery but a time for developing a greater awareness of the world. “Higher education” means being exposed to a wide variety of belief systems, cultures, knowledge, and people. Diversity is an essential component of producing educated graduates. If everyone thought the same, society would not have the light bulb, the iPhone, or the wheel. Some universities, however, eschew multiplicity in favor of control. ...
... middle of paper ...
...ntirely. Fear, paranoia, and ignorance became pandemics. When individuals’ rights are handicapped, the human being is degraded to an inferior state. Banning or obstructing free speech opens a gateway to the same kind of degradation. Where students are promised freedom and enlightenment, they are met with shackles and a rulebook.
What does a constitutional right mean? Yes, it’s some fancy words scribbled upon a ragged length of paper. But that’s missing the point. America’s Constitution sets us apart. We are different because of that ragged length of paper. And being different, being extraordinary does not mean settling for ignorance. Extraordinary means shouting to the world our thoughts, feelings, realizations, hopes, fears, doubts, and desires. What better place to transform into a veritable din of expression than a university: the place you go to find yourself.
Throughout America, people place a high value in their freedom of speech. This right is protected by the first Amendment and practiced in communities throughout the country. However, a movement has recently gained momentum on college campuses calling for protection from words and ideas that may cause emotional discomfort. This movement is driven mainly by students who demand that speech be strictly monitored and punishments inflicted on individuals who cause even accidental offense. Greg Lukianoff and Johnathan Haidt discuss how this new trend affects the students mentally and socially in their article The Coddling of the American Mind published in The Atlantic Monthly. Lukianoff and Haidt mostly use logical reasoning and references to
This is a case of great importance because it addresses the issue of the broadness of the First Amendment as well as student’s freedom of speech rights being limited based on vicinity and because they are students. From this case it can be concluded that the courts were indecisive in their decision making process and that they will continue to interpret the First Amendment to their suiting and not as it is written. Finally, schools do need to have the right to enforce policies that are beneficial to the students.
By embracing, and not just celebrating diversity in our colleges, we can create a more broad, educated, and interesting view of the
The multiple choices students have today in college have made the university a party environment, resulting in complacent students. Mark Edmundson raises important questions and makes valid points in this essay that are worth thinking about. If people don’t take a look at our present college system and start thinking outside the box, the college education system will continue on its downward spiral of consumerism. It is fun to graduate high school and go to college to party and to have a comedic professor, but there is so much more to college then having fun. People need to realize that by challenging student, students can then start to recognize their own potential end become better for it. Learning and utilizing the information that is being taught in college is essential. “Everyone is born with their own mind, all that is left to do is break out of the stereotypical college student mold, and use
From the opening sentence of the essay, “We are free to be you, me, stupid, and dead”, Roger Rosenblatt hones in on a very potent and controversial topic. He notes the fundamental truth that although humans will regularly shield themselves with the omnipresent First Amendment, seldom do we enjoy having the privilege we so readily abuse be used against us. Freedom of speech has been a controversial issue throughout the world. Our ability to say whatever we want is very important to us as individuals and communities. Although freedom of speech and expression may sometimes be offensive to other people, it is still everyone’s right to express his/her opinion under the American constitution which states that “congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press”.
We’ve all heard the saying “one size fits all,” but when it comes to our education should one size really fit all (Allitt 3612)? Patrick Allitt, a professor of history at Emory University in Atlanta wrote the essay “Should Undergraduates Specialize?” published in 2006 in the Chronicle of Higher Education, he argues that American colleges should give students the chance to choose between a liberal arts education or one that is more specialized to those who want it. Allitt provides an effective argument by building his credibility with personal experiences and feelings, different viewpoints of the argument, and explaining the advantages and disadvantages between the two different
The free speech clause in the Bill of Rights states: “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech” (US Const., amend I). This clause, albeit consists of a mere ten words, holds much power and affluence in the American unique way of life. It guarantees Americans the right to speak freely without censorship by preventing the government from restricting the rights of the people to express their opinions. Consequently, this freedom can encourage citizens’ participation in politics; promote an adaptable and tolerant community; facilitate the discovery of truth; and ultimately create a stable nation. However, how much freedom should be granted to an individual? Where should the line be drawn for the coverage free speech protection? (1) What happens when the exercise of free speech puts other constitutional values in jeopardy? What values should prevail? (2) In an attempt to address these questions, many opposing interpretations have been presented. While some construe this clause in an absolute, categorical approach, others take on a more lenient, balancing stance. (1)
Colleges and universities in the past were limited to one type of student, upper class males, but now colleges and universities are centers of education for people of all backgrounds. People from different backgrounds and opinions congregating at these centers of education, forced many colleges to evolve. By giving colleges and universities a large variety in their students, it forces them to ditch a standard on education. Due to this fact, all colleges and universities must deliver an assortment of options in the effort of giving everyone the best education possible. Evolution for colleges and universities did not end there; due to the birth of the world wide web most colleges and universities now give the option to enroll in online classes. This rise in online education spawned a new form of university, fully online universities. Author Graeme Wood presents in his essay, “Is College Doomed?” a wonderful example of what a college or university should not be. Graeme Wood describes Minerva, an online university with the goal of stripping education to only the essentials. Minerva wants to take away campuses, sports, lectures, and most amenities leaving only their version of education. Minerva’s goal to take away options for students reduces their reach, leaving only a select few with the desire to join Minerva. Limiting students only leads to a worse education, especially since the students are the ones paying for the version of education they desire. College’s most valuable asset is their plethora of options in living, community forming, studying abroad, and variety of classes, this aspect of college in particular is what creates a perfect education for any student.
The purpose of this paper is to explore the topic of freedom of speech and free speech zones on college campuses. This paper will answer the questions: Why have so many Universities who protect academic freedom, retreat into fear of freedom? Are school officials afraid of debate and disagreement? Are they trying to keep people (outside the zone) from hearing words that may offend someone? These questions will be answered through analyses of previous court cases, journal articles and news articles.
An industry that once promoted fairness and attainability was now itself becoming an obstacle to overcome. “American universities are in fact organized according to middle- and upper-class cultural norms or rules of the game and that these norms do indeed constitute an unseen academic disadvantage for first-generation college students transitioning to university settings” (Stephens et. al, 2012). This proposed characteristic serves as an almost uncontrollable and unchangeable disadvantage that students will likely fail to subdue. Institutions should serve as mediating platforms that allow students to start at impartial grounds, where their talents, abilities and connections are the only factors that can influence their
The right and privilege to higher education in today’s society teeters like the scales of justice. In reading Andrew Delbanco’s, “College: What It Was, Is, and Should Be, it is apparent that Delbanco believes that the main role of college is to accommodate that needs of all students in providing opportunities to discover individual passions and dreams while furthering and enhancing the economic strength of the nation. Additionally, Delbanco also views college as more than just a time to prepare for a job in the future but a way in which students and young adults can prepare for their future lives so they are meaningful and purposeful. Even more important is the role that college will play in helping and guiding students to learn how to accept alternate point of views and the importance that differing views play in a democratic society. With that said, the issue is not the importance that higher education plays in society, but exactly who should pay the costly price tag of higher education is a raging debate in all social classes, cultures, socioeconomic groups and races.
In the United States, free speech is protected by the First Amendment in which it states, “Congress shall make no laws respecting an establishment of religion … or abridging the freedom of speech.” Now, nearly 250 years into the future, the exact thing that the Founding Fathers were afraid of is starting to happen. Today, our freedom of speech is being threatened through different forces, such as the tyranny of the majority, the protection of the minority, and the stability of the society. Now, colleges and universities in the United States today are also trying to institute a code upon its students that would bar them from exercising their right to speak freely in the name of protecting minorities from getting bullied. This brings us into
In their book Paying for the Party, Armstrong and Hamilton discuss how universities take class differences and class projects of distinct women to define what will be their college experience. In their book, Armstrong and Hamilton define class projects as individual and class characteristics that defines a person’s agenda and class- based orientation. Hence, people with similar class projects, not only shared the same financial and cultural resources, but also the same expectations toward school. (Armstrong & Hamilton, 2013). As a result, Armstrong and Hamilton claims that students with similar class projects end up becoming a collective constituency and a representative group for the university, whom in turn must take their interests to form a college pathway for them. Therefore, a college pathway for Armstrong and Hamilton refers to how universities are able to take successfully the interests, class characteristics and expectations of students to mold within the organizational and architecture context of the school. In a way, each college pathway is built not only to represent, but also to provision and guide the different types of students in a college.
Essentially, students may have the tendency to have similar or more significant interests in front of peers in order to feel accepted when participating in class. In Sheen S. Levine and David Stark’s article, “Diversity Makes You Brighter” the authors emphasize how participants in a study who were in diverse company had 58 percent more accurate answers in a stock project (2). If colleges were to begin diversifying their campuses, students would be surrounded by individuals who do not share similar characteristics. Expanding the amount of diverse students on college campuses make a student feel more independent which can lead to an increase in honest results in the knowledge of college students. Evidently, broadening the diversification of colleges contributes to educational
Louis Menand, a professor of English and American literature at Harvard University presented three different theories for higher education in an article for The New Yorker named, Live and Learn: Why We Have College. Menand (2011) claims that the reasons for college are meritocratic, democratic, and vocational. These theories are great models for the purpose of higher education in our culture, at different points in our history. As a nation, there are definite intentions behind the way that instruction is conducted in our colleges and universities. The techniques adopted by institutions of higher education are no mistake and they are designed to serve a purpose. These methods evolve with time and shape the way that generations think and reason. In our generation, the purpose of higher education in our culture is to sustain the nation atop of the worldwide economy.