OCR Text |
Show THE DAILY CHRONICLE UTAH THE CHRONICLE'S VIEW e3M X To WALK A. Eegents Make $love In Eight Direction the annual costs of and the Utah Between continued failure to sufficiently fund higher education, it is a sad fact of every college student's life that tuition will get more expensive. For the first time in quite a while, however, the higher education higher tuition must come more tuition increases at 8 percent, the former group is at least taking steps to make amends with a move that will boost the state's financial aid coffers. The Regents had planned to raise tuition statewide by 3 percent To AULGS SCHOOL- - BPTH WrVfS ' Mt THE tr-r.- 1 IV1 aforementioned shortcomings. In addition to that increase, U President Bernie Machen would impose an additional 6.3 percent increase on U students, thereby making next year's! tuition bill 9.3 percent higher thari this year's. However, the Regents instead boosted their increase to 3.5 percent for all students. Machen responded, by dropping his increase to 5.8 percent keeping are recognizing the fact that with inherent equally financial aid. While some students are lucky enough to come from prosperous, or at least adequate, financial backgrounds to the extent that they do not need any monetary assistance in paying for their college education, such is not the case for all Fortunately, those in this latter group are finally seeing a little extra help come their way. After the state Board of Regents snuffed a plan by the Utah Council of Student Body Presidents to cap fVC in order to compensate for the higher-up- s InDARK th H At Lft A VEff STEEP HIU... A BUCKET 1 w X 1 WJM& 'O'st' BUT AT CEA6T IT CMLH CJOfT OS 45- - a &om&&. the overall U increase at 9.3. But that is not the most salient point. What is, however, is that the extra 0.5 percent increase coming from the Regents will go directly to fund financial aid for struggling students. $ov while students will still pay more next year, those who can't pay !by themselves will at least find their burden eased a bit. The Regents are to be commended for realizing that students cannot foot the bill for all the education-funding shortcomings by themselves, that with tuition LETTER esidency Shenanigans Shameful Editor This year, the Utah State Legislature enacted House Bill 331, which will essentially double the time it takes for out of state students to gain residency. In the law school, for instance, this means that those who came here anticipating resident tuition fees next year may end up paying an additional $10,000 to remain. I'm unaware of the difference in resident and tuition for undergrads, but it must also be significant, and the misleading principle behind the whole deal is entirely problematic. HB331 was apparently enacted to help deal with financial shortfalls in next year's budget. Unfortunately, if signed by Gov. Lcavitt, the state will have lured thousands of students to Utah on a one-yea for wait of promise residency, only to leave them holding the hat for thousands of dollars more next in-sta- te increases must come aid increases. The Regents, admirably, have taken a step to equalize that process for the first time non-reside- Unsigned editorials reflect the majority opinion of The Daily Utah Chronicle Editorial Board. Editorial columns and letters to the editor are strictly the opinions of the author. The forum created on the Opinion Page is one based on vigorous debate, while at the same time demanding tolerance and respect. Material defamatory to an individual or group because of race, ethnic background, gender, appearance or sexual entation will be edited or will not be published. EDITOR TO THE out-of-sta- te ar ori- nt year because Utah will now require them to wait two. How can the U, already a very culturally homogenous environment, enhance its diversity base if it tells out of state students it will take them more than two years to gain residency? Many students, without this incentive, will likely stay away. One potential compromise? If the governor vetoes the bill, the Legislature could call a special session to amend the bill. Maybe if the state could at least "grandfather" in existing out-ostate students as residents, then some fairness could be achieved. This compromise could retain current students and at least make good on the deal they thought they would receive when they came. Please write your letters to governorutah.gov JONATHAN G. JEMMING Law Student, College of Law f- First-Yea- r Some Lessons Metier ILeurfie datMome MICHAEL CHIDESTER Chronicle Opinion Columnist the books some people want to the Consider hands of students at an school near you: "Heather Has Two Mommies" and "Gloria Goes to Gay Pride." The school chancellor of School District 24 in Queens, New York City, already tried to introduce these books part of the "Children of the Rainbow" curriculum almost 10 years ago. Books like those about Heather and Gloria are examples of study plans being pushed into schools by Big Mother, who is trying to teach schoolchildren what is right and wrong. She is the National Education Association. And while she fights for students and teachers in many meaningful ways, she should remember that the teaching of some things, including issues surrounding homosexuality, is better accomplished by real parents at home. In fairness, the NEA works tirelessly to improve education in America's public schools. Only days ago, the U.S. Senate passed d a bill that will compensate teachers for money they spend on students. The NEA also awards $2,000 Innovation Grants to teachers who propose inventive teaching projects, three of which went to Utah educators last year. The list of cash-strappe- out-of-poc- admirable NEA projects could continue. Last summer, however, the NEA proposed a resolution encouraging the promotion of homosexuality in classrooms. Supporters of the resolution say it will "protect homosexuals in schools by implementing curriculum, instructional materials, programs and by hiring homosexual educators." These programs, which could be taught to students as young as preschoolers, would not require parental consent. To some people, this sort of instruction might seem fine. But in recent years, teaching anything with a moral or ethical element has raised red flags. Take, for example, "character training" programs now in some schools. The Wall Street Journal highlighted "Character First!" one such program in so-call- ed 1999- - While Character First! received rave reviews from most educators, opponents expressed uneasiness with the program's loose ties with Christian groups. Cathy Kass, an education professor from Oklahoma City, expressed concern with a organization teach"A lot of people look ing character in schools. at character training as a way for certain viewpoints to get into school," Kass said. "I'm Jewish...and I know what it's like to have religion that's not mine pushed on me." Kass conveys a valid point. People who curriculum taught don't want in schools can echo Kass's same feelings. The NEA's proposed curriculum certainly seems like "a way for certain viewpoints to get into school." Likewise, supporters of traditional quasi-religio- us families would certainly feel such education would be having a political agenda that's not theirs "pushed on" them. And make no mistake about it the NEA has a defined political agenda. The organization blithely mixes educational lobbying with other lobbying. In June 2000, The Associated Press reported that the NEA regularly uses the dues of its 2.5 million members on political spending. According to the report, internal documents show the NEA budgeted almost $5 million for the 2000 election. So who is receiving the NEA's cash? An analysis by Focus on the Family showed that while the NEA's membership is only 49 percent Democratic, about 97 percent of the group's soft money contributions in the 1998 election landed in the hands of Democrats. In the same year, Democrats received 93 percent of $2.2 million in NEA congressional contributions. The most bizarre aspect of the NEA's political activities is its support of issues that have absolutely nothing to do with education. According to the same Focus on the Family report, the NEA openly supports abortion, as well as "a nuclear freeze, reparation of Native American remains, a world court and blocking telemarketing." g With such a bias, perhaps people can excuse conservatives for doubting NEA motives in connection with teaching homoleft-leani- left-win- sexuality. The NEA's campaign is also misguided because it docs not teach tolerance and understanding of differences it CHRONICLE OPINION EDITOR LAURA B. WEISS LWEISSCHRONICLE.UTAH.EDU teaches students to acceptance of a lifestyle many think is unacceptable, and to embrace what many feci is not morally right. Surely somebody will misconstrue such a statement as "hate" or "intolerance." But the real misunderstanding is that tolerance, understanding or even friendship and love do not necessarily mean acceptance. And not accepting another person's actions docs not necessarily mean intolerance. For an example, turn the tables of the debate. The NEA openly opposes Christian and groups like the Family Research Council and Focus on the Family, which it calls the Religious Right. For NEA advocates to be tolerant of such "fundamentalists," as it is apt to call them, would they have to agree with Focus on the Family? Would they have to accept the Family Research Council's take on school vouchers or abortion? Of course not doing so would go against the NEA's core values. Supporters of traditional families should have the same privilege to respectfully disagree. Finally, the NEA should leave such teaching to parents, who best know the students and who can guide students as they feel is right. The NEA even agrees on this point. The NEA's Web site tells parents, "You are your child's first and most important teacher." That is good advice for teachers, administrators and parents, and especially good advice for surrogate parents like Big Mother. Michael welcomes at: feedback mchidcsterchronicle.utah.edu or send letters to the editor to: lettcrschroniclc.utah.edu. . pro-fami- 581-704- 1 ly |