OCR Text |
Show www.dailyutahchronicle.corn 5 OPINION Wednesday, August 31,2011 Academics unfit amid Pac-12 peers co py PAPEks sta,Writer or the first time this semester, the U is offering an ethnic studies major. This is a victory for current and incoming students—they now have a broader choice of what to study. However, it does expose an ominous contrast between the U's academics and its new Pac-i2 rivals. Consequently, the U must continue to take similar initiatives to work toward providing a diverse range of academic options to students on par with the nation's top universities. One example of where the U is lacking within the Pac-i2 is in comparison to UCLA. UCLA offers 127 undergraduate majors. Comparatively, the U offers 72 undergraduate majors throughout all departments. It is clear the U is seriously deficient compared to an institution now considered its peer. I am not suggesting that U students are somehow less capable in any sense than UCLA students, but rather that the U endows its students with fewer resources and opportunities than schools they are now compared to in the Pac-i2. A lack of academic emphasis, at the expense of celebrating athletics' new place in the Pac-i2, is where the U has seriously gone off track. When I look around on campus or read news about the U, a barrage of Pac-i2 logos that are generally accompanied by some sort of football-related matter always overwhelms me. Although this might seem exciting to many students, I see it as a shortcoming. Many classes after 3 p.m. are being canceled for our first football game, and although access is a valid concern, the underlying issue remains. The focus into the Pac-i2 has been on competition athletically, rather than academically. "I see Pac-i2 stuff everywhere, it's kind of annoying," said Jade Lamb, a freshman in exercise and sport science. "I think there is more emphasis on athletics than on schoolwork." I understand that sports are exciting for students, including myself. Entering the Pac-i2 amplifies our passion. On a positive note, the new athletic conference will provide additional revenue and exposure for the U and its students. Over time, this increased exposure will be a great benefit, but it needs to be channeled toward continually increasing and improving our academics. Athletics will not replace a quality education or provide tangible benefits for students who are not athletes. Yet as we have entered the new academic year, it appears to me that students have a sense of overflowing pride because of the athletic conference the U has joined. In some regards, I find this almost embarrassing. To those students who feel more distinguished I ask, "What has the U really gained by joining the Pac-i2?" I implore all students not to commend the U on the athletic conference it has joined or number of sporting events it wins. Instead, take note that it has shown some level of commitment to furthering academics, but that it has a lot of ground to make up. Demand that the U put its primary focus on making up the disparity in academic offerings to its newfound fellow schools. If the U and its students truly want the best for the institution as a whole, it will come by way of fostering a well-rounded academic environment. Our focus as a university must be on what we offer students in the classroom, rather than in the stadium. F letters@chronicle.utah.edu RST compRE NIDE? LUIGI GHERSI/The Daily Utah Chronicle Equality for immigrant students Undocumented students need opportunity to be successful s taxing as it normally is for U.S. citizens to pursue a college degree, it's demonstrably harder for undocumented immigrants. The 65,000 people who graduate high school and hope to attend college each year face an uncertain future because of the volatility of state and federal immigration policy, according to U.S. News A and World Report. The joint efforts of Congress and the states have produced few results. The extent of the dithering has been so bad that nearly three decades after undocumented immigrants were given the right to a free K-12 education, we have failed to map out a coherent plan to help them obtain college degrees. The DREAM Act, Congress' most promising initiative to date, which would have provided undocumented immigrants who meet certain conditions a path to citizenship alongside college and financial aid, fell short last year, and has not been seriously considered since. Undocumented students face myriad obstacles. Federal law prohibits them from applying for Stafford Loans and Pell Grants. Utah law disqualifies them from consideration for state-funded scholarships and financial aid, including the New Century and Regents scholarship programs. Thirty-eight states admit them as nonresidents eligible only for out-of-state tuition, leaving a mere io that enroll them at discounted in-state rates. Utah is one of the latter, but applies qualifications to it, said Nancy Trevino, senior associate director of admissions. Undocumented students at the U must attend a Utah high school for at least three years and graduate from that Utah high StaffWriter school in order to qualify for a waiver to close the gap between in-state and out-ofstate tuition, she said. Although Utah's limits constitute a poor policy, it is far from the worst. The University of Arkansas, among others, requires a Social Security number to apply and enroll, and Georgia bans undocumented students from the state's top five public schools. South Carolina bans undocumented students from public universities altogether. The U's qualifications are preferable to these extreme measures, but any barriers to education remain poorly thought-out. Such policies are little more than morally and economically bankrupt onslaughts on a vulnerable group of people who are American in every way except a passport. They are solutions in search of a problem that make college virtually unattainable for undocumented students who possess all the talent documented students do, but cannot navigate the patchwork policies of the broken system they alone are forced to face. The status quo these policies produce is untenable and in drastic need of change. Undocumented students should be given college opportunities and full-fledged amnesty. The clearest moral imperative we face is that the vast majority of undocumented youth were brought here through no fault of their own, and should not be punished for the wrongdoing of others. Under normal circumstances, these students would be precisely the people we'd encourage to go to college. The problem is, we don't treat their circumstances normally, and perceive them as more of a burden than a benefit. The economic element is as cogent as the moral imperatives. Most undocumented immigrants remain in the United States regardless of whether they have access to higher education, according to the American Association for State Colleges and Universities. It is in our society's long-term interest to promote high levels of education for undocumented students. Doing so elicits more profound economic contributions, and reduces the likelihood that they will become reliant on public assistance. Further, higher education positively affects individual earnings. In our progressive tax code, higher earners contribute higher proportions of their earnings in taxes, meaning that if more immigrants occupy higher tax brackets, more taxes will be culled. Strong revenue streams shore up ailing government coffers, beget a healthy and growing economy and put America on more sound fiscal footing. Yet much of this information is neglected by policymakers with chilling indifference. In the end, policies limiting the access of undocumented students to universities create a culture of alienation for minorities of all stripes and degrade society. So what if they lack a green card? Undocumented students have the capacity to make us great. letters@chronicle.utah.edu .dailyutahchronicle. co 809 E. 400 S, SLC UT 84102 (801)596-1107 |