Argument: College courses should not have a required attendance policy.
Reason: Because students ought to have control over their education
Assumption: Students are old enough to choose to whether they will attend class, as well as accept the responsibility of their choice.
Claims: Students pay for their education. The choice to attend should be theirs.
If students can master the material and do well on tests without attendance, they should not be required to attend.
Not having an attendance policy is better for those who need the help of the professor and for those who do not.
Argument: Personal finance should be a required highschool and college course.
Reason: because the financial literacy of America is too low.
Assumption: Teaching personal finance in the schools would improve the financial literacy of America.
Claims: We are required to study courses like math, science, english, etc.., which often focus on knowledge we forget soon after taking the final exam. However, schools do little to teach personal finance, which is practical knowledge we will need everyday regardless of chosen profession.
Most American adults havea limited knowledge in personal finance (things such as planning, investing, budgeting, etc…) which forces them to live below where they could be.
A good understanding of even just the basics would lead to much wiser financial decisions, and consequently financial success in life.
Argument: The United States should do away with the current tax system and replace it solely with a consumption tax.
Reason: because the current tax system is a drag on the economy.
Assumption: A different tax system would allow the U.S. economy to grow.
Claims: The current tax system taxes effort, and rewards idleness.
The current system forces businesses to consider how to get around taxes as much, or more than, how to grow their business. This results in a weaker economy, often with businesses fleeing to more “tax friendly” nations.
I really like your first idea for an OPED. I totally agree that it is ridiculous that teachers require attendance to every class. We are college students and are old/smart enough to make our own decisions on whether or not we need to attend class. Good job!
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with your first idea. This isn't junior high or high school anymore where it is a law that we have to go to school. We chose to come here to go to school and we are paying to get an education. If we can earn a degree and learn everything that we need to learn from a course it shouldn't matter if we attend class or not. Students know the best way that they learn. I have had many classes where attendance was graded so I had to go to class and listen to a really boring lecture. I knew that if I would have taken the hour to study by myself, the way I learn best, I would have learned a lot more in less time.
ReplyDeleteYour first idea sounds dangerously similar to the OpEd we read in class. If you do this topic, you'll need to use a different approach and build on addressing counter arguments.
ReplyDeleteYour second idea is too general. How do you know that some schools don't already teach personal finance in high school? I would narrow it down to a specific location that you can speak about with authority.
Your third idea is a very ambitious topic that would require extensive research in order to develop an adequate argument. Maybe something for the Issue Paper, but too complex for an OpEd.