The problems between Title IX and the Universities

Although Title IX has been around for almost half a century, has it been perfected and used to its full potential? My answer to that question is no. The problem with rape or sexual assaults on college campuses stems from the fear of the student and the university that the act occurs at. When an incident like that occurs the victim feels lost with no one to turn to especially with all the scandals in recent past where universities almost turn a blind eye to what happened to one of their students. According to the essay, “once she[victim] makes a complaint, the risk is now escalated, and played out in a new dimension: it is often retaliation that is the university’s real trouble” (Doyle 30). By saying this, Doyle is showing how once word of an incident like this arises, the university has no choice but try to defend itself and protect itself from the retaliation of the students or parents of the alleged victim. The biggest problem with these cases is when the university tries to cover its back and brush the incident under the rug and try to compensate without making the incident a public news story. Doyle continues to go on to say, “Retaliation, for the university is a beast: it is often far easier for a victim to demonstrate a  case of retaliation than the original complaint”(Doyle 30). Do you believe more often than not universities treat these cases very unjustly? Do you think our university would act like others in the past where they didn’t help the victim just protected themselves? Lastly, do you think students have constant fear that at anytime this could happen here at our campus?

This all ties back to the beginning of her essay where she discusses how police and the chancellor took the wrong actions against a peaceful student protest. When the students were gathered the chancellor of the school called for the cops in preparation for what she thought was bound to happen. In fact, the chancellor was really wrong in this case and brought way to much firepower to the situation at hand. In actuality, it was the chancellor who blew this protest way out of proportion. According to her statement she was not worried about her students being violent during the protest but outsiders from Oakland who at the time were generally tied with drugs, alcohol, and sexual activity. That right there is when she crossed the line. She made false accusations and bad judgement of her students characters and resulted in a student getting pepper sprayed for no good reason. Would you feel comfortable at a university where the president/ chancellor looked at their students in such a way? Would you think our president would respond in such a way to a nonviolent protest? Was this chancellor just or her actions on that day?

The Ongoing Battle Between Students and their Educators

  1. http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2015/05/the-betrayal-of-student-activism/392759/

No matter what University you attend, most students experience distaste towards their institution due to the high tuition and not seeing the results for paying such money. Students who graduate after four years are more than likely to face high amounts of student debt which looms over their heads while they are trying to start their new life. At the University of California Santa Cruz, students who saw their tuition increase took matters into their own hands. Six of the Universities’ students decided to blockade a bridge where most of the cities commuters must use daily. This sparked a response the students weren’t exactly looking for. These students who provided a non-violent protest are now facing up to 30 days in jail time and have been suspended from school for a year and a half. Local people wanted the students expelled for the commotion they caused that day. Should the University have expelled these students for their actions? Do you think the University acted appropriately in reprimanding these students? What do you think would happen if that were to occur on our campus today?

2) http://cached.newslookup.com/cached.php?ref_id=646&siteid=2504&id=11442281&t=1423123260

According to Harker, the Universities in America are pricing themselves out of the reach of the middle class. With the continuous rise in tuition annually, families that can not afford to pay for the students education have to make a huge decision on whether to invest what money the family does have into their child or to protect the future of their family. Harker believes that if everyone is going to pay this type of money, they should get everything out of it and the university should cater to the student. He goes on to say, “Professors decide what to teach and when, depending on their interests and availability. Students choose from a buffet of courses and schedules designed to suit instructors. The system is teacher-centric”(Harker). He then says that the university should change to a more learner-centric environment, teaching the students to still be able to do what a computer system cannot. Many times at this University I have not felt like a  “customer” but more like just another student by the way they draw out our paths before us. As a student and customer, we should be able to take what classes we want and when we want to take them for all the money we are paying. Each semester our advisors map out what classes we “need” to take in their eyes. Why aren’t we seeing our own paths through our own eyes? Why is it that so many times we feel like just a number and not a prospect getting ready for the real world? Do you think we would be better of deciding our paths or following the paths set out before us?