Assignment:
The University of Pittsburgh does not accept grades below C- in major field courses or in Math 0029, Math 0030, English 0150 or English 0200. The university's position is that, in order to maintain its standards and reputation, it will require at least average work in such courses. Another school of thought is that since students pay the tuition, they have a right to a D and should not be required to retake such courses unless they choose. At the heart of this controversy is whether or not institutions should be able to set standards or individuals should be able to determine their own standards. What do you think?
The Right to a D
I do not believe the University of Pittsburgh is correct in mandating that students achieve a C- or better to pass major field courses, Math 0029, 0030, or English 0150 and 0200. I believe that students not only have a right to fail, they have a right to make D's.
I am not saying that students should be satisfied with D's in these or other courses. Obviously, they should strive for better. But a D represents below average work--not failing work. One can pass psychology with a D (and a great many people do on this campus); one can pass chemistry and sociology and fine arts and history with D's, so why not everything else? The University has established a double standard.
Could it be that money is behind this policy? Could it be that by forcing all students to pass these courses with a C- or better, the University is forcing people to retake classes they ordinarily wouldn't? With tuition rates over $90 per credit hour, the University stands to make hefty profits with a policy like this.
Of course my opponents argue that basic math and English are essential skills to survive in today's world. They further argue that someone receiving a major in anything should at least do "average" academic work in that area. "The University," say my opponents, " has an obligation to preserve its reputation by turning out quality graduates."
I don't agree. If the University were really concerned about its reputation, it would be more careful about who it admits. Everyone knows that in these hard economic times, most colleges and universities accept anything resembling a warm body--as long as that person is willing to pay. SAT scores don't matter that much, nor does high school rank. Money matters! Can you pay the tuition? If so, you're in. If you have to take Math 0029 twice and English 0150 twice, who cares? It's more money for the University.
I have another reason for disagreeing with the policy, however. It's not the University's job to determine who is qualified in a major and who isn't. That's the job of the market place. Suppose an elementary education major makes D's in her education classes. Is it the University's job to say she isn't qualified to teach? No. Let her go out into the job market with that transcript. Let her see if school districts want to hire her. Of course they probably won't, and that's the student's fault for making so many D's. It doesn't reflect on the University; it reflects on the person.
In short, this C- policy is a double standard established by the University to milk more money from students (who are academically disadvantaged, for the most part). It is also a misguided attempt to protect an institutional reputation that doesn't need protecting.
I don't necessarily agree with this paper, but the writer does make some thoughtful points.
First, the writer states his position clearly.
Second, he states his opponents' concerns and addresses those concerns.
Third, he supports his position with honest-to-goodness reasons, not just cliches.
His voice, however, is not very well controlled at times and runs the risk of alienating his audience. Note his use of rhetorical questions: "Could it be that money is behind this policy?" Yes, it could be, and yes, the university does make money when a student retakes a course. But the writer is implying bad motives without providing evidence. Furthermore, the writer is getting too snotty when he says, "Everyone knows that in these hard economic times, most colleges and universities accept anything resembling a warm body--as long as that person is willing to pay." As we've said in class, beware of the words "everyone" and "no one." They don't allow for the exceptions. "Everyone" doesn't know about university admission policies. It is in fact not true that "colleges and universities accept anything resembling a warm body." The writer's irritation has led him to be sarcastic, and that sarcasm has resulted in an untruth. His point that admission standards may not be high enough is worth making, but in making it this way, the opponents will tend to dismiss him as not being serious.
Remember, in an argument paper, you are addressing those who don't agree or those who have no opinion. You are not talking to your cronies, so resist the temptation to poke fun at your opponents.
Return to gallery of sample student papers