Friday, April 28, 2017

Assignment: Should the government subsidize college? (Due Tues, May 2)



The Economics of Funding College Education:

Image result for iowa universitiesImage result for iowa universitiesImage result for iowa hawkeyes

Currently, the state government and taxpayers of Iowa pay for about 2/3 of any resident's tuition if he or she attends one of the state's three public universities (listed above).

-In one paragraph, analyze one argument in favor of the government subsidizing college tuition.  Be sure to evaluate one outside 'expert' source in support, using in-text citation.

-In one paragraph, analyze one argument against the government subsidizing college tuition.  Be sure to evaluate one outside 'expert' source in support, using in-text citation.

-In a final paragraph, defend your position on the government funding college education.

This assignment is due by 11:10 am on Tuesday, May 2.

Wednesday, April 26, 2017

Assignment: Should the government increase its pollution tax on gasoline? (due Fri., April 28)



The Economics of Pollution Taxes:

The current federal sales tax specifically on gas is $0.18/gallon.  Additionally, purchasers of gas in Iowa pay a sales tax of $0.32/gallon (Source: taxfoundation.org).  Should the various levels of government increase their pollution taxes on gasoline?  Analyze this issue using the following format:

1) In paragraph one, evaluate at least one argument in favor of the government increasing its pollution tax on gasoline. You must include at least one outside source, using in-text citation (author, website, date).

2)  In paragraph two, evaluate at least one argument against the government increasing its pollution tax on gasoline.  You must include at least one outside source, using in-text citation (author, website, date).

3) In paragraph three, justify your position on the government increasing its pollution tax on gasoline.  Be sure to reflect on one of the four criteria for tax fairness (ability to pay; efficiency; simplicity; benefits received) in your explanation.

This assignment is due by 11:10 am on Friday, April 28.

Tuesday, April 25, 2017

Glass ceiling

Men in the work force are to blame for the glass ceiling. Men dominate a large portion of the high paying jobs and management positions. Since men have a large role in executive jobs it intimidates women who want to climb the ladder of opportunity (Moazzam, Tribune, 2013). This causes more men to have higher paying jobs because women are afraid to become CEOs, or managers of companies. Because the men stop women from having the courage to break through the glass ceiling they are causing a large population of women to not work.

Some say that women are to blame for the glass ceiling because they are putting up too many barriers for themselves. Women believe that they have no control over the glass ceiling which is causing the them to victimize themselves (Broader, Entrepreneur, 2013). Women who create groups to help break the glass ceiling put a band-aid over the issue and does not help it. They create a metaphoric barrier about the glass ceiling that creates confidence issues in the workforce for women. When they pay attention to everything they can’t do it makes them believe actually believe they can’t do it.

I believe that women are to blame for the glass ceiling because they create one. Women convince themselves that their is a huge barrier between women and men in the work-force that causes women to lose confidence. This barrier is not there and only exists because women create it. If they did not create it then they would not have the issue. One way to fix the pay gap between women and men is to bring awareness to the fact that there is not a glass ceiling ( Smart Living, Popsugar, 2012).

Friday, April 21, 2017

Cheating in School - Hayes

Cheaters should be punished harsher in school. Cheat on a test cheat on everything once a cheater always a cheater. If you're are in school and caught cheating you should be dropped from the class and in some cases placed in a lower level of the class you are taking for example, if you cheat in English 10 you could be dropped to English 9. This was done in a Californian high school, a student caught cheating in English was dropped to a lower level English with the idea that if he has to cheat to pass the higher class he must not be caught up enough to that level of English. (Jessica Carlson, 2013)

On the other hand why should children be punished I'm such a harsh way that could affect their future so much? In a religious point of view it is said all humans are born sinners. Cheating on a test, hiding and lying to a teacher is simply a child developing and later on will learn morals which schools do not teach. Teaching morals rather than punishing would be better, any positive reinforcement is better than negative punishment. (Ephesians 2:3)

I believe in the idea of everyone is a born sinner, no one is perfect. Schools should not be the decider for punishing students. I believe if it is to happen it should be handled with the students parents. With positive reinforcement I believe students would seize from cheating.

Thursday, April 20, 2017

Bettendorf Economics Blog: ASSIGNMENT: Should punishments for cheating in school be harsher? (due Tues., April 18)

      Schools should have harsher punishments instituted for cheating. Having harsher punishments will deter future cheaters when they see their classmates made an example of. There are many student that do cheat on study's results were “in between 80 and 95 percent percent of high school students admitted to cheating at least once in the past year”( Tim Walker, neatoday 2012). Cheating will decrease and the students real test ability will be shown. This will also help the student for colleges and life where cheating is not accepted and punish harsher.



     Cheating should not have harsher punishments in place for students. Other solutions might serve better than just harsher punishment. One school found that “Our position favors less harsh penalties, more frequently applied,"( Jay Matthews, Washington Post 2001). The school found that student that got less punishment frequently would seize to cheat. Another problem with harsher punishment is the students may find a way to cheat their way out of it. One example of this would be to simply skip a detention.



      I believe that schools should have harsher punishments. As shown paragraph 1, there are a lot of student that cheat. This shows us that the system we have for cheating is massively failing. By having harsher punishments student would be to scared to risk chanting. Some examples of punishments could be cleaning the lunchroom, not being allowed school lunch for a week, and a class roast of the offender. This will decrease cheating and prepare students for the real world where cheating in dealt with very harshly.

 


Are men really the reason why the 'Glass Ceiling' is even a topic in today's society? Things will only start to change once we stop blaming women, and start challenging the flawed system they must navigate ( huffingtonpost.com, Gloudeman, 2015). Men could be the reason why the glass ceiling is a thing and maybe why it isn't still an "issue" today. Man has set the bar low for women and therefore they have not been able to work their way up through the 'Glass Ceiling."

On the other hand, women could be at fault as well. I feel women spend more time claiming that man has discriminized them or "put them down" than actually going out and getting jobs that would require them to get outside their comfort zone and eventually break the glass ceiling. Women are still far more timid in the workforce then men. Men are more likely to go ask for a raise or push themselves out of their comfort zone in order to achieve greatness. (Dailymail.com, Goodson, 2008).
If women would just shut up about how men have put them down and actually went out and did something about it then things would probably change, if they need to at all.

In my opinion it is the women's fault they the can not break the glass ceiling. I mean Hillary Clinton was most qualified to be the Prseident of the United States and she still lost to Trump. That isn't mans fault that is her fault. We talk about the median in class and how you take the 50th man and woman and compare their salaries and the man has more money than the women. Maybe that man took more risk than the woman he was compared to and has achieved more. Men are more likely to promote themselves and even lie to do so (Dailymail.com, Goodson, 2008). Basically a man is willing to do the extreme to achieve success when women will just settle, which is fine.
It is undeniable that inequality still exists, and my recent research into leadership across multiple sectors suggests that this trend that leaves universities the poorer. Indeed my study concludes that women are, in fact, better suited to positions of management in all but one of the five categories. These categories covers traits of effective leaders, including the ability to withstand job-related pressure; the ability to take the initiative and communicate with clarity; an ability to innovate, to retain curiosity and ambition; the ability to support colleagues and work inclusively; and finally an ability to set goals. With my colleague Lars Glaso, I analyzed data from a survey of nearly 3,000?managers- more than 900 women, more than 900 in senior management and nearly 900 from public sector. I found out that women achieved higher scores in four of the five traits. This indicates that women are far more naturally suited to positions of leadership than their male counterparts. The one area in which women performed less well was the ability to withstand job-related stress. It is undeniable that the top jobs in higher education carry a heavy burden of responsibility. But consider how women outperform men in the four other crucial areas (Oyvind Martinsen, Timeshighereducation.com, 2017).

What’s to blame? Industry matters ― the largest gaps appear in technology-based spaces such as videogames, IT and engineering, as well as finance and insurance. In the healthcare industry, it’s 23%. In addition, survey evidence shows that women ask for less money and employers comply: on average, employers offered women about 3% less than what they offered men for the same role. There’s also the “glass ceiling”, meaning it’s harder for women to break into more senior roles, and they therefore face a shorter wage ceiling.However, there’s another less-spoken way that working women can achieve pay equity: having access to quality, affordable birth control. Contraception doesn’t close the pay gap per se, but rather the opportunity gap. By giving women control over their personal lives, they have the time, energy and ability to focus on their careers without worrying about unexpected pregnancies. Delaying a first birth by a few years can reduce the pay gap that typically exists between working mothers and those who have decided to delay having a child during their careers (Sandra Pelletier, huffingtonpost.com, 2017).

I do not think men is to blame for the glass ceiling. Many women is capable to be equally like men and paid equally like men, but they choose not to take that role themselves. It's easy to blame women for not being assertive enough. There is good evidence that women tend to want to be able to do 95 per cent of a job description before they'll apply for it whereas men will apply for it being able to do 60 per cent of it. Men are more confident, men are more assertive and will go for higher increases and so on. A common reaction to that is to say women should become more like men ( Britt Mann, stuff.co.nz, 2017). This shows that women can be equal to men but they choose not to take the challenge.

Glass Ceiling Deere

          Who's fault is the glass ceiling? Woman can't be to blame as they are the ones who want to break through it, so it must be men trying to keep women down. "Here, we get the rare sense that systemic forces, not women, are at fault for an enduring lack of equality at the top. And in thinking about the broader social and cultural forces at play, the whole paradigm suddenly shifts (Gloudeman, 2015, HuffPo)." Because men run the system it is easy for them to keep women below them as they all have preconceived notions of what women are. Men think that woman get pregnant and take off time from work and expect there job so they can't run a large business. When in reality, woman would do a much better job running any business run buy a man. Not only that but men are the ones who get women pregnant in the first place so it's like double oppression.
           Most men are not sexist though, so that argument means nothing. Maybe woman can't break the glass ceiling because they only believe they have more important things in there lives. "Research shows a significant 92 per cent of British women harbor hang ups that are holding them back in their lives - and the workplace is where British women feel they would most benefit from an injection of confidence (Winter, 2013, DailyMail)." So it's not that men are trying to keep women down, it's that most women don't feel they move up with what is going on in their lives. Men only focus on getting a promotion or a raise because that is what is most important to them, where as women might be more interested in other facets of their life.
          However, we can't put men and women into such general baskets of how they act. Woman would not hold themselves back, that notion is absurd. Men have to be the ones holding woman back or at least were and has carried over to today. The only way to break through the glass ceiling is to raise the minimum wage. "Two-thirds of minimum wage workers are women. Two-thirds of workers in low-wage, tipped occupations are also women. Raising the minimum wage and the tipped minimum wage are important steps towards fair pay for women (Vagianos, 2015, HuffPo)." If we raise the minimum wage then is will raise the median wage and close the gap between men and women in the workplace. Of course raising the minimum wage causes loss of jobs, but who cares because "EQUALITY."

Glass Ceiling

According to the Huffington Post, women are trapped within certain areas because men keep them there. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nikki-gloudeman/no-the-glass-ceiling-is-non-womens-faults_b_6701482.html To elaborate it says that women cannot get higher up in cooperate because men already in cooperate keep them where they are. The reasoning behind that is men do not believe women are as skilled or qualified in cooperate jobs.

Here is the reason to why men are not apart of the glass ceiling, men take more dangerous and higher paying jobs more than women. According to a study UNC conducted, men are more likely to become electricians, mechanics, managers, construction laborers and finally the military and police. Women tend to fill jobs of teachers, secretaries/assistants and cosmetologist which points to why women are making less than men all together. http://demography.cpc.unc.edu/2015/03/16/male-and-female-dominated-occupations-2013/

I believe the glass ceiling is not caused by men but an ideal women created to feel they are under privileged and deserve more. It is a fact you would see men in more dangerous jobs and take higher skilled jobs. Also, women just do not take the initiative in taking toughen jobs. The glass ceiling can easily be broken right now just women would rather have it spoon fed to them than work for it.

Glass Ceiling

The pay gap is a problem but i do not believe men are specifically to blame for it. On a post from Forbes.com titled "Women: Are We Partly To Blame For The Gender Pay Gap?" there is a post that is quoted from reddit from a user who talks about when hiring men and women men typically ask for more than women on an annual earning. Women will normally settle with the initial offer of 45k a year whereas men normally ask for a bit more around the lines of 50k because 45k isn't enough (Forbes.com). In this it shows that men are not to blame for this pay gap as women can ask for more than they typically accept, all they have to do is ask for more.

On the other hand, it is understandable that as men rule most of the largest companies as a study showed that out of 500 companies only 21 of them were run by women. For there to be a way to help change and fix this pay gap men will have to recognize that there is a pay gap and from there pay women the same amount as they pay men. (Tech.co). For there to be a fix on the pay gap men will have to shift their focus or at least some of their focus on this problem so that this can be resolved for future workers in these companies.

As I said in my previous paragraph, men need to recongnize that the pay gap is an actual problem and a way to fix this is when in an interview with a woman offer the same amount that men in the same position are earning. There can still be negotiation done through the interview but start off with the same annual amount that men in that position earn. I do believe if women want to earn the same as male counterparts they should be more assertive on their pay (tech.co).


The Glass Ceiling 
The workforce seems to be dominated by men which account for over 53% of the population. Women only account for 47% of the working population. This number has increased over the years but is still lower than the male working population. Women are more concentrated in certain types of work places like staff and support jobs. These jobs do not offer the chance to get to the top like being a CEO. In a recent Washington Post survey most women named main obstacles to be 3% family responsibilities and the rest of the obstacles to be gender related like, slow advancement for women, and the attitudes towards a female boss ( Arlington, Feminists, 2014). More than 80% of the working women on wall street say they face harder judgement towards them from being a working women. 

On the other hand many believe that in this day and age the only thing that stops you from getting the job you want is you. People believe that getting the job you want takes hardwork and some women do not want to work this hard to become a CEO or manager of a company. The real glass ceiling barriers have to do with low self esteem, lack of integrity, ignorance, and fear. Becoming a manager of a company takes lots of responsibility and courage to stand up for yourself and remain strong throughout the job. Many women can do this as well as men which makes the argument that men are to blame for the glass ceiling irrelevant because it ultimately comes down to the person and their work ethic. 

I do not believe that men are to blame for the glass ceiling. I think the problem is not the gender gap but the different levels of confidence throughout the work place. Some women do not feel superior to men and it stops them from moving forward in their job. If women had more confidence and felt like they could do everything women could do the glass ceiling would not exist. I think fixing the pay gap between women and men could be solved by pay transparency (Elsesser, Forbes, 2015). If people knew what they were earning compared to others it would bring more awareness to the issue and help solve it. 

Wednesday, April 19, 2017

Glass Ceiling: Who's to Blame?

Before women entered the workforce, it was an expectation for them to raise and take care of their family 24/7. Since then, the ‘all women are housewives’ stereotype has been slowly chipped away at but still exists much more subtly and is an expectation for some families. Placing the expectation on women to be the sole caretaker limits their ability in their career. This can lead to them having to take leaves of absence, cut back on hours, and for some women, stop working all together. If men were more involved in home life, women would have more opportunities in the workplace for advancement. Also, men are four times as likely to ask for a pay raise compared to a woman, which contributes to the wage gap (npr.org, ludden, 2011). Overall men are too aggressive and should help more with home life.

There are many contributing factors creating this theoretical glass ceiling. Maternal responsibilities is a huge factor for many women in the workforce. Since the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, both men and women have access to 12 weeks of leave regarding the birth or adoption of a child (lifescript.com, Fritscher, 2007). With this opportunity many mothers and fathers choose to alternate their leave so they’ll still have one income. But often times the responsibility is left solely to the mother. Regardless of how the parents choose to handle this responsibility, in no way is it “the man’s fault”, it is the couple’s choice.

The fact that US females have the median earnings that are only 79% that of males is misleading. Most of that gap is attributed to women’s career choice, resulting in lower paying jobs. For the most part in the United States, men and women working the job are receiving equal pay or very similar pay and fixing that is what has helped to begin to close the earnings gap. If women want to be truly equal in this aspect, more must seek higher education and be more aggressive to earn those higher positions. No one is to blame for the glass ceiling. If anything, we can blame those practicing good economics in the situation where a man is hired over a women due to a woman’s potential leave in the future. With so few top level positions, it will take more time for women to fully integrate into CEO and other higher up positions. A solution that many companies have adopted is having daycare facilities at the workplace. Through providing this on-site daycare, large companies have saved between $150,000 and $200,000 in wages and in turn the parents get to spend lunch breaks with their children while still being able to focus on work afterwards (smallbuisness.chron.com, Magloff, 2017).
     Men are to blame because men feel like they have more power over everyone else and since they founded the country and not woman men feel like they should have more and the women should stick to the jobs that pay less. Woman always get penitalized because there the ones that have kids and have to say home. Usually woman stick to jobs that do pay less such as teachers or secretaries, but some people are saying that employers are gearing them towards those jobs. “This is not to say that employers do not discriminate by sex. Some employers still steer women into lower-paid positions with lesser prospects,” (Motherhood Still a Cause of Pay Inequality-Eduardo Porter 2012). I agree because it is likely that employers are pointing them towards these jobs, so that they can put men in those positions instead. 
     Men are not to blame because they are not to blame because everyone is paid for the amount of work they are putting in. They are also not to blame because there is a larger number of men competing for these jobs. An article called, ‘Does the glass ceiling still exist?’ (debate.org 2016), “Equality is not measured by how many leaders from a certain group get a job; but, by whether or not they were discriminated in competing for those jobs. It is not surprising that there are less female prime ministers, currently, since men compete for these positions in higher numbers than women.” I agree because if the men are competing for the job more then it is more likely that they will get the job. 
     I believe that men are not to blame because they push themselves to get higher paying jobs. Men want to be the dough maker so they push them selves in making money. Men compete for stuff and push themselves to be right so I believe that's a reason for men getting the higher jobs woman have baby's and need to stay home with the baby so I believe that the inployer also looked at that as a factor and doesn't want to lose money so he also goes with the safer choice and go with the male. 

'Glass Ceiling'

Men are to blame for the "glass ceiling'  for a few reasons, but one is being that they do not take after home/ family responsibilities. Since it is typical for women to stay home with sick kids, fix household problems, etc. men are more likely to get the job (Forbes.com 10/31/2011). To many people that seems sexist. Men are to blame for this because if they would do the same for their families that woman are expected to, women and men would have an even playing field.

Others disagree and would say men are not to blame for the 'glass ceiling'. Organizations that demand equality in fact make it worse for women, When women are demanding something that does not fix the problem. Also, a lot of women are mean and think they are better than the other women in their work environment. Since women are mean to one another, that makes people disrespect women (entrepreneur.com Broder 10/16/13).

I do not think men are to blame for the 'glass ceiling'. Women being treated differently than men is a society thing; not a men are to blame for this problem (entrepreneur.com Broder 10 /16/13). I agree with this because women are just as able as men to have high paying jobs and become successful. Everyone had the opportunity and keys to success and if you choose to use them or not to use them that is on you, and not someone else.  
     The glass ceiling is a big problem in our society today, but who is to blame for it? According to Daily Mail it's because men are too aggressive "Shannon Goodson claims that women are still far more timid than men in the office," (dailymail.com, 2008). This makes the case for men being the reason for the glass ceiling. Due to a man's aggressiveness to brag about achievements, ask for a raise, or ask for a promotion they are likely making their female counterparts look less prepared for the job. Women also want to be more lady like which men take advantage of so that they may receive the promotion or raise. Men are to blame for the glass ceiling due to their aggression.

     Men are often blamed for the glass ceiling, but is it really their fault? It isn't their fault because most of the time women are just trying to fill a 'mandatory quota' that they feel they need to fulfill in the name of women's rights. According to entrepreneur.com not only do women give the glass ceiling too much power they also complain about their flexibility and their desires "36 percent of men said they want to be CEO, whereas only 18 percent of woman said the same" (Lindsay Broder, Entrepreneur.com, 2013). This explains that women aren't the majority of CEOs simply because they don't want to be. They also want to have a family, but most successful CEOs are without families because of their extreme dedication to their company. Although men play a part in the creation of the glass ceiling it is the women who keep it alive today.

     Are men really to blame for the glass ceiling? I believe that it is men who created it, but that it's women who allow it to prosper. They give it power and they feel that they must break the ceiling in the name of women's rights, but then they aren't choosing what they want to do they're doing what society tells them they need to do. According to the atlantic.com a lot of women are running from higher paying jobs due to hostile work environments so they had a solution that might help decrease the gap, "part of that solution has to include changing workplace cultures that are inhibiting women from taking jobs that increase their wages" (Bourree Lam, atlantic.com, 2016). I believe this is the best way to go about it. It will allow for the women who actually want to go into these executive positions a chance feel safe and ready to do their job. I feel that the most important part is that it will still allow for women who don't want to go into higher executive positions the ease of mind that they are no longer being forced into a position they don't want to go into all in the name of women's rights. The glass ceiling has caused a lot of problems in our society and it is time to stop pointing fingers and solve the problem so everyone has the equality they deserve.


Are Men to Blame for Women's Glass Ceiling

Some people believe that men are to blame for women's glass ceiling. They believe that men are sexist when employing people for there positions. According to thebalance.com, "jobs may be offered to a less qualified male applicant just because he is male"(Lahle Wolfe, thebalance.com, 2016). Women are also subject to be judged by what they look like and what they wear. Thus blaming men for profiling and being sexist in the workplace. When men are being sexist and profiling it does not allow women to get jobs they want, and does not allow them to break through the glass ceiling.

Blaming men for the women's glass ceiling is just the easy thing to do because women and others have no one else to blame but themselves. Men are not to blame in this day in age because of all of the freedom women have to do whatever they please. "The highest ranking women in most industries are in non-operating areas such as personnel, public relations, or, occasionally, finance specialties that seldom lead to the most powerful top-management posts." (Empowering women in Business, feminist.org, 2014) This really is the reason why people believe that there is a "glass ceiling" for women, because they choose certain career paths that do not allow them to rise to the top. This is perfectly fine and their right but people cannot then blame men. 

I believe that men are not to blame for the women's glass ceiling, simply because women are not aggressive enough in the workplace. According to entrepreneur.com "The women who complain about inequality in the workplace are often the same women who want flexible work schedules or other benefits so that they can have it all" (Lindsay Broder, entrepreneur.com, 2013). This is another reason why no fault should be placed on men when most women who complain about inequality want all the other benefits of the job as well. One way to fix the inequality of pay between men and women is to have the same exact benefits for both and then talk about pay. 
One possible reason for the reality that most CEOs are men is that all men in leadership positions are sexist. According to feminist.org "when deciding who to promote into management, male corporate leaders tend to select people as much like themselves as possible - so it is no surprise that women are frequently not even considered at promotion time. Instead, the men at the top look to former colleagues and old school ties" (Feminist Majority Foundation, 2014). This supports the possible reality that all men in leadership positions are sexist because the FMF says that men promote people only who are most like themselves which almost always excludes women.

A possible explanation for why men are not to blame for women's lack of corporate success is some women simply make different decisions and are not as ambitious in getting promoted. According to Penny De Valk, ILM chief executive, and dailymail.co.uk " The poll of 3,000 members of the Institute of Leadership and Management revealed that women managers have lower levels of ambition and confidence than their male counterparts...Women managers tend to lack self-belief and confidence at work compared with men" (De Valk, dailymail.co.uk). This can explain why less women are in CEOs because some choose other paths and others are just not willing to fight to the top. It may mean that the reason women are not CEOs is because of themselves not sexist men.

Personally, I do not think men are to blame for the glass ceiling or women not commonly being CEOs. I think it all comes down to personal choices and what is important to people. I simply believe different things are more important to women like relationships, a healthy marriage, and spending time with their children. According to Huffington Post and a member of the National Association of Professional Women  " I realized during the five years in my current role, work-life (managing multiple projects, balancing family, etc.) disallowed me to advance my skills in pursuing professional development opportunities either internally or externally to the organization. was so consumed with working to meet deadlines, managing projects, and rushing out the door to tend to family (nothing wrong with that), I did not strategically network to build relationships in the workplace which would have ultimately given me the visibility required to get to the next level" (Shanna B. Van Ness, Huffington Post). This supports my belief that it is just choices each individual makes because women often make choices that make moving up the corporate ladder come second.

Are Men Responsible for Glass Ceiling

I do believe that men do have some responsibility in the whole glass ceiling thing. In the early years it's been all men doing everything and even back when just men worked paying jobs. It has been steadily increasing for the last 40 years, but it's still not equal, and most likely never will be. Men have made women feel less important and therefore they don't want to do important jobs. "This cage is held together by the misgivings we have about our ability to succeed and handle the demands of leadership without sacrificing our other aspirations outside the workplace" (Warrell, www.forbes.com, 2013). If men didn't start off mistreating women, then I believe women would love to do all the important jobs, and even construction type jobs. I see men as creating the glass ceiling, only in the way of making them feel less wanted. 
The other side is that men aren't responsible for the glass ceiling. With everyone wanting to be treated equal today, I don't see why this is still even talked about anymore. You don't hear women complain of not getting higher up jobs, it's just that they usually don't want to do it. Applying yourself is the biggest thing in the workforce, and I don't see how that isn't the main reason for the pay gap. Men also ask for raises more and promotions, because we don't get feelings hurt if it doesn't happen. "The women who complain about inequality in the workplace are often the same women who want flexible work schedules or other benefits so that they can have it all" (Broder, www.entrepeneur, 2013). Women like to have everything their way and won't be flexible. Overall, I think women are to blame because of how they act and aren't as hungry for better positions. 
I believe men are not repsonsible for the glass ceiling in this day in age. It comes down to what women want in a job and how flexible they are. You can't take emotions into account and it also comes down to ambition. Women also like to complain, while men just keep it to themselves and don't make a scene. "68 percent of workplace bullying is same-sex harassment and of that 68 percent, 80 percent of cases are women-on-women harassment" (Broder, www.entrepeneur.com, 2013). Overall, I believe men are not in charge of the glass ceiling anymore, and it is getting better. 
Are men to blame for the glass ceiling, or pay discrepancy, for female workers? Some believe this is true because men have created the laws in favor of themselves. An article titled, ‘Now it's official: you can't blame women for earing less than men,’ written by Angelina Chapin in 2016, stated, “...women earn less because of good ol’ fashioned discrimination. It’s no surprise, since for most of history work cultures were created by men to help other men advance. The pay gap will only close once companies become environments that cater more to the female sex.” Men have been getting paid more for centuries because they are the ones creating the laws towards required work payments for men and women. 
Although that argument makes sense there are still other people who believe that men are not to blame for this pay disrepancy. “...men and women aren’t paid the same amount of money because they are choosing to go into different professions, and the labor market rewards their choices differently. In other words: unequal work, hence unequal pay,” says an article titled, ‘What Gender Pay-Gap Statistics Aren't Capturing written by Bourree Lam in 2016. These people believe that women would be paid the same if they were choosing the same job positions as men. 
In my opinion, men are not entirely to blame for this pay discrepancy now, but they did have a big part in starting it. Even if it is a man who is deciding how much women are getting paid for their work that does not mean that all men are to blame for this problem. One solution for this is to show that women are all getting paid equally by data, and if the pay discrepancy does exist, find out why, and fix it. 

Bettendorf Economics Blog: Assignment: Are men to blame for the 'Glass Ceiling' for women? (Due Thurs, 4/20)

      Are men to blame for the glass ceiling? “In 2005, 60% of women were in the labour force; ten years later, this ratio had edged up only slightly to 63% (it was 80% for men in both years).”( The Data Team, The economist 2017). This mean that less jobs are given to women and more are be given to men. Men are taking jobs that could go to women. The field should be leveled to stop men from having the glass ceiling.

      Men are not to blame for the glass ceiling. The glass ceiling is defined as “: an unfair system or set of attitudes that prevents some people (such as women or people of a certain race) from getting the most powerful jobs”( Merriam-Webster.com, 2017). The system is not unfair to women by man's fault, women have equal opportunity in America to get a job. The only thing that shifts the balance one way is maternity leave and even that is a stretch.

       In my opinion men are not to blame for the glass ceiling. The main reason for this is that we can’t be blame pad for something that does not exist. The reason why many believe it does is that men have higher paying jobs and usually the higher income end of a family. The men usually work hard to they can get more money for their family. Women will usually not strive as hard because their spouse already makes more money and provides for them. In one study done” According to a survey by management experts, the biggest obstacle on women’s climb to the top is their level of confidence – not their gender.”(Steve Doughty, Daily Mail 2011). This concludes that the problem is women lacking ambition and competition not men being sexist.

People say that men are a large cause for the glass ceiling. Some even go to say they cause women to make less. "Overall, women continue to earn 15% to 20% less than men—a disparity that grows the longer that women remain working outside the home." (Fortune.com). Women make up about 22% of cooperate executives nowadays, giving a compelling argument that men could be causing the glass ceiling. 
      Other people argue that men do not cause the glass ceiling. The glass ceiling exists because of different levels of difficulty and work ethics. Those who do not try to succeed will not succeed. "The majority of the male interviewees (13 out of 19) reported that they eventually became comfortable projecting authority, gaining enough confidence to lead client interactions into personal territory. As one said, “You need to develop a sense of maturity so that you can win over clients as a peer.” (http://knowledge.insead.edu/career/how-women-and-men-internalise-the-glass-ceiling-4587#QUjMuCtS00Y7ZhIt.99).
   Personally I don't think anyone is to blame for the glass ceiling, I think people just need to be more assertive to make themselves known and get more power in the work place.

Tuesday, April 18, 2017

Assignment: Are men to blame for the 'Glass Ceiling' for women? (Due Thurs, 4/20)

The Economics of 'Equal Pay for Women'


In America, the median (middle) pay for women is 78% of that for men (according to 2016 US Census Data).  Are men to blame for this 'glass ceiling', or pay discrepancy, for female workers?

1) In paragraph one, evaluate at least one argument in favor of men being to blame for the 'Glass Ceiling' for women.  You must include at least one outside source, using in-text citation (author, website, date).

2)  In paragraph two, evaluate at least one argument against blaming men for the 'Glass Ceiling' for women.   You must include at least one outside source, using in-text citation (author, website, date).

3) In paragraph three, justify your position on blaming men for the 'Glass Ceiling' for women.  Explain at least one solution for fixing the pay discrepancy for women, based on your position. You must include at least one outside source, using in-text citation (author, website, date).

The due date is 4/20/17 at 11:10 a.m.

Cheating Punishments

One argument in favor of giving out harsher punishments for cheaters in school is that harsher punishments will always make students think twice before cheating. At our school if you are caught cheating on a test for the first time, then all you get is a 0% on that test. Which for most kids would be terrible to their grade, but a lot of people still do it and making the punishment harsher, like failing the course would definitely make the number of kids cheating go down. In a survey done by Rutgers University 95% of high school students from 70 high schools admitted to cheating in some form (Jonah Lehrer, plagirism.org, 2014). Harsher punishments will definitely lower that number which is way too high in the first place.

One argument against harsher punishments for cheating in school is that kids do make mistakes and one mistake should not give a kid a failed course. Others think that cheating is not that big of a deal and that students need to value there actual learning over grades and test scores. Once the students and colleges value this, harsh punishments won't be needed. Many people think that harsh punishments for cheating discourage students from learning. "Also, it affects students badly because it leads to a break in educational progress of students" (Hammadi, linkedin, 2015). Harsh punishments will discourage students from learning and prevent them from getting a better education.

I believe that harsher punishments would work the best because it will always make the student think twice before cheating and thus lower the number of cheaters. 95% of students admit to being cheaters in school, which I think is way to high of numbers and needs to be cut down. Kids are always afraid of punishments and if you make it known that the punishment for cheating will be harsh they will not do it as much.


Should students receive harsher punishments for cheating? Well a pro to harsher punishments is students will be less likely to cheat. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/should-students-expelled-cheating-zainab-al-hammadi The article talks about how harsher punishments such as being expelled would negatively affect a person. I disagree because first of all do not cheat and second if you're going to school to become a doctor and you have to look at notes during open heart surgery you should not be a doctor.

https://learning.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/10/why-do-students-cheat-in-school/comment-page-18/?_r=0 A con to harsher punishments is just you are punishing students for something teachers just will not enforce. According to The NY Times access to cheat is easier than ever and teachers just do not care enough to enforce it, which is why students cheat so much. So it would not be fair to punish students more when the pipunishments are there just not enforced so students are more likely to cheat. 

I believe there should be harsher punishments when it comes to cheating. If you increase how you would get punished and the severity of it the likelyhood of it happening goes down and teachers also have to enforce those rules for it to go down.

Cheating is a significant problem in private and public schools all over the world. The question is why is cheating such a common action and why do students feel the need to copy someone else's work? Well, there is multiple situations that lead to cheating. What is the ideal punishment for cheating? Should punishments be harsher to prevent cheating? Cheating can lead to suspension, automatic zero, or at home discipline (law.lawyers.com, 2017). Those punishments may not be enough to really scare kids into not cheating, maybe an automatic fail in the class or expulsion is enough. Expulsion can be argued that it is too harsh, but some people would agree that this is a fit punishment.

On the other hand, punishments for cheating are already harsh enough as is and do not need to be changed. I know an automatic 0 in a class off the bat is very hard to recover from, not from personal experience, but from another source. Also, mistakes are made and kicking a kid out of class on the first offense is pushing it a little bit. It is important to have an open mind when you are having a conversation with your child and make sure you hear their side of the story. If you don't and just start taking away privileges without talking, your child might just go back to his or her old ways and that is what you were trying to avoid from the start (Lisa A. Goldstein, noodle.com, 2017).

In my opinion, I think the punishments for cheating now are enough as is. There shouldn't be a strip of lisense law or automatic expulsion from school that is extra. If a child wants to cheat I, honestly, would let them cheat. They can figure out that you won't be able to cheat your way at a certain point in your life and eventually fail. If it got way out of hand then I would take action to an automatic fail or something.

Cheating

There are many consequences to cheating in school. Over 66% of students have admitted to cheating on an exam in school and 80% of kids say they have let someone copy their homework or have copied someone else's work (Middleearth,Wordpress, 2014). A harsh punishment of failing the student out of the class is an appropriate way to handle the situation because it teaches the student not to continue to cheat. Failing a course stays on the students record making it hard for them to apply to colleges and other programs they need their transcript for. Failing a class also makes it aware to other teaches that the student was caught cheating and was punished. If a student is never punished they were never learn to stop cheating.

Some people though believe that cheating can not be punished and that the incident is a learning experience for the student. Some students may have trouble understanding academic dishonesty which makes it harder for them to understand the wrong behind cheating (Coles, Morningcall,2003). If a student is caught they should be taught the wrongs and consequences of cheating but not actually be punished. A lot of students have been caught cheating their first time which doesn't make sense to fail them out of a class if they don't even understand the consequences. This makes the student understand the effects of cheating to help prevent them from doing it while still managing to teach the student something.

I believe the punishment for cheating should depend on the type of cheating being done and if it is the student's first time cheating. If the student has not cheated before then I think teaching them the effects of cheating is a good way to help them understand the wrong and make them not do it again. Cheating is wrong regardless of the situation but should be punished depending on the act or amount of cheating done.
Pros

In every school there are students who cheat. Students who take advantage of careless teacher. Indeed, three out of four high school students admitted to serious cheating on tests-- in a recent survey of about 4,500 students by Rutgers University professor Donald McCabe (Jay Mathews, TheWashingtonPost(WP CompanyLLC), 2001). On a student's first offense, it should not be taken very harshly. Although, after the first offense, they should flunk the class or be expelled.

Cons

Cheating happens because of fear of failing, fear of being average, and fear of not being able to participate in sports or extracurricular activities. Cheating at school happens often and at particically all grade levels. Harsher punishments should not be issued. It should should vary prior to the age or grade of the child. Students who cheats will or at least should- feel an immediate response from their parents and the school (school law, education-law.lawyers.com, 2005). Harsher treatments does not teach the student better morals. Although it does ruin their self esteem and causes the student to think even more less than himself.

Conclusion

I do not think students should have harsher treatments. The school system can not punish the whole nation because of cheating. Everyone has cheated before, it's just that they have not been caught yet. I think people can learn from getting a zero on the assignment or a test. If cheating continues, then yes,  harsher punishments should be in place.
Cheating is a severe problem in many schools throughout the country and one main consequence for children is no after school activities during the week or weekend. The lesson should be learned that cheating is a big deal and should be taken seriously (Martindale, Education-lawyers, 2017). Cheating in schools sets children up for the rest of their lives causing them to cheat later on in life in things like college and the work place. Taking away a child's right to have fun activities or clubs shows the child that the issue of cheating is a big deal and is not taken lightly. Over 90% of children admitted to copying someone's test in school which is an extremely large number. Threatening to take away something the child enjoys would cause the child to see the wrong in what they are doing. 

Cheating ultimately relies only on the person who is doing the cheating which causes some schools to not punish their students. Instead of failing the student immediately or not allowing them to participate in certain activities some schools just let the student off with a warning. Cheating can permanantely haunt an academic career which makes the chance of students encountering a teacher who knows they cheat very likely. For some this punishment is enough because it is the students responsisbilty to uphold themselves in school (Hearst, Education. Seattle, 2017). Not choosing to punish students for their cheating makes the student realize their reputation and the effects it has on them. 

I believe students should be faced with a warning and just a failing grade when they have been caught cheating. The act of cheating ultimately relies on yourself because you chose to do it. I think the consequences of cheating should be kept to a minimum and should mostly let the student worry about it. Having teachers know you cheat and the failed courses appear on your record is enough for any student to want to stop cheating.  

Academic Cheating Punishments

A main factor contributing to students’ motivation to cheat is the mentality that they will not be caught in the act. Of those who have been polled in a study, over 90% of cheaters did not believe they would be caught or face consequences (oedb.org, 2010). Along with this, it was discovered that most students who do cheat do not feel guilt, but rather feel that their actions were justified. With harsher punishments and stronger enforcement of policy, this poor mentality can be diminished, forcing students focus their energy towards earning their grades instead of creating new methods to cheat in the classroom. The students who do cheat frequently are just setting themselves up for future failure by not actually learning the material and reinforcing their already poor study habits and work ethic.

With academic cheating rising, the number of those actually being caught and punished is lowering. In fact, 95% of students who have cheated have not been caught (oedb.org, 2010). The lack of punishment isn’t the problem, it’s actually catching the students where faculty and administration is ineffective. For the most part, when a student is caught, they face their consequences, but only a few are actually forced to face these current consequences because their actions aren’t detected. Having a more detrimental punishment won't change anything until more kids are caught. Also, it is more likely that with harsher punishments students will find better ways to cheat to escape the repercussions. Then it will be even harder to actually catch the offenders.

I believe that harsher punishments would be slightly effective and stop the problem for a few kids, but overall will it really deter students from cheating?  These theoretical harsher punishments can really only be effective if the students are caught, and with only 5% of offenders being caught, I think we are focusing on the wrong solution. We need to put more time into actually catching the students before coming up with newer, harsher punishments. Without having students that have been caught, what would be the purpose of implicating harsher punishments? It will scare some students yes, but for the most part, those who are that desperate to cheat will cheat anyway. In a way, allowing the students to cheat is a punishment in itself. When it comes to standardized testing, those students will not know the material and score much lower than those who have studied throughout the years. I do not believe cheating is a justified act, but I don’t believe having harsher punishments will change much.

Monday, April 17, 2017

Punishments for cheating

Students that cheat in school should have more serious consequences for many reasons, but one is, is that cheating will eventually lead to failure. If a student is constantly cheating and is not receiving any punishment to make them stop the bad habit, that student will never learn what it takes to actually achieve something on their own, the correct way (https://middleearthnj.wordpress.comb 2015/09/28). Also, since cheating is the "easy way out" those who do cheat will not have the skills that involve working hard and actually taking in information and applying what you have learned.

On the other hand, some believe cheating in schools is not wrong. Some say cheating should be allowed because as a society we are so focused on maintaining good grades, that it is sometimes impossible to do well on an assignment/ test without cheating. Also, the tests students take, they will most likely never be tested over it again or need to know the material so it should not matter if they cheat or not (Soling www.wired.com 2015/01/29).

I think the punishment for cheating should vary depending on the cheating. I think that copying someones homework is very different than cheating on a test. I do not think that cheating is right, but I also do not think someone should be kicked out of school or fail if they copy homework.
     Cheating in school is becoming much worse, it's getting harder for teachers to control it. It gets easier for students to cheat because of the technology we are able to have. There should be harsher punishments because then students wouldn't do it as much and would be more scared of it. "If you are caught, you could fail the course, be expelled, and gain a bad reputation with your teachers and peers." I believe that's a better punishment for cheating because not student would want to fail to entire semester because of one simple act. Cheating should be taken more seriously. 
     Cheating in school is very common in high school and it would not be taken so serious because Students do it all the time and if they expell a student for something that everyone does then there'd ened up kicking out over half the school  80% said they had let someone copy their homework. So that 80% of stendent would be kicked out of school and no one would be attending the school so it's silly to have to make it such a big deal to the people that don't want to succeed in like by themselves. I say let them fail and cheat they way through life and they will fall hard and fail. 
     I believe that cheating is not taken seriously, they school should make this a harsher punishment because it's no fare to the people that try so hard in school just so that they're work is taken from others. Kids should be kicked out off the class and take an F for cheating  because it's not fare. Cheating will take you no where in life and will make you less confident in yourself and in what you do it doesn't teach you anything 
Cheating is becoming more and more common in schools everyday. To prevent this, harsher punishments need to be laid out. If harsher punishments were given to students caught cheating then it wouldn't be as common. According to an article titled, "Cheating at School," (unknown author and date), "...a student who's willing to cheat in grade school is likely to cheat in high school. A high school student who cheats may continue cheating in college." Even if you are caught cheating on a simple spelling test in grade school, you are now more likely to cheat on somthing more important later on. If there were harsher punishments for said cheating, such as, expulsion, failing the class, etc., then students would be less likely to cheat early on.
Although cheating is definitely not something you should do some people also believe strengthening the punishment for it in schools would not be wise. Many teachers and administrations of school distrcits believe that just a failed grade for the assignment they cheated on is necessary. "A course is something a kid needs to graduate, so a second chance is appropriate," said Doug Graney in an article titled, 'Students Can Often Cheat Their Punishment,' written in 2001. If the student fails the whole class they will not graduate until they pass it. So, a simple failed grade for that assignment would lower their grade enough where they realize the consequences of their actions. 
When it comes to cheating, I believe that there should not be harsher punishments for it. Cheating may be getting worse, but that could just be because teachers are not giving their students the right lessons on how to cite their sources. If teachers were doing that then students would not be cheating they would be creating their own work, and simply using other resources to back their information up. For example, here at Bettendorf High School, we have a no cheating policy, but our teachers are always showing us how to cite our sources in order to prevent this. Also, when it comes to cheating on tests, students would not feel the need to cheat if they knew exactly what material was going to be on the test, and had tools to review it. Overall, I do not think we should have harsher punishments towards cheating in school. 

Thursday, April 13, 2017

One possible solution to cheating in school is to treat it very seriously and punish the student harshly. According to lawyer.com cheating should result an automatic zero and expulsion if repeated. On top of that the parents should discipline the student at home. Also they recommend "detention or some other form of school discipline that takes away some of the students after-school free time" (Dell, lawyer.com, 2017). This would be a possible solution because sometimes the only thing that will get through to students is harsh consequences. It will help create negative incentive to cheating.

Another possible solution to cheating in school is to not get angry and have an open conversation with the student. According to Dr. Eric Anderman who is an expert in student cheating and educational psychology at Ohio State University "If you immediately get furious and start punishing or taking away privileges without discussing the situation, the result may be that your child will continue cheating and just try harder to avoid getting caught" (Anderman, noodle.com, April 23rd, 2015). This supports lesser punishments for cheating because Dr. Anderman suggests that harsh punishments may just cause more cheating. 

Personally, the best way to keep kids from cheating is to threaten very harsh punishments. I think this will be the most effective way because kids will be too scared to cheat and the ones that do will become examples to others. Overall this will incentivize kids to do there own work and not want to copy others because they know the consequences. Finally, I think that harsh punishments is the only effective way to keep kids from cheating in school.
         Cheating is an act that needs to be punished, but how much does it need to be punished? A harsher punishment might deter more students from doing. "For serious or repeated instances of cheating, a student may be suspended from school for a few days or even expelled or "kicked-out" permanently. Whatever the consequences, the lesson to be learned by the student is that cheating IS a big deal and won't be tolerated at school or at home (Lawyers.com, 2015)." So if a student is cheating they need to learn that it is a big deal, and maybe the only way they will learn is if the have do the entire class/year. If a students knows they will be kicked out of their schools for cheating using all their time just to have it wasted, they probably won't do it.

          Others might say that cheating isn't that big of a deal and give them a 0 on the test they cheated on. When a students thinks their grades are the most important thing in there life why wouldn't they cheat? Also, if a student gets expelled, what would they learn? There is no reason to expel students from college for cheating because they will not learn anything from that experience. Also, it affects students badly because it leads to a break in the educational progress of students (Hammadi, linkedin, 2015)." If a student misses a whole year of school that throws the whole drive to keep doing, especially if they get kicked out for something as little as cheating. In college, if you got expelled for cheating, it unlikely that any other colleges will take you in because they heard that you cheat. So, because of one mistake your chances of getting a college degree are over.

         I feel we should have harsher punishments. Students need to learn that cheating is a big deal and they aren't going to if they don't get punished enough. When a students cheat in middle school and doesn't get punished why wouldn't they in high school and college? Without harsh punishments lazy students would be rewarded for doing nothing and learn that cheating gets you as far as you need. If a student knows they will be punished severely, they will learn to take responsibility for their own learning and become better students.

Cheating in School

         Cheating in school has become a major thing that happens everyday. Many students don't even think about it when they are doing it because it has become so normal to them. Teachers don't discipline it like they probably should, so over the last decade or more, it has become not as big of a deal I'm taking it as. Students want to cheat because they know they can do it, but it also isn't as stood up against as in the past. "For cheating to be reduced, instead of seeing cheating as something that can’t be done, they must come to recognize that it should not be done. Removing the desire to cheat is the least immediately practical but most assured way of encouraging academic integrity" (uloop, www.huffingtonpost.com, 2014). If the school system in America can make school less influential on life, then students would cheat less and get more out of it. If school wasn't so impactful on what we do later on in life, it would take away cheating. 
        Preventing cheating is almost impossible. Kids need good grades and want to look better to everyone else. Teachers don't usually do anything about it, and therefore the kids don't mind doing it all the time. Most people feel that cheating is so easy to do, that if they don't do it, they are missing out on a chance to do better, even if they think they don't need to cheat. "There's other people getting better grades than me and they're cheating. Why am I not going to cheat? It's kind of almost stupid if you don't" (ABC News, abcnews.go.com, April 29). Such a high percentage of people do it, at school or in the workforce, you might as well do it to keep up with them. With having little punishment, the world can get better by cheating of each other, even though that may sound bad. 
I believe that cheating is okay in the end. So many kids do it everyday and it's not punished well at all. As I said, we can get better off of cheating off one another, because we push each other to do better and 'work together'. It's very hard to punish cheating and to recognize it in the first place, so how is the world gonna crack down on cheating anyway. I like the world as it is today in this aspect and it's a very hard thing to fix, so why try doing something that won't work anyway. 

Cheating

Cheating should have a harsher punishment than just a smack and don't do it again. It is never fair to the student who did manage to study and make time for school unlike the cheater. Expulsion may be a little harsh but if you get caught cheating then your degree cannot be credible because you cheated to "earn" it. Cheating should end a career, if you cheated to get where you are you don't deserve it (debates.org). When you cheat you cheat yourself out of your own education.

Cheating shouldn't be punished, when a student cheats they will likely not review their answers as it is unlikely they will have to test over the exact material again. The argument that cheating impacts a students self esteem is invalid as there is little to no scientific research to back it up (wired.com). It is argued that a students view on cheating is copying work or asking for help on a question on an exam, in a workplace this would be named networking or cooperative work which would be rewarded not argued as cheating. When we have a problem we search for answers, we ask others if they have experienced the same thing we ask others for help, search the web it doesn't matter the source we just want answers, like cheating.

As I do believe cheating is a problem I don't believe it needs harsher punishments. Students don't want to be at school, while some students will work for their grades others will take the easy way and try and cheat. I can see that schools don't want students to think it's ok to take credit from others work but it doesn't need a harsh punishment. When you are taking a test it is prohibited to copy another students work, refer to a book, or even browse the web in search for the answer, yet outside of schools where this is prohibited in workplace environments these are skills you want workers to have, to be able to search the web effectively or referring to books as long as the answer is reliable and truthful.
      Cheating is becoming easier and easier, with schools becoming more connected through the internet. With the new age of internet power and cheating sites, kids must be punished so they understand that cheating gets them no where and is easier to catch with the internet too. "Dr. Munson says the consequence will likely be decided by the teacher and may involve redoing the work, receiving a failing grade for the assignment, or detention. Embarrassment and guilt will naturally result, but this is how your child will learn." (Lisa A Goldstein, Noodle.com, April 23 2015). With a new and constantly changing environment. 
     Now a harsher punishment may not be exactly what is needed either, a kids become more defiant the more they are punished by their teachers. "...most teachers and principals argue strenuously that anything tougher for a first offense would be wrong."(Washington post, Jay Matthews, 10/28/01). Students who are given more than one chance after cheating, a chance to redeem themselves.
    Personally I believe cheating should be punished more, as many kids struggle to pass even the core classes. It isn't fair that someone can cheat and only get the bare minimum for a punishment. Cheating is a serious problem, much like plagiarism. It should be treated similarly or more harshly. 
     Cheating has always been a big problem, so should we do more about it? Even with the amount of discipline we have at Bettendorf it's not enough to stop the rampant cheating. According lawyers.com "For example, the student who gets caught cheating will - or at least should - feel an immediate response from his parents and the school" (lawyers.com). I believe both aspects of this quote are very important. It is the job of the school to give the student caught cheating the grade they deserve combined with time spent whether that's a detention or a suspension from athletics. Another point that the article makes which I believe has an even bigger role is parents punishing their kids. Some parents simply don't care and because of that students aren't getting the punishment they deserve. In order for students to stop cheating parents must take the initiative or punish their children. If parents were to punish their children for cheating then there would be less of it.

     Although cheating has some "benefits" that some people believe to be important in our society. Discipline for cheaters seems to be the best idea, but others think differently. For example "Cheating is an act of resistance, and resistance against oppressive powers should be encouraged and celebrated," (Cevin Soling, Wired.com, 2015). According to this article students are being oppressed because they are forced at the bottom of the food chain and thrown in school against their will. They believe that cheating is good for these students because it is a way to fight back against the oppression they are receiving. Wired claims that this is good for the society because it causes people to think for themselves and be rebellious. Not punishing students for cheating allows for students to become less oppressed and more rebellious.

     Cheating is a huge problem and should always receive a huge punishment. I believe that the article released by Wired is idiotic because when a society like that is created we no longer have people willing to work all they wanna do is live off of someone else and be "rebellious". I also believe that parents aren't doing enough and if they increased their punishment by taking away a students car or something then that student wouldn't cheat. The laziness that causes cheating is the same reason our country has such a big problem with the welfare system therefore by teaching our students to actually work for their grades our country has the potential of becoming stronger. Cheating is a product of laziness and in order for an individual to become a strong independent member of society it must be stopped. 
With the punishments that people have now when they cheat is like a slap on the wrist. They need to learn that it's not fair to the person who either studied hard or didn't study at all. They need to learn that if they cheat there will be serious punishment not just a slap on the wrist and a don't do it again. ""I will not lie, cheat or steal." Most thought it was a great idea, but they didn't think the pledge would change anything." (Duff, Victor. July 17, 2012. http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul/17/opinion/la-oe-dorff-cheating-20120717

I think that some of the ways kids have come up with ways to cheat are genius and deserve some level of congratulations for their critical thinking solutions for the problem at hand, there is no way kids deserve to be punished even more because kids stress out enough as it is, sure people worked hard and studied hard, but cheating is a way of using your resources and surroundings to achieve a common goal.

There should be harsher rules for cheating. Punishment should be raised to the max when dealing with cheaters because it is unfair and the equivalent of stealing. People need to understand that what they are doing isn't okay and that if you go through life cheating your way out of everything you will either end up in jail or on the streets because nobody wants to accept a cheater into their lives to mooch off their ideas.

Harsher, More Creative Punishments! (Example)

If you want someone to remember you, you have to do something emotionally  memorable.  In my opinion, most cheating in school occurs because the repercussions of getting caught are not nearly severe enough.  If we want reduced cheating, not only should the school teach the cheating student a lesson, but punishments should be so severe that others will be dissuaded from engaging in similar behavior.  According to Cormac O'Keefe (Irish Examiner, 2015), the government "should target the finances, properties, and vehicles of criminals as part of a more imaginative response to combating crime".  If one of the following  negative reinforcements is clearly presented on the first day of school, my guess is that cheating school-wide would decrease due to hitting students where it matters most to them-- "in their wallets":

1) Automatic 'F' in the class
2) Loss of Driver's License
3) Immediate removal from an extracurricular activity
4) $200 fine to not immediately fail the course
5) Removal of off-campus privileges
6) Campus cleaning duties over a weekend

Wednesday, April 12, 2017

Bettendorf Economics Blog: Should punishments for cheating in school be harsher? (due Tues., April 18)

Bettendorf Economics Blog: Should punishments for cheating in school be harsher? (due Tues., April 18)

Cheating in school is a major problem, with most students end up using it as a last resort. But at least with Bettendorf High School, we have a two-strike method with the first offence meaning a slap on the wrist, and the second offence being a little harder slap on the backside. Well at least we get the little slaps, unlike some schools like Lowel High School, where the policy is if you are caught plagurising once-kicked out of the class. If we were to start with that and then bump it up even higher to a expulsion, I doubt any kid would even concider cheating.

Now me being a highschool student myself, Cheating has been something I involved myself with once or twice now. Cheating really is just a way to quickly put one of those annoying missing assignments behind you, especially when they keep stacking up. Students who get their assignments from a friend probably didnt actually cheat, but they probably did the assignment together with their buddy in class-talking and chatting away.

My opinion on all of this is that if you can handle taking the zero, then why not risk it? You bascially have two choices, one is keep your morality and do the assignment or just take the assignment from a buddy. Now, I still feel that cheating is wrong and I dont noramlly use it because i would just rather do the assignment. And that way, low risk low reward, I can guarentee my spot at Harvord.

ASSIGNMENT: Should punishments for cheating in school be harsher? (due Tues., April 18)


The Economics of 'Cheating in School':

1) In paragraph one, evaluate at least one argument in favor of harsher punishments for cheating in school.  You must include at least one outside source, using in-text citation (author, website, date).

2)  In paragraph two, evaluate at least one argument against harsher punishments for cheating in school.  You must include at least one outside source, using in-text citation (author, website, date).

3) In paragraph three, justify your position on harsher punishments for cheating in school.

The due date is 4/18/17 at 11:10 a.m..


Monday, April 10, 2017


Objectivism 


         One con of requiring volunteer work for high school students to graduate is that service hours reap no financial gain. Sometimes high school students don't put forth their best effort when they do not see the reward. When schools require students to volunteer, then in some instances you will just have a bunch of kids who do not want to be there at all. People and/or kids who are required to, and do not want to do something rarely get any productive work done. Another con of requiring students to do this in order to graduate is the time commitment it takes to do these volunteer hours. According to The Calabasas Courier "students with after school jobs have even less time than others to complete volunteer hours"(Cydney Hayes, chscourier.com, 2012). This shows that for a lot of students with jobs or extra curricular activities, they are not able to find the time for volunteer hours.

          There are also many pros to volunteering like helping your community. Another is that many people find interests and skills they had never realized through volunteering. According to United way volunteers have a better chance of finding a job than non-volunteers (United Way, Unitedway.org, 2017). Volunteering looks very good on job and college applications and this fact from United Way proves that. In many cases volunteering can be the difference between you and another candidate.

          All this being said I do not believe that volunteering should be required to graduate. I think this because I believe that the cons ultimately out way the pros of required volunteer work. Volunteering is great when it is not required because a lot of times students would be there just to get it over with and not to actually be productive and help. Time commitment is another con of requiring volunteer work because many students have jobs and/or extra curricular activities, requiring hours would make them even busier.

Service hours requirement; good or bad?

Here at Bettendorf we do not have a service hours requirement to graduate, but what if we were to make it one? One of the main positives of volunteering is all of the new interests and skills you will discover you may have. According to the report by the Canadian Heritage written in 2016 titled, 'Why People Volunteer,' "Among the major rewards and incentives of volunteering appears to be the opportunity for personal growth. Discovering new skills and capabilities, learning more about yourself and other people or overcoming personal challenges were identified by the people in our groups." Many people are surprise to find that they had interests and skills they didn't even know they had. They discovered these through volunteering with different programs, and doing different things each time.
Although there are positives to volunteering, there are also the negatives. If Bettendorf were to add a requirement for service hours to graduate people wouldn't have time for other requirements such as homework assignments, jobs, or clubs and after school activities. According to the article written by livestrong in 2015 called, 'What are the pros and cons of volunteer work,' “Once you begin to volunteer and organizers of that particular activity or program see that you're a valuable asset, you make be asked or encouraged to do more. This can lead to scheduling problems and leave less time for school, family, work and other obligations.” Overall, making service hours a requirement would lead to scheduling problems with other requirements you have to graduate.
I believe that the adding of a service hour requirement would be more non-beneficial than beneficial for Bettendorf High School. Some students already don't have enough time for doing school assignments along with participating in school clubs, work, and personal time. If students had to also volunteer certain hours in order to graduate this would lead to more stress, and failure to complete everything they need done. 

     There are many pros to having service hours in school because it gets students involved with the community and there peers.  When a student volentirer it strengthen the community by many reasons. One reason would be supporting family's by either day care or elder care. Improving schools is also a bennifit by tutoring or literacy. Support youth also helps by mentoring a kid or after school programs. A good reason it's good is you could beauty the community by cleaning up beaches and parks.
     There are also bad qualitys about having service hours because some kids just don't have the time for it because of sports or family events. It's also bad because you have less time for school meaning you could possibly not pass classes because your so worried about having to do hours. Another good reason why not to have hours is because some people might not have the qualifications for the jobs.
     I don't think we should have in service because I feel like it's your choice into how much you contribute to the society and your choice on how hard you work. I believe that it should be a choice and them it would determine on what type of person you are and what your willing to do for the community.