作者： chenchen

“A 4.0 GPA and I Still Know Nothing”
Rachel Levine, age 17

I don’t really know what a mortgage is, or how to do my taxes, but I do know what the derivative of y=2(3x²-4x)² is. I don’t know a thing about stocks, or what my social security number means, but I do know that the mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell. I don’t know what a credit score is, or how to balance a checkbook, but I can do a geometric proof for you.

In five months, I will be heading off to college and living without my parents’ care for the first time in seventeen years, and I have never felt so unprepared. Academically, I have no woes. It is the thought of living on my own, in the grown-up world, that troubles me. Society has become so focused on academics, test scores and GPA, that no school wants to spend time teaching kids about buying a house, or paying off loans. Because of this, I am going off to college with little to no knowledge about everyday skills.

Professor David Perkins has looked at the issue of what is and is not taught in schools, and tells educators to ask themselves, “What’s worth learning in school?” At a seminar that Perkins spoke at, he asked audience members to raise their hand if they had learned in school what mitosis, the process of cell division, was. Nearly every person raised their hand. When Perkins asked how many of them had used their knowledge of mitosis in the last ten years, only one hand went up.

I am not arguing that public schools should up and abandon math or science or any subject, but if biology is a required course, why shouldn’t accounting be too? Or home economics? Public schools are built around a curriculum that spends so much time teaching information that will likely never be used again. Instead, teaching important life skills needs to be integrated into the curriculum of public schools. Some courses, like accounting and home ec, are offered as elective classes, but very few kids take them because it won’t make their college application look better or boost their GPA as much as taking the AP Statistics elective. Public schools are doing the bare minimum to make these useful classes available to students and in turn are sending kids off unprepared for their future lives outside of the academic world. There needs to be a bigger push toward making classes about life skills a requirement in public schools, so that people are not going into the workforce, wondering how to do their tax returns.

Works Cited

Hough, Lory. “What’s Worth Learning in School?” Harvard Graduate School of Education, 8 Jan. 2015.

Ojalvo, Holly Epstein. “What Are You Really Learning at School?” The New York Times, The New York Times, 7 Sept. 2011.

_________

A Peaceful Passing
Elina Niyazov, age 19

In the timeless words of Abraham Lincoln, “And in the end, it is not the years in your life that count. It’s the life in your years.” The debate over whether the quality or quantity of life is more important has shaken up the grounds of ethics. Recently, physician-assisted suicide has become legalized in Oregon, Washington, Washington, D.C., Vermont, Montana, Colorado and California. Yet New York, just this past year, banned this end-of-life route.

The Death with Dignity Act, passed in selected states, allows strictly qualified terminally ill patients to receive lethal medication from their doctors to end their lives. It is one end-of-life option among others including: palliative sedation, voluntary stopping of eating and drinking, and stopping treatment. All of these alleviate pain and hasten death, however, they are not always effective depending on the diagnoses. Brittany Maynard, who had terminal brain cancer, wrote an article explaining her choice of physician-assisted suicide: “I considered passing away in hospice care … but even with palliative sedation, I could develop potentially morphine-resistant pain and suffer personality changes and verbal, cognitive and motor loss.” Fundamentally, both physician-assisted suicide and other end-of-life options result in the same outcome. However, physician-assisted suicide is more immediate and less painful while the others, though legal, can result in intolerable, prolonged anguish. Some patients want to have the responsibility of choosing their own way of ending the suffering in the comfort of their own homes, surrounded by their loved ones. For this reason, physician-assisted suicide ought to be legal.

By disallowing terminally ill patients from choosing the right to die with dignity, there is an infringement on the right to live a quality life, right to freedom, and right to autonomy. Physicians against assisted suicide claim that since the Hippocratic oath implies a doctor’s responsibility is to heal, assisting patients to hasten their deaths is a violation of medical ethics. John Grohol, a psychologist, wrote a New York Times article stating, “When doctors equate healing with quantity of life, they ignore the quality of life. If suffering is intolerable, it is inhumane not to end it.” Therefore, if it is against the patient’s will to continue suffering, disallowing the patient to die peacefully and painlessly is disregarding the patient’s well being and, in fact, rejecting the oath.

The Death with Dignity Act entitles a patient to make a decision about his own life and, for once, not allow the disease to dictate the body’s fate. With strict regulations, such as psychiatric evaluations ensuring the patient’s choice is individual and competent, New York should be the next state to adopt such end-of-life care and give people the option to live fully and freely.

Works Cited

Grohol, John M. “Denying Someone a Peaceful Death Can Be Unethical” The New York Times. 7 Oct. 2014.

Maynard, Brittany. “My Right to Death With Dignity at 29.” CNN, Cable News Network, 3 Nov. 2014.

_________

“A Prodigy for Your Progeny”
Kaiser Ke, age 16

In China, the competition is great and the opportunities are few. Children are faced with the burden of success the minute they are born. Before they are born, mothers are faced with the pressure of bearing the most well-advantaged offspring. In recent years, there has been an exponential rise in the number of couples who are opting to screen embryos during in vitro fertilization (IVF). Because of the financial burden, lack of facilities for, and social stigma of raising a handicapped child, Chinese parents are more willing to prioritize you sheng (which translates to “healthy birth”) over the protection of an embryo.

One of the screening processes, known as preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), is currently used to detect embryos with single gene mutations that could cause diseases and disabilities like Tay Sachs disease or cystic fibrosis. Chinese law prohibits selection of embryos based on anything else (for instance, selecting for male embryos is illegal). However, a whole new array of problems will develop as we achieve a greater understanding of what genes influence intelligence.

The trailblazer in this field is the Beijing Genomics Institute (BGI), which launched a project in 2012 to analyze the DNA of 2,000 of the world’s smartest people. There are thousands of variants that influence mental abilities, but BGI aims to decipher the substantial genetic component of intelligence in the near future. While the study is purely academic, insight into the labyrinthine genetics of genius will define the future of genetic screenings; Pandora’s box will be opened with no possibility for return.

Fertility clinics may go from advertising for “cancer-free babies” to promising “prodigy babies”. The starting line for the rat race to the middle class will shift from family standing to predestined genetic design. PGD won’t necessarily result in China mass-engineering super-citizens, but it will easily be misinterpreted by and desensitize result-driven consumers. “Selecting for the smartest embryos” overemphasizes the hereditary facet of intelligence and glosses over the influence of nurture. Clinics cannot guarantee smarter babies, but eager couples will still flock to them nonetheless. In addition, even with PGD for simpler single gene mutations there is the risk of false positives. Now, couples might unknowingly dispose of perfectly healthy embryos in pursuit of a prodigy.

It is imperative that the Chinese government take proactive measures to oversee future PGD implementation. In addition to a moratorium so officials, scientists and consumers can deliberate, genetic counselors who are well-versed in bioethics need to lead a nationwide discussion on how far we are willing to let competition define us, literally. The human genome is indisputably the new frontier of exploration. However, unrestrained scientific ambition will move China forward before it is ready.

Works Cited

Cyranoski, David. “China’s Embrace of Embryo Selection Raises Thorny Questions.” Scientific American, Nature America, Inc, 16 Aug. 2017.

Eror, Aleks. “China Is Engineering Genius Babies.” Vice, Vice Media, 15 March 2013.

Kolata, Gina. “Building a Better Human With Science? The Public Says, No Thanks.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 26 July 2016.

Mukherjee, Siddhartha. The Gene: An Intimate History. Scribner, 2017.

Press, The Associated. “The Latest: Fertility Clinic’s Embryo Tank Had Prior Trouble.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 27 March 2018.

Sipp, Douglas, and Duanqing Pei. “Bioethics in China: No Wild East.” Nature News, Nature Publishing Group, 13 July 2016.

Su, Baoqi, and Darryl R. J. Macer. “Chinese People’s Attitudes Towards Genetic Diseases and Children With Handicaps.” Eubios Ethics Institute, Institute of Biological Sciences, University of Tsukuba, 2003.

Yong, Ed. “Chinese Project Probes the Genetics of Genius.” Nature News, Nature Publishing Group, 14 May 2013.

_________

“Abolish the Office of First Lady to Put Ladies First”
Catherine Lin, age 17

When Bill Clinton ran for president in 1992, he flaunted an unusual selling point: his wife, Hillary. “Two for the price of one,” he was fond of repeating on the campaign trail. Though Mr. Clinton was referring to her qualifications and unusually significant political role — she remains the only first lady ever to maintain an office in the West Wing — presidential couples always present voters “two for the price of one.” Presidents’ spouses fulfill a variety of official responsibilities: They manage paid staffers, promote nonpartisan causes and entertain White House visitors. Crucially, the first lady is unpaid, and, as former First Lady Lady Bird Johnson once quipped, “elected by one person — her husband.”

As every new election raises the prospect of a man in the office of first lady, this amorphous role has become awkward and archaic: The presidential spouse should be absolved of public obligations altogether. The position of first lady evolved within the context of a society that could not imagine a woman in power or a president’s wife with a high-powered career, relegating her to the domestic sphere. It devalued traditionally feminine tasks such as event planning, deeming them unworthy of monetary compensation.

Feminist advances have allowed successive presidential spouses to expand their public profiles, becoming vocal advocates for women’s and children’s issues. Thus, some have argued, as Professor Jean H. Baker proposed in The New York Times, that the office should “be defined as a paid public position, with salary and expectations.”

However, this change would only affirm the expectation that women subsume their identities into those of their powerful husbands. If the role of the presidential spouse is a “full-time job,” as Baker claims, he or she would likely be compelled to relinquish their existing occupation, just as Michelle Obama and Hillary Clinton gave up prestigious positions. Yet, a life of visiting elementary schools or choosing flower arrangements for the next White House dinner may not appeal to every spouse. Furthermore, since the first lady is eligible for office by virtue of being married to the president, greater politicization inevitably bumps up against charges of nepotism.

A far simpler solution would be to abolish the office and treat the presidential spouse as a normal private citizen. After all, the position is dispensable. German chancellor Angela Merkel’s husband, a theoretical physicist, has eschewed the public eye so unwaveringly that a German newspaper once labeled him “as invisible as a molecule,” a practice that has not impeded the smooth functioning of the German state.

The United States can and should follow suit. We can only free ourselves of the sexist assumptions and stereotypes that currently underlie the role of first lady if we free presidential spouses from public servitude.

Works Cited

Baker, Jean H. “Give First Ladies a Salary and Expectations.” The New York Times. 9 March 2016.

Cornwell, Rupert. “Bill and Hillary’s Double Trouble: Clinton’s Two for the Price of One’ Pledge Is Returning to Haunt Him, Says Rupert Cornwell.” Independent. 9 March 1994.

Finkelstein, Sarina. “Want to Fix Wage Inequality? Start With the First Lady.” Time. 12 April 2016.

Kirschbaum, Erik. “Don’t Call Him Mr. Merkel.” Reuters. 16 May 2012.

Neath, Scarlet. “What’s the Point of a First Lady?” The Atlantic. 6 Oct. 2014.

_________

“America’s ‘Boys in Blue’ Can be Green Too”
Akshay Raj, age 15

Police officers now have the opportunity to be guardians of not only our citizens, but also our planet. In this day and age, the extensive use of fuel-burning vehicles is becoming a larger issue as global warming develops into a growing threat — especially in the United States. While replacing all gasoline cars with electric vehicles (EVs) would be impractical, widespread change is necessary. A good place for us to begin is with some of our nation’s most admired and respected individuals: police officers.

According to the most recent law enforcement census, 17,985 police departments across the United States deploy thousands of police vehicles, becoming one of the country’s largest contributors to greenhouse gases. Living in a city where EVs and hybrids are becoming increasingly common, the dozens of diesel police cars around me begin to feel archaic. Within the next decade, several departments can reasonably aim to replace a majority of their police fleets, or at least nonemergency fleets, with fuel efficient vehicles.

In fact, plans for this system have already garnered support and are underway in New York City, one of the nation’s greatest greenhouse gas emitters. For instance, recent city plans call for replacing just under a fifth of its 11,000 car fleet; this is estimated to reduce city government emissions by 50 percent, according to the New York Times article “New York City Aims for Vast Electric Car Fleet by 2025.”

Albeit costly, replacing only 2,000 cars will pay for itself through fuel savings, while dramatically improving the environment of one of the world’s busiest cities. Furthermore, police officers serve as an example to the public, which is why their use of green vehicles could cause a larger change to ripple across America.

The variety and practicality of electric vehicles have grown tremendously in the past half decade, showing no signs of stopping. Some argue against this plan’s practicality due to the failure of the most significant previous attempt in the LAPD, in which a 100 car fleet of EVs had seldom been used since its introduction in 2016. However, cars in this fleet were among first-generation mass market EVs and faced significant limitations.

Most modern models have evolved past those limitations with greater durability, safety, speed, affordability and other factors that strengthen the practicality of the car. Some gasoline vehicles may remain for specialized missions, but their necessity is limited.

The more Americans neglect the benefits of today’s fuel efficient vehicles, the more dire our climate situation becomes. A solution is widely available, and a step forward taken by our nation’s officials can push us toward a future of clean energy. With this advance, police officers can save more than just lives.

Works Cited

City of New York Inventory of New York City’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions, April 2017, by Cventure LLC, Cathy Pasion, Christianah Oyenuga, and Kate Gouin, Mayor’s Office of Sustainability, New York, 2017.

Grynbaum, Michael M. “New York City Aims for Vast Electric Car Fleet by 2025.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 1 Dec. 2015.

King, Alanis. “That Fleet Of Electric Cars The LAPD Paid At Least $2.9 Million For? It’s Barely Touched Them.” Jalopnik, Jalopnik.com, 18 Jan. 2018.

Reaves, Brian. “Census of State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies, 2008.” Bureau of Justice Statistics. July 2011. Web. 14 March 2018.

_________

“‘Corrective Statements’ Don’t Fix Anything”
McKenna Tanner, age 15

According to The New York Times, in 2006, U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler ruled that tobacco companies Altria, Lorillard, Philip Morris USA and R.J. Reynolds Tobacco hid and denied the health risks of smoking in pursuit of greater profits.

The courts have forced the companies to release “corrective statements” in newspapers and on major news channels. Although these statements are a step in the right direction, their sparse design does not catch people’s attention and, therefore, does not effectively spread their information to the public.

Tobacco advertisements in the 1900s were flashy and colorful; they featured pictures of grinning doctors endorsing the health benefits of cigarettes and attractive people smoking happily. These advertisements grabbed the reader’s attention, but the corrective statements do just the opposite.

The print and televised statements consist of plain black text in bullet points on a white background, with a monotonous, slow voice-over that is reminiscent of a digital assistant added to the televised ones. They appear designed to be unattractive and slip under the radar of viewers and readers.

This is not how to get a message across.

An antismoking campaign by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention entitled “Tips” ran in 2012 and featured former smokers telling their stories with graphic images of their injuries.

According to NBC News, this campaign led 1.6 million people to attempt to quit smoking, and 78 percent of surveyed smokers and 74 percent of surveyed nonsmokers recalled seeing at least one Tips advertisement. The CDC’s advertisements made an impact because they caught people’s attention; these corrective statements do not do that, so how will people see them?

These statements reveal important information about smoking’s adverse effects and the companies’ deceitful actions. It is imperative that smokers and those considering smoking are fully aware of the negative consequences of their actions. In Texas, women seeking abortions must receive information about the procedure’s risks and alternative options 24 hours beforehand. Don’t smokers, whose choice to smoke exposes them and every person around them to numerous fatal diseases, deserve the same educational material?

And how will they receive that information when it is practically invisible?

When Kessler ordered these companies to release corrective statements, her intent was that the American public see and hear those statements. In their current form, these advertisements do not satisfy that condition.

The courts cannot allow these ineffective statements to continue; the companies must release new advertisements that actually attract the eye to fulfill their obligation. We do not allow our children to avoid apologizing for misconduct; let us apply this same rule in this case. Altria, Lorillard, Philip Morris USA and R.J. Reynolds Tobacco, say it like you mean it.

Works Cited

Fox, Maggie. “Graphic Anti-Smoking Ads Helped 100,000 Kick the Habit for Good, CDC Says.” NBCNews.com, NBCUniversal News Group, 9 Sept. 2013.

Maheshwari, Sapna. “Why Tobacco Companies Are Paying to Tell You Smoking Kills.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 24 Nov. 2017.

_________

“Do Asians Play a Role on the Great White Way?”
Sungchin Eraso, age 16

“The King and I”

“Miss Saigon”

“Allegiance”

At face value, these recent Broadway musicals are evidence of an increasingly diverse Broadway: one that allows Asian-American artists to thrive alongside those of every color and identity. In fact, the 2015-16 Broadway season was praised for bringing diversity “front and center” with shows emphasizing heritage, like “On Your Feet!” and “Allegiance.” However, as diverse audience members search for representation on the Broadway stage, we must reevaluate: Do these shows offer Asian-American artists the same opportunities as those of other ethnicities? The Asian American Performers Action Coalition’s report “Ethnic Representation on New York Stages” confirms the trend of growing diversity: Between the 2006-07 and 2015-16 New York theater seasons, minority actors’ representation increased from 15 percent to 35 percent while Asian-American actors’ representation rose to only 9 percent.

High Asian-American representation accompanies musicals such as “The King & I” and “Miss Saigon” — among the only shows to employ large Asian-American ensembles. According to the same report, the 2015 revival of “The King & I” hired “almost half of all Asian actors employed that season.” Japanese-Canadian director Stafford Arima confirms their impact: “You would look at the résumés and just see 12 productions of the ‘King and I’ and nine productions of ‘Miss Saigon’.”

These classic musicals, however, carry the remnants of a less racially-aware time. “The King & I” and “Miss Saigon” include large Asian ensembles, but consistently cast Asian-American actors as background to white story lines. Unlike the vibrant cultural celebrations of “Hamilton” or “The Color Purple,” which pridefully explore ethnocultural roots through hip-hop or religion, these Asian-centric shows only “celebrate” a long history of Anglo-European interference in Asia and the Pacific Islands.

Asian-American actors deserve to play characters that embrace their history without focusing on the white man’s role in it. They deserve to involve themselves in shows that look toward a future in which Asian-American pride is loud and present. They deserve the same opportunity to love, honor and celebrate their culture as the trailblazing African-American, Latinx, and LGBTQ+ actors currently shining on the Broadway stage.

The theater community should take pride in its beacons of diversity — “Hamilton,” “On Your Feet!” and “The Color Purple” — but should also recognize the inequality among actors of color. Modern musicals such as “Allegiance,” about Japanese-American internment, or “Here Lies Love,” about the political controversy of the Philippines, drive the industry in a positive direction, yet they have not closed the gap between Caucasian and minority — particularly, Asian — representation on Broadway. Let Broadway applaud itself for its monumental gains in the past decade, but never let it stop pushing for the equal, truthful and proud representation its diverse audience deserves.

Works Cited

Bandhu, Pun. Ethnic Representation on New York City Stages. Asian American Performers Action Coalition, 2018, Ethnic Representation on New York City Stages. Accessed 1 April 2018.

“The King and I.” IBDB: Internet Broadway Database, The Broadway League Inc. Accessed 1 April 2018.

Onuoha, Mimi. “Broadway Won’t Document Its Dramatic Race Problem, So a Group of Actors Spent Five Years Quietly Gathering This Data Themselves.” Quartz, 4 Dec. 2016. Accessed 1 April 2018.

Paulson, Michael. “This Broadway Season, Diversity Is Front and Center.” New York Times, 10 Sept. 2015. Accessed 1 April 2018.

Purcell, Carey. “’There Aren’t Enough Roles,” Says Tony Winner Ruthie Ann Miles on Diversity in the Theatre.” Playbill.com, 8 June 2015. Accessed 1 April 2018.

“Richard Rodgers Theatre.” BroadwayWorld, Wisdom Digital Media. Accessed 1 April 2018.

_________

“Driving: It’s Going Out of Style”
Emma Chiu, age 15

As typical of an American high schooler, I recently underwent a teenage rite of passage: beginning to drive. My friends, who also have their driving permits, frequently joke with me about the woes of lane-changing, parallel parking and three-point turns as we prepare for our looming driver’s license tests.

Yet we remain part of a dwindling majority. In 1976, nearly 87 percent of high school seniors held a driver’s license. By 2016, this percentage dropped to under 72, a decrease that may correlate with a climbing dependence on parental or public transportation, a lack of car ownership, or simply not needing to drive anywhere.

Then add these declining rates to a rising innovation: autonomous cars. The introduction of effective autonomous cars could drastically reduce vehicular deaths, since 94 percent of traffic fatalities involve human error. Self-driving cars would eliminating the dangers of intoxicated driving, distracted driving or simply incompetent driving ― and render learning to drive unnecessary.

But, following the fatal Arizona crash between an autonomous Uber car and a pedestrian, Americans question the true safety of such technology. Company documents reveal that Uber’s self-driving cars drove an average of only 13 miles before a human supervisor had to interfere to prevent a crash. In comparison, a study by Virginia Tech found that the average American driver crashes approximately once every 49,505 miles. Juxtaposed with the data of human drivers, Uber’s autonomous cars appear laughably incompetent. Nevertheless, autonomous cars collectively travel about 113,636 miles per crash, indicating that they can and will be more reliable than humans.

Autonomous cars remain far from flawlessly navigating the roads, but we often fail to consider that developers designed our traffic regulations with humans — and human error — in mind. An entire network of self-driving cars would optimize traffic congestion and pollution by reducing the number of cars on the road. Consequently, regulations such as speed bumps and parking spaces may become restrictive rather than protective. To take full advantage of autonomous cars, we must prepare to rescind and replace longstanding laws.

As self-driving cars continue to improve, so does public reception of them. The percentage of Americans that distrust driverless cars decreased drastically from 74 percent in 2017 to 47 percent in 2018. If this downward trend continues, autonomous cars will soon be an accepted and integral part of society. Akin to penmanship and opera singing, human driving will soon be a practice of the past. And, given the potential security benefits and efficacy of autonomous cars, this is a future that we must accept — and even embrace.

Works Cited

Bahrampour, Tara. “Not Drinking or Driving, Teens Increasingly Put off Traditional Markers of Adulthood.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 19 Sept. 2017.

Blanco, Myra. “Automated Vehicle Crash Rate Comparison Using Naturalistic Data.” Virginia Tech Transportation Institute, Virginia Polytech Institute and State University, 8 Jan. 2016.

“Critical Reasons for Crashes Investigated in the National Motor Vehicle Crash Causation Survey.” National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Feb. 2015.

Giffi, Craig A. “A Reality Check on Advanced Vehicle Technologies.” Deloitte Insights, Deloitte Insights, 5 Jan. 2018.

Wakabayashi, Daisuke. “Uber’s Self-Driving Cars Were Struggling Before Arizona Crash.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 23 March 2018.

_________

“Fairness in Education”
Xiaolin Ding, age 17

Education has become an industry in which the upper-class’s monopoly of resources is unchecked. A New York Times study of 38 top colleges in America, including five Ivy League schools, found that more students came from the top 1 percent of the income scale than from the entire bottom 60 percent. China faces a similar conundrum, where rich families in urban areas can send their kids to “keypoint” high schools. These schools receive more funding per student than average schools, have better teachers, and reliably place their students into elite colleges. In a world where income inequality is growing — China’s bottom 25 percent owns less than 1 percent of the aggregate wealth while the top 1 percent owns over one-third — one wonders if people not born into wealth are doomed to poverty.

However, in 2016, the Chinese Ministry of Education sparked hope when it announced 140,000 spaces — about 6.5 percent of spots in top colleges — would be reserved for students from less developed provinces. Unfortunately, this policy immediately ignited strong protests by urban parents. Under protest banners of “fairness in education,” protesters rallied to preserve using “Gaokao” college-entrance examination score, as the sole metric. They noted that Gaokao mimics China’s old imperial civil service exam (“Keju”) in relying purely on exam results and praised this meritocratic system as superior. Essentially, their argument is that in the long race of college applications, no one should be forced to run 6.5 percent further than their competitors.

What these protesters failed to mention is that times have changed, and the race’s participants begin on vastly different starting lines. The Keju system that was effective in bringing people from rural areas to government posts in cities, and thus increased social mobility, is not applicable in a country experiencing the fastest urbanization trend in history. As recently as 1993, over 40 percent of students in China’s colleges were children of farmers or factory workers. But now social mobility is becoming an obsolete concept. Today, less than 10 percent of young people in the countryside go to senior high schools compared with 70 percent of their urban counterparts.

Fairness in education is the right slogan, but a truly meritocratic system should not ignore complex social realities that put some students at a disadvantage from a young age. The Chinese government’s new higher-education admissions policy is a step toward balancing the unequal ‘starting lines’ that poor, rural students face. More such creative, comprehensive policies should be encouraged. Without these measures, growing inequality in society cannot be redressed. Every citizen — regardless of location, family background or wealth — should have hope that hard work and dedication can transform their lives.

Works Cited

Aisch, Gregor, et al. “Some Colleges Have More Students From the Top 1 Percent Than the Bottom 60. Find Yours.” The New York Times, 18 Jan. 2017.

“China’s Dirty Little Secret: Its Growing Wealth Gap.” Economy, South China Morning Post, 13 July 2017.

Hernández, Javier C. “China Tries to Redistribute Education to the Poor, Igniting Class Conflict.” The New York Times, 11 June 2016.

“The Class Ceiling.” The Economist, The Economist Group Limited, 4 June 2016.

_________

“I CAN’T HEAR YOU: Echo Chambers in America”
Kevin Tang, age 16

In 2018, America is more sharply divided than ever before as partisan animosity climbs to record highs during Trump’s first year of presidency. Today, our political climate is marked by increasingly acerbic and polarizing rhetoric on all sides of the political spectrum. While we tend to blame those in Washington for splitting America into two, there is another major reason for this internal discord — ourselves. From social media to news outlets, we often shut ourselves in echo chambers that reinforce our existing views but exclude alternative views.

Understandably, we naturally do so in the first place because we like hearing what we want to hear and because we feel confident when others accept our opinions, especially when we browse through and post on social media. But, why is this specifically bad?

While some may contend that these platforms allow us to converse with like-minded individuals, echo chambers have silent, pernicious effects on the way we perceive truth. When we surround ourselves only with ideas that are similar to our own, we succumb to groupthink as we take everything we read as fact. This dangerous cycle perpetuates disinformation since we almost always don’t take the time to independently verify what we read and view to be true in the echo chamber.

Statistical data already proves this phenomenon. In a 2016 study published in the Journal of Social and Political Psychology, Swedish researchers analyzed 700,000 posts on a right-wing forum. The results were shocking: It took only six months for the average user to adopt the community’s radical opinions and go from “I” to “We.”

Once we fall under the influences of this “mob mentality,” we regard our beliefs as hard fact and refuse to engage in conflicting opinions, extinguishing civil discourse. For instance, when people of the same political affiliation were told to debate the merits behind denigrating rumors about the opposite party, the discussions notably veered toward reaffirming those erroneous statements.

Despite the plethora of multifaceted and diverse opinions offered online, we still overwhelming choose to latch onto narrow viewpoints that we want to hear. Instead of willfully ignoring the other side, we must learn to engage in opposing perspectives to listen and understand rather than to respond or scorn at. Instead of taking everything we read in blind faith, we must learn to analyze and question it.

So, at the end of the day, don’t be afraid to question anything in life. Even if you feel like it’s a “dumb” question, ask it. The more you learn, the less “dumb” questions you will have. But most importantly, learn to be prepared for the answer, too. It may not be what you want to hear, but that’s the truth. The plain truth.

Works Cited

Bäck, Emma A., et al. “From I to We: Group Formation and Linguistic Adaption in an Online Xenophobic Forum.” 13 March 2018. Journal of Social and Political Psychology. Accessed 24 March 2018.

DiFonzo, Nicholas. “The Echo-Chamber Effect.” The New York Times, 22 Apr. 2011. The New York Times. Accessed 24 March 2018.

_________

“Is Trump’s Wall a Solution or Just Another Tourist Attraction?”
Lechen Dong, age 18

During Donald Trump’s campaign for U.S. president, he presented a plan to build a physical wall on the border between the U.S. and Mexico. Although the wall hasn’t been built yet, planning is underway and it’s now possible to see eight prototype walls in Otay Mesa, San Diego. According to the Trump administration, this planned wall will reduce the flow of undocumented immigrants. However, building a wall is actually counterproductive and there are many more effective alternatives.

It’s true a wall may keep some undocumented immigrants out, which might decrease the number of these immigrants in the workforce. But, according to the Department of Homeland Security, “most undocumented immigrants now simply overstay legally obtained short-term visas — and do not sneak across the border.” Simply flying to the U.S. as a tourist or visitor, many people arrive legally and then stay on as undocumented immigrants. Clearly, physically blocking people from crossing the border using a wall is not an effective way to solve the problem.

Building the wall would also cut into the budget for other kinds of border control. The Trump administration plans to spend over 18 million dollars on building a border wall, or over 50 percent of the 33 billion border security budget. Spending so much to build the wall would mean budget cuts for routine spending on maintenance and border control upgrades during the wall’s construction. Spending cuts would result in reductions in patrol routes, lights, cameras, sensors and personnel. This lack of maintenance and improvements would result in more undocumented immigrants crossing over during construction, not fewer.

Instead of building a wall, there are more effective ways to solve the undocumented immigration issue. First, money budgeted for the wall could be spent on enhancing law enforcement efforts aimed at companies that hire undocumented immigrants. If hiring regulations are enforced and it becomes harder for undocumented immigrants to find jobs, the number of illegal border crossings would decrease. Another critical way to reduce the flow of undocumented immigrants is to continue investing in other forms of enhanced border control technology like drones and heat sensors, which would increase law enforcement’s ability to find undocumented immigrants sneaking across border.

If completed, the wall wouldn’t be an effective protection against undocumented immigrants. Even China’s Great Wall was ineffective at keeping out groups like the Mongolians or at keeping Han Chinese from leaving China to settle outside the wall illegally. Eventually, immigrants will always find ways to cross the physical obstacles that governments put in their paths. Therefore, the U.S. border security budget should be spent on actual solutions instead of on creating a big, inefficient wall that may eventually become just another tourist attraction like the one in China.

Works Cited

Burgos, Fredy. “Trump’s Mexico Border Wall Isn’t Going to Stem the Flow of Undocumented Immigrants.” Newsweek, 20 Dec. 2017.

Nixon, Ron. “To Pay for Wall, Trump Would Cut Proven Border Security Measures.” The New York Times, 8 Jan. 2018.

Nixon, Ron. “What Border Agents Say They Want (It’s Not a Wall).” The New York Times, The New York Times, 22 March 2018.

Urrea, Luis Alberto. “Looking at Trump’s ‘Beautiful Wall’.” The New York Times, 3 March 2018.

_________

“It is Time to Abolish the Electoral College”
Joseph Saber, age 16

Many Americans characterize the Electoral College as a fair system that represents all Americans. Supporters point to the fact that small states like Wyoming and Delaware would be unimportant in a direct election for president and thus ignored. Under the Electoral College, they reason, candidates must pay attention to all states. Yet nearly every argument in support for the Electoral College is inconsistent.

The truth is that small states are still ignored despite the extra representation. Rather than diversifying the states that candidates visit, the Electoral College forces candidates to focus on the swing states. This is because of its all-or-nothing approach to granting electors: If a candidate wins a majority in a state, he or she will win all the electors in the state. It matters not whether the candidate wins by 60 percent or 90 percent. The results of this are horrible. As The New York Times stated, “In 2016, two-thirds of all public campaign events were held in just six states….”

In addition, there is not a clear reason why the small states should have their votes count more than the large states if the Electoral College does nothing to diversify the states candidates visit. Small states should have their votes count less precisely because they are smaller than the large states.

Most in favor of abolishing the Electoral College want a direct national vote giving one vote to every person. However a direct national vote would still retain several problems of the Electoral College, most notably the spoiler effect. The spoiler effect occurs when a third candidate splits the vote of one of the two parties causing the candidate who would have won to lose and the candidate that a minority of Americans wanted to win. This has happened both to Republicans and Democrats and it discourages Americans from voting for a third party for fear of wasting their vote on a candidate who cannot win. Americans would still be stuck with two-party rule under this system.

This problem could be alleviated with instant-runoff voting. Under this system, voters could rank their choices for candidates. If no candidate has a majority in the first round, the candidate with the least votes is eliminated and the second choice of those who voted for that candidate is considered. This process is continued until one of the candidates has a majority. With instant-runoff voting, the fear of giving away an election would be eliminated because voters could choose third parties as higher choices and give lower priority to the major parties. This would diversify the political landscape of the United States and give Americans more choices for elections.

Works Cited

Edwards, George C., I.,II. “5 Myths about the Electoral College.” The Washington Post, Nov. 04, 2012, ProQuest.

“It’s Time to Give Instant Run-Off Balloting a Try.” Montgomery Advertiser, Sept. 17, 2017, ProQuest.

Lehnert, Tim. “No Vote ‘Wasted’ in This System.” Telegram & Gazette, Dec. 30, 2016, ProQuest.

“Let the People Pick the President.” Editorial. New York Times, Nov. 7 2017.

“Ranked-Choice Voters Should Not Be Forgotten.” Portland Press Herald, June 08, 2017, ProQuest.

Schwarz, Frederic D. “The Electoral College: How It Got That Way and Why We’re Stuck With It.” American Journal, Feb/Mar 2001, pp. 43-49. ProQuest.

________

“It’s Time to Legalize the World’s Oldest Profession”
Ashlyn DesCarpentrie, age 17

Sex work is a legitimate occupation, and it’s time we legalized it as such.

The truth is prostitution isn’t going anywhere; it’s called the “world’s oldest profession” for a reason. Instead of squandering limited sources on policing an issue that history has proved impossible to eradicate, why not give sex work a legal framework that provides sex workers with medical help and legal protection against violence?

Prostitution is a multimillion dollar business, yet no one is collecting taxes from it. According to Nevada brothel owner Dennis Hof, the city of Las Vegas alone could make $25 million a year, just from taxing prostitution. A study conducted by the University of California found that one American city spends on average of $2000 arresting one prostitute; this amounts to $125 million a year in enforcement costs nationwide. Legalizing sex work would turn it into a revenue maker, rather than a burden for the taxpayer.

Making prostitution legal could minimize serious health concerns. Decriminalizing prostitution allows the government to regulate and monitor the trade. This, in turn, could ensure that HIV and other STD protection programs are carried out effectively, and research proves this to be true; according to expert Steffanie Strathdee’s study, 46 percent of HIV infections could be averted in any of the Canadian, Kenyan and Indian cities she researched, simply by fully decriminalizing prostitution. An Australian study found that the prevalence of STDs was “80 times greater in 63 illegal street prostitutes than in 753 of their legal brothel counterparts”. Additionally, it was found that condom use was significantly higher in legalized sex work compared to illegal prostitution.

It could be argued that authorizing sex work encourages ill treatment toward women. Research shows the opposite; legalizing prostitution actually reduces violence toward women. A study in the Netherlands found that opening designated legal street prostitution zones decreased rape and sexual abuse by 30-40 percent. It was also found that giving sex work a legal framework empowered women to demand safer sex and legal punishment of abuse. Furthermore, as Peter G. Hill brings up in his New York Times Letter to the Editor, legalizing prostitution allows the government to enforce age restrictions on sex trade, preventing underage teens from being lured into the trade.

I am not proclaiming a moral judgment on prostitution; I am stating facts. Prostitution is a reality of the modern world. This modern world demands equality. It demands protection and change. Yet change, protection and equality are not being demanded for sex workers. It’s time for the government to stop telling people how to live their lives, and it’s time for the citizens to demand protection for those who need it.

Works Cited

Akers, Mick. “This Pimp Wants to End Sex Trafficking.” LasVegasSun.com, 20 March 2017.

Becklund, Laurie . “Prostitution Arrests Cost $2,000 Each, Study Finds.” Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles Times, 10 July 1987.

Kastoryano, Stephen, et al. “Street Prostitution Zones and Crime.” Cato Institute, 19 Apr. 2017.

“Opinion | Should Prostitution Be Legalized?” The New York Times, The New York Times, 7 Sept. 2015.

“Prostitution, Public Health, and Human-Rights Law.” The Lancet.

“Simple Way to Curb HIV? Legalize Prostitution, AIDS Conference Told | CBC News.” CBCnews, CBC/Radio Canada.

_______

“Let Children of Color Be Characters, Too”
Sandra Chen, age 16

Two facts about me: I am Chinese American, and I am a writer. I only recently recognized the connection between these two facets of myself — or rather, the lack of one: in all of my stories since childhood, I had never written about a Chinese American character. The reason? I’d never really read about one either.

The lack of ethnic representation in children’s literature is stark. According to the publisher Lee & Low, only about 10 percent of children’s books published in the last two decades contain diverse themes. Meanwhile, roughly 80 percent of people involved in children’s literature — authors, illustrators, editors, publishers, etc. — are white. When people of color constitute roughly 39 percent of the current U.S. population, these numbers convey a serious problem. It has been said that books act as mirrors, allowing readers to reflect on their own identities. Children of color are deprived of the opportunity to truly see themselves in the pages they read, thus made to understand that they can never be the protagonists of their own stories.

Too often, multicultural books are pushed aside because they can’t connect with the majority of white readers. But to make such an argument when nonhuman characters are so popular in children’s literature is to suggest that white children have more in common with animals than other children. Moreover, research has continuously shown that reading facilitates empathy and understanding. A study conducted by Laurel Hartmann specifically found that multicultural picture books “helped encourage the students to search for similarities between their own lives and the lives of members of diverse cultures around the world.” Thus, representative books may be just as important for white children as for children of color.

In recent years, more and more attention has been brought to this issue. In 2014, an online campaign under the hashtag #WeNeedDiverseBooks turned into a nonprofit organization that advocates for diversity in children’s literature. Independent publishers such as Lee & Low Books, ArtePublico Press’ Piñata Imprint, and Just Us Books have introduced more diverse characters into print. It is up to us to support these efforts to ensure that children of color have a chance to see themselves and be seen, to remember that their stories are just as real, valid and deserving. It is up to us to buy diverse books from local bookstores, contact school libraries to ask for more inclusive selections, and promote minority writers who are representing their communities.

And as a young minority writer myself, I am learning to find my voice and to speak out for all those who have lost their own. In doing so, I hope that the writers of the next generation will never learn to silence their heritage as I did.

Works Cited

Hartmann, Laurel K. “Using Multicultural Literature in the Classroom to Encourage Tolerance and Respect.” MS Thesis. Rowan University, 2011.

Low, Jason. “Where is the Diversity in Publishing? The 2015 Diversity Baseline Survey Results.” Lee & Low Books. 26 Jan. 2016.

Myers, Christopher. “The Apartheid of Children’s Literature.” The New York Times. 15 Mar. 2014.

Perez, Domino Renee. “Characters in Children’s Books Are Almost Always White, and It’s a Big Problem.” The Washington Post. 8 Dec. 2014.

Slater, Dashka. “The Uncomfortable Truth About Children’s Books.” Mother Jones. 10 Sep. 2016.

________

“Making Room for All Chinese in China’s Capital”
Yuxin Long, age 17

“In one night my livelihood was destroyed, as if I’d been attacked by bandits, but this was done by the government saying they care for us,” said Zhang Guixin, a vegetable stall owner originally from Henan province, after his business in Beijing was demolished. Beijing’s municipal government is waging a targeted, unethical and destructive campaign against migrant communities.

On November 18, 2017, a fire killed 19 people in a blue-collar apartment, prompting China’s capital to initiate a safety blitz against “illegal structures” on its outskirts, seeking to “improve safety,” according to government officials. Consequently, thousands of migrants living in these low-rent areas were forced to move or leave Beijing entirely with as little as one day’s notice, as their homes and business were destroyed. These mass evictions trample on the human rights of Chinese citizens and were met with unusual public backlash. Over 100 Chinese intellectuals authored an open letter condemning the governmental actions and demanding an immediate termination of the campaign, compensation to the evicted, and increased awareness of the migrants’ rights.

Furthermore, the illegitimate displacements pose a serious threat to the psychological health of victims and deprive migrant children of equal access to education. At Yingbo, a private kindergarten in suburban Beijing, dozens of security officers forcibly evacuated students, causing significant trauma. Geoffrey Crothall, the director of China Labour Bulletin, explains that this coldblooded operation “reinforced [evictees’] feelings of resentment and social exclusion.”

In fact, this campaign fits into China’s ongoing efforts to shrink Beijing’s population. Home to approximately 21.7 million residents (including 8 million migrants), the city suffers from a “metropolitan disease” and desperately needs a reduction in size. Last year, the level of annual per capita water resources was one-eightieth of the world average. In 2014, Beijing had the country’s highest rates of congestion and per capita commuting time. In an attempt to transform the overcrowded capital into an upscale metropolis, Beijing aims to cap its population at 23 million by 2020.

However, diluting the population of Beijing by evicting migrant workers has an acutely negative impact on the city. A Forbes study shows that the total GDP of Chinese cities is proportional to its migrant population. As Beijing’s population ages, migrants are a vital bulwark against failing social and economic institutions. Li Tie, the president of the China City Development Center, states, “Beijing cannot survive without them.”

Policymakers must consider patterns of urban ecology when reforming Beijing. The government should allow more time for migrant families to move between houses, jobs and schools, as necessary. To empower this vital community, new employment opportunities and relocation compensation should be offered. As Beijing strives to transform into a world-class capital, it must stop treating migrants like second-class citizens.

Works Cited

“Beijing’s Total Water Consumption Will Be Less Than 4 Billion This Year.” The Beijing News, 18 May 2017.

Buckley, Chris. “Why Part of Beijing Looks Like a Devastated War Zone.” The New York Times. 30 Nov. 2017.

Hernandez, Javier and Zhao, Iris. “One Target in Beijing’s Migrant Crackdown: Schoolchildren.” The New York Times. 24 Dec. 2017.

“Li Tie: Beijing Cannot Survive without the Migrants.” Sina Finance. 29 Nov. 2017.

Ma, Beibei “Beijing Municipal Commission of Development and Reform Analyzes Four Major Causes of the ‘Metropolitan Disease’ of Beijing.” China Youth Online. 23 Jan. 2016.

“Notice on Special Operations for Security Hazard.” Beijing Municipal Work Safety Committee, 20 Nov. 2017.

________

“Sex Ed and Abortion in America: Hypocrisy at its Finest”
Sylvia Hollander, age 17

Abortion is one of the most polarizing topics in the United States. For many on both sides, you’re either with them or against them, and unwilling to compromise. But what if there was a way to reduce abortion rates without blocking women from getting them? The answer is simple: better sex education.

For the past few decades there has been a large push to end the abstinence-only sex education implemented by many schools across the U.S. Several studies have found that an abstinence-only education does not work, as it is becoming increasingly unlikely to expect young people to remain abstinent until they are married, considering the increasing age of marriage. There has also been significant evidence that cohesive sex ed classes decrease the chances of unplanned pregnancy and abortion. In theory, abstinence is an idealistic solution, but it has been shown time and time again to be unsuccessful in practice.

One program that has actually shown positive results is the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program, which is evidence-based and funds a wide variety of organizations working to prevent teen pregnancy. In the past decade the CDC has reported the average teenage birthrate has dropped more than 40 percent, due to the help of the TPP and similar programs.

After defunding the planned parenthood budget and closing 81 clinics in Texas, teen abortion rates were found to have risen a significant amount. Meanwhile, Colorado offered free birth control, and teen abortions decreased by 42 percent in just 4 years. This is just one example of how it has been shown that limiting access to family planning services such as planned parenthood actually drives up the need for abortions, while providing contraception and informing people of how to be safe drives the need for abortion down. Why is it then that Republican lawmakers continue to slash funding for these organizations?

It would be logical to assume that an administration with a pro-life agenda would be eager to decrease abortions in any way they could, however, this seems to not be the case. Regardless of its proven benefits, the Trump administration canceled funding for 81 projects in the TPP program, while increasing funds for abstinence programs. The fact that the government is ignoring fact-based evidence under the guise of being “pro-life” is appalling. It has been shown that quality sex education is highly beneficial, and if the government truly wants to stop abortions from happening, this is the way to do it. Until then, we need to call them out for their blatant hypocrisy and urge legislators to pay attention to the facts, protect the rights of its citizens and remind others to stay informed.

Works Cited

Baker, Aspen. “A Better Way to Talk about Abortion.” TED: Ideas Worth Spreading, May 2015.

Bassett, Laura. “Teen Abortions Surged In Texas After Republicans Defunded Planned Parenthood.” The Huffington Post, 12 July 2017.

Bennet, James. “Opinion | The Gathering Threat to Abortion Rights.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 31 Jan. 2018.

Bump, Philip. “Analysis | How America Feels about Abortion.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 24 April 2017.

Carroll, Aaron E. “Sex Education Based on Abstinence? There’s a Real Absence of Evidence.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 22 Aug. 2017.

Forrester, Christina. “The Truth About Christianity And Abortion.” The Huffington Post. 19 April 2017.

German Lopez. “Colorado Offered Free Birth Control — and Teen Abortions Fell by 42 Percent.” Vox, Vox, 7 July 2014.

“Reproductive Health.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 16 Nov. 2017.

“Reproductive Health: Teen Pregnancy.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 9 May 2017.

Santelli, John. “Analysis | Abstinence-Only Education Doesn’t Work. We’re Still Funding It.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 21 Aug. 2017.

________

“The Future of the #MeToo Movement Through the Eyes of a 17 Year Old Boy”
Charles Gstalder, age 17

I’m Charlie, I’m 17, and I attend an all-male prep school. Discussions with my peers in the wake of the #MeToo movement have yielded shared feelings of disgust toward these abusers, and horror that we too may be part of the problem. This fear stems not from acknowledgment that we have facilitated harassment, but rather from the uncertainty of what constitutes reprehensible behavior. Our shared worry was not spurred by Harvey Weinstein or Matt Lauer ..., but instead from claims brought against Aziz Ansari. The allegations against Mr. Ansari appeared to be a landmark event, for instead of universally turning favor against him, they divided the community. Some notable feminists, including Bari Weiss, even began to back Ansari. Following the release of the allegations Weiss published an article in The New York Times in which she calls for women to be more vocal about their wishes, and states that lumping Ansari in with other accused abusers “trivializes what the #MeToo movement first stood for.” This sentiment was shared by my peers. Following the publication of the original exposé, my morning commute was dominated by debates over whether what Ansari did was wrong, and whether his accuser went too far. The fact that such discussions occurred is evidence of a systematic problem across the younger generations; we are unsure what exactly constitutes inappropriate sexual behavior.

The Economist recently published the results of a survey in which participants were asked whether they felt certain actions constituted sexual harassment. The findings were divided by nation, age and gender. The study concluded that in the U.S. there exists both a generational and gender gap. Older generations were shown to be less likely than younger generations to view actions such as commenting on attractiveness to be sexual harassment. Similarly, women were far more likely to view actions as harassment than their male counterparts. The divide demonstrated by the study coupled with the discourse surrounding Ansari paint a picture of a society confused, unsure and anxious. The only viable solution to such sentiments is further education.

I propose redefining sexual harassment and restructuring the way young men are taught about relationships. I believe that boys should be taught from a young age what is and is not acceptable, similarly to how young children are taught the difference between a “good touch” and a “bad touch.” While I understand my claims may be viewed as shortsighted or worse, defensive of predators, my intent is the opposite. We young men know we are the problem and that until we change these issues will still occur. We want to be a part of the solution and long for education.

Works Cited

“Over-Friendly, or Sexual Harassment? It Depends Partly on Whom You Ask.” The Economist, The Economist Newspaper, 17 Nov. 2017.

Weiss, Bari. “Aziz Ansari Is Guilty. Of Not Being a Mind Reader.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 15 Jan. 2018.

________

“The Net Neutrality Repeal: An Attack on Free Expression and Communication”
Ainsley Tia Lim, age 15

As a teenager living in the high-tech world of Generation Z, I rely a lot on the messy, manic, but magical invention we call the internet. It’s easy, often helpful, and most importantly: free.

But soon, everything about that is going to change.

On December 14, 2017, the Federal Commissions Committee (FCC) voted to repeal 2015’s net neutrality rules, officially called Title II. These rules required internet service providers (ISPs) to give equal access to all content online without charging its consumers for higher quality, nor special treatment to certain websites. This repeal may not change the web drastically, but it will take the entire internet as we know it and chuck it down the drain.

The ringleader behind the repeal, FCC chairman Ajit Pai, claimed last April that Title II “abandon[s] successful policies solely because of hypothetical harms and hysterical prophecies of doom.” But let’s travel to net-neutrality-free countries like Portugal, where these hypothetical harms are already a reality. Portugal’s wireless carrier, Meo, splits internet access into packages: a package where customers pay for traditional data, plus monthly paying packages for any other sites and apps they use — entertainment, shopping, communication. For instance, more data for both messaging apps and social networks cost €4.99 [$5.86] a month each. This means you could be paying up to $140.64 USD a year for both packages. Imagine losing almost $150 a year, just for your favorite messaging and social media sites.

But wait, there’s more! With no net neutrality, an ISP could block any access to an app unless the customer or the app company pays up. ISPs who view a site as a competitor, or even disagree with their political views, can be censored.

And if Portugal can do that, what’s stopping America from doing the same? Without the safety blanket of net neutrality, what’s stopping them from silencing social movements like Black Lives Matter? Suppressing resources from communities that need them most like women, the LGBT+ and immigrants? It doesn’t just hurt small businesses trying to expand, students living in poverty, or even long-distance relationships relying on the internet to communicate. It blocks any of our voices from being heard.

Net neutrality is hanging by a thread, but there’s still a small flicker of hope in the midst of the internet’s impending doomsday. Recently, congressional Democrats introduced a resolution of disapproval to counter the FCC’s repeal. Both the House and Senate must pass it in under 60 days.

To my fellow Gen Z kids, and those older too — the clock is ticking. It’s time to let these people know we want to save our messy, manic and magical internet.

Works Cited

Collins, Keith. “Why Net Neutrality Was Repealed and How It Affects You.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 14 Dec. 2017. Accessed 27 Feb. 2018.

Huffman, Mark. “Congressional Democrats Launch Effort to Restore Net Neutrality.” ConsumerAffairs, ConsumerAffairs, 28 Feb. 2018. Accessed 27 Feb. 2018.

Pai, Ajit. “The Future of Internet Freedom.” 26 April 2017, Washington, D.C., The Newseum.

Price, Rob. “Portugal Hints at What the American Internet Could Eventually Look like without Net Neutrality.” Business Insider, Business Insider, 14 Dec. 2017. Accessed 27 Feb. 2018.

________

“The Price of Preserving Patriarchy in India”
Uma Bhat, age 15

The price of a husband in rural India is high: a mother’s family heirlooms, a father’s money — but worst of all, a young girl’s youth, innocence and future. In a world where freedom is a luxury, underaged brides watch their aspirations die as they are sold into patriarchal family structures that display the very roots of male dominance. The underage marriage of Indian women must be eradicated in order to protect the interests of women worldwide.

According to UNICEF’s Child Marriage Statistics, an estimated 47 percent of girls in India continue to be involuntarily married before the age of eighteen — leaving them little time to grow and develop their social footing. Misogyny is inevitable for several of these girls — many of their fathers marry them off in an attempt to increase food rations and investments in men, who are regarded as more valuable in rural Indian societies. Unfortunately, girls are simply seen as a “liability and a burden,” according to Dinesh Shur, a village pastor, in a CBN article detailing child marriage in India.

As such, futures remain desolate for child brides in rural India. Their educational careers are left on an indefinite hold as they bear children, often by the time they reach puberty. Instead, they spend their time doing dreary chores for their husband’s families. “After marriage, what is my work now? Washing dishes, cleaning the floor, washing clothes and cooking,” states Seema, in an article written by Nel Hedayat that details the life of a child bride. With no education, no work experience and no one to turn to, child brides are left dependent on any support offered by their in-laws.

What families don’t realize is that by allowing girls to obtain an education rather than being forced into domestic labor could lead to the socioeconomic advancement of India as this enables potential members of the workforce. Additionally, jobs will provide women with financial security and a voice in a male-dominated society. The New York Times article “Why Aren’t India’s Women Working?” states: “Working, and the control of assets it allows, lowers rates of domestic violence and increases women’s decision-making in the household. And an economy where all the most able citizens can enter the labor force is more efficient and grows faster.”

After being upheld for thousands of years, child marriage may seem hard to stop; but it is all of our duties to help these girls through supporting and donating to educational, self-defense and women’s rights groups in India. We must strive to make it possible that no young woman will ever have to see a day when a price tag is set upon her self worth and freedom again.

Works Cited

Hedayat, Nel. “What Is It like to Be a Child Bride?” BBC News, BBC, 4 Oct. 2011.

Pande, Rohini, and Charity Troyer Moore. “Why Aren’t India’s Women Working?” The New York Times, The New York Times, 23 Aug. 2015.

Thomas, George. “India’s Innocent: Secret Weddings of Child Brides.” CBN.com — The Christian Broadcasting Network, 26 March 2017.

“UNICEF Child Marriage Statistics.” UNICEF.

________

“The Trouble With Teen Movies”
Olivia Newman, age 18

It’s a Saturday evening. You’re flipping through the television channels when you stumble upon the movie “She’s All That.” Or “Another Cinderella Story.” Or “Freaky Friday.” While each may have different characters, plot lines and messages, they are all classified as teen movies, which means they share one common feature: bullying.

The bullying that occurs in these films is usually of a specific type: The football player and his buddies see the nerd with his calculator in the hallway and shove him into a locker. The cheerleaders fill the chubby girl’s locker with soda so that when she opens it, she gets drenched. The huge bodybuilder of a senior beats up the scrawny freshman who accidentally bumped his backpack.

I don’t know if times have changed or movie writers have just forgotten what it felt like to be in high school, but in my four years of being a student, bullying has rarely been carried out in this manner. More often, it happens in whispers, through subtly closed off circles, through feigned compliments that turn into mocking giggles as soon as backs are turned. It happens over the internet: in group chats that exclude one specific person, in comments of “GORGEOUS!” under an Instagram post that the commenters definitely do not think is gorgeous. This cyberbullying is particularly prevalent in the lives of current teenagers, who have almost unlimited access to social media, and it “can have such a negative impact … [and] can do great harm to a whole peer group, or to school culture more generally.” These more subtle types of harassment seem to be more prominent in a high school setting than physical attacks, and hurt much more.

Most teen movies fail to capture this kind of bullying accurately, and in this way contribute to an unrealistic view of high school life. Bullying can have very strong effects on teenagers, “causing depression and anxiety … disrupting [teenagers’] sleep, [and] causing gastrointestinal issues and headaches.” If movies continue to portray bullying in the wrong way, not only may these symptoms be increased as teenagers begin to feel that their own experiences are invalid, but people will not be able to recognize true bullying behaviors. Kids are taught constantly in school not to be a bystander, but even the most noble of students cannot be expected to intervene when they don’t realize that someone is being bullied. Teen movie writers need to take on the responsibility that comes with targeting the adolescent demographic, and complete research and focus groups to make sure that they are portraying one of the most common experiences in teenage life accurately. This, if nothing else, they owe to their viewers.

Works Cited

Klass, Perri. “In the Fight Against Bullying, a Glimmer of Hope.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 22 Dec. 2017.

Strickland, Ashley. “Bullying Is a ‘Serious Public Health Problem,’ Experts Say.” CNN, CNN, 21 June 2017.

_________

“Trivializing Mental Illness Makes Me Depressed”
Lola Byers-Ogle, age 15

“I swear, I’m so OCD,” the girl says after neatly placing a bundle of colored pencils into a decorated pouch. I offer an awkward laugh, but all I can think about is my friend, who’s OCD keeps him from going to school and hanging out with friends, or the article I read that says people with OCD are 10 times more likely than people without to commit suicide. How many times have you heard similar off-handed comments? “This class makes me depressed.” “He’s so psycho.” Today, a girl described the weather as “bipolar.” These comments are thrown around frequently without any thought to the harm they might be doing. Even I’ve done it. Most of the time there’s no malice, but comments like these, which trivialize serious illnesses, feed a society that stigmatizes the mentally ill, isolating them and making it impossible for them to live fulfilling lives.

Using mental illnesses like descriptive adjectives and not serious disorders is trivializing, and contributes to the stigmatization of those afflicted. NAMI (National Alliance on Mental Illness) estimates that 1 in 5 Americans suffers from a mental illness, suicide is the 10th leading cause of death in the U.S. — claiming well over 41,000 lives a year. In simpler words, mental illness is a big deal; such a big deal the World Health Organization sites depression — just one of many mental illnesses — as the leading cause of disability. So why do we act like they’re not by using them as descriptors or for cheap laughs?

Mental illness stigma leads to misunderstandings about the conditions and can create barriers to accessing treatment. In the New York Times piece “Alone With My Husband’s Secret,” Carolyn Ali writes of her husband’s struggle with depression. Even after telling his wife, he asked to keep his condition a secret from his family members because of fear of their reaction. Ali says the experience also took a tremendous toll on her. She wonders why these surprisingly common experiences are kept secret and why the stigma exists. This is just one story, but it underscores what experts say about stigma being a major cause of under-treatment.

Although there are many things that lead to the stigmatization of mental illness, and many reasons for treatment barriers, the trivializing of these conditions through jokes and minimization of the severity of the conditions is contributing to the exacerbation of the problem. It can be easily addressed through increased understanding of the words we use to describe experiences and ourselves. Recognizing how serious these disorders are and choosing not to use them as merely descriptors for an exaggerated situation is one small step to a society where stigma won’t prevent those from getting the treatment that they need.

Works Cited

Ali, Carolyn. “Alone With My Husband’s Secret.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 1 Feb. 2018.

Hawkes, Nigel. “Stigma Is Leading to under-Treatment of Mental Health Conditions, Says Leading Psychiatrist.” The BMJ, British Medical Journal Publishing Group, 21 April 2016.

“Mental Health By The Numbers.” NAMI: National Alliance on Mental Illness, 12 March 2018.

“Patients with OCD Are 10 Times More Likely to Commit Suicide.” ScienceDaily, ScienceDaily, 19 July 2016.

Wilkerson, Abby L. “Should I Tell My Students I Have Depression?” The New York Times, The New York Times, 14 Dec. 2016.

_______

“Turning The Page To A New Era”
Casey Webb, age 16

As R. David Lankes once said, “Bad libraries build collections, good libraries build services, and great libraries build communities.” In an age where access to the internet is becoming more and more prevalent in people’s lives, some argue that libraries are more of a financial burden than a benefit to society. However, libraries are more than an obsolete source of information. They are places of community and opportunity still important to this day, and thus should not be discarded but adapted for modern purposes.

According to the Editorial Board from The New York Times, in 2015 more people visited New York’s libraries than all the baseball stadiums, sports arenas, city-owned museums, gardens and zoos combined. This could be due to the fact that “virtually all libraries provide free access to the internet [and] WiFi” as reported by the American Library Association. For some, libraries are even a safe haven. One woman called Sandra recalled, “[Libraries were] a space to feel safe. During my high school years of hormone induced mental imbalance, I knew that I could depend on my local library.” The continued use of libraries and the invaluable services they offer, such as technology training and workshops, proves the necessity of libraries in the modern world.

Even more than a library’s usefulness for information and support, they also provide a place for the city’s community to gather. The American Library Association found that libraries have been used for book clubs, classes, forums and more. From study groups to citywide events, libraries are the ideal location for people to come together. And in an age where people’s lives are becoming increasingly digitized and secluded, community is all the more important. As a high school student who utilizes the library at least once a week, I can sincerely say that I have built friendships between those bookshelves.

Some people may argue that libraries still cling to archaic methods, which extremely diminishes their useful potential. And some libraries are indeed losing their effectiveness by sticking with old routines as the world shifts to a digital face. But many libraries have already adapted wonderfully to the changes. From starting online ebook libraries to integrating new software into their systems, these libraries prove that the answer is not to shut down libraries, but to help them change.

Libraries are invaluable for their services, support and the opportunities they offer for the community. By helping them to adapt to current technology and modern techniques, we can ensure that libraries will continue to benefit their cities. So support your local library and take advantage of its services. Maybe you’ll learn something new, or make an unexpected friend. And who knows? You may even read a book while you’re there.

Works Cited

“ALA Library Fact Sheet 6.” American Library Association.

The Editorial Board. “New York City’s Libraries Need Money.” The New York Times. May 5, 2015.

Luis Herrera, Luis. “Libraries Are More Relevant Than Ever.” The New York Times. Dec. 27, 2012.

“New National Poll Shows Library Card Registration Reaches Historic High.” American Library Association. Sept. 23, 2008.

“Sandra From Houston, Texas.” ilovelibraries.com.

________

“Under Black Cloaks”
Bincheng Mao, age 16

Can you imagine a life in which you are merely the property of someone else? Unfortunately, this is exactly the life of women in Saudi Arabia, where the treatment of women restricts their fundamental human rights.

During my two years living in Dubai and Qatar, I went to Saudi Arabia three times with my father where I witnessed their discriminatory policies. In a mall in Riyadh, I was shocked to see a woman awkwardly eating noodles without taking off the veil of her niqab. She used a fork to lift the noodles toward the eye-opening, and slightly pulled the lower part away from her face, then pointed the fork down so the noodles would slide onto the inside of the veil without revealing her face.

As it turns out, the Saudi government strictly prohibits women in public from ever taking off their niqabs. Saudi Arabia claims these restrictions are to ensure “women’s modesty” commanded by Allah. Yet, not only are these restrictions undignifying, the Quran calls for “both men and women ‘to cover and be modest.’” The fact that the Saudi government only restrict women reveals a double standard.

However demeaning the requirement of wearing a niqab in public might be, it is only one symptom of a system that restricts women’s fundamental rights. According to Human Rights Watch, Saudi females’ lives are controlled by male guardians from birth to death due to its unique guardianship system. As hundreds of Saudi females have attested, this is a most inhuman policy as the male guardian decides whether “his” woman can see a doctor or even leave prison. Presumably, Saudi leadership, composed entirely of men, believes that women are unable to make the types of decisions that men make. Over time, the system gradually changes Saudi women’s mind-sets, reducing them to men’s property, even in their hearts. Rania, a 34-year-old Saudi woman, said, “We are entrusted with raising the next generation but you can’t trust us with ourselves. It doesn’t make any sense.”

While the Saudi government argues that these policies are protecting women, they have nothing to do with protection and everything to do with dehumanization. However, President Trump has proposed multiple economic collaborations with Saudi Arabia, and during his recent meeting with Prince Salman, “over 20 people were at the table, yet none were women.” This symbolic irony along with other policies reveal the U.S. government’s unwillingness to address this gender disparity.

It is time for our free nation to push for urgently-needed reforms by placing conditions of ending human rights violations to U.S.-Saudi trade deals. Instead of ignoring these human rights abuses, the United States of America should show the world that abuses are not tolerated.

Works Cited

“Boxed In: Women and Saudi Arabia’s Male Guardianship System.” Human Rights Watch, 6 June 2017.

Cochrane, Emily. “Over 20 People Were at the Table When Trump Met the Saudis. None Were Women.” The New York Times, 21 Mar. 2018.

Mythili Sampathkumar. “Nine Members of the UN Human Rights Council Accused of Violating Human Rights.” The Independent, 21 Sept. 2017.

“The United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner Annual Report.” OHCHR, 7 Mar. 2017.

Vyver, James. “Explained: Why Muslim Women Wear a Burka, Niqab or Hijab.” ABC News, 17 Aug. 2017.

________

“Vice for Vice”
Eugene Hong, age 15

Tobacco was, at one point, an American cultural cornerstone, as domestic as apple pie. That is, well, tobacco in the form of cigarettes. Now, because of vape pens — technology that delivers nicotine through heated oils — American youth are experiencing the rapid rebranding of our favorite vice. While vape companies such as Juul are capitalizing on the image of a sleeker, less carcinogenic way of getting buzzed, vaping is simply a method of concealing nicotine use, without eliminating any of its physiological consequences. The discreet nature of vaping and the game of cat and mouse that it inspires between teachers and students is prompting a psychological shift among youth that enables drug consumption, while masquerading as doing the opposite.

Joe Camel, the icon of tobacco conglomerate R.J. Reynolds, was executed in 1997, after nearly a decade of representing the Camel brand of cigarettes. The reasoning behind the federal government’s decision to outlaw the swaggering camel was that he made smoking seem carefree and enticing to youth. Currently we are experiencing a more subtle version of the Joe Camel, in which vape pens such as Juul are reclaiming fun, risqué smoking. Not only do vapers have a nearly endless array of flavors to choose from, they also have apparatus that can disappear in a closed fist, according to a review of the Juul pen by NPR, in which owning a Juul is like a badge of honor. “Y’all this kid came into my 7th period to get a juul and we all started laughing when he left so the teacher was really confused,” according to @hyphyybriannaa, quoted in the study.

A recent Times report on vaping attributes vaping partially to a decline in teenage cigarette smoking. While vaping is indeed helping teens move away from more carcinogenic forms of consuming nicotine, it also has the detrimental effect of making drug use seem more commonplace, cosmetic and convenient. After all, some brands of vaporizer can be charged in a laptop USB port, and concealed all day for undetectable puffing. Vaping might in fact just be hiding the harmful effect of drugs through a sleek image. In the National Institute on Drug Abuse study cited in the Times report, 51.8 percent of teens surveyed claimed that the substance inside vaporizers was “just liquid.”

Does better technology make drug use permissive? No, but it certainly makes it easier. Vape pens are likely going to be short-lived in schools, which will make them only more appealing to youth. In order to truly lessen drug use, government and schools have to go after image, not just drugs themselves.

Works Cited

Chen, Angus. “Teenagers Embrace JUUL, Saying It’s Discreet Enough To Vape In Class.” NPR. 4 December 2017.

Elliot, Stuart. “Joe Camel, a Giant in Tobacco Marketing, Is Dead at 23.” The New York Times. 11 July 1997.

Hoffman, Jan. “Marijuana and Vaping Are More Popular Than Cigarettes Among Teenagers.” The New York Times. 14 December 2017.

________

“Want to End the Shortage of Priests? Ordain Women”
Elizabeth Meisenzahl, age 16

Since 1970, the global Catholic population has nearly doubled. At the same time, 5,000 fewer priests are active in the Church, creating a worldwide priest shortage in which more than 20 percent of parishes lack a resident priest. To address this crisis, the Catholic Church should end the ban on female ordination.

Although most supporters of a male-only clergy cite Church tradition, ordaining women only chafes against modern constraints. In fact, the Church didn’t change their rules on ordination in this respect until the 11th century. To be clear, this means women served as priests, deaconesses and even bishops for nearly 1000 years. In the early Middle Ages, the changing Church not only closed these roles to men, but attempted to change contemporary and ancient records to obscure that women ever served in these roles, a campaign that has been remarkably successful through modern times.

If tradition is not enough proof, then perhaps Scripture itself provides a better basis. In Paul’s letter to the Romans, he refers to “our sister Phoebe, a deacon” (Rom 16:1). Further, his letter to the Galatians states that “In Christ there is no Jew or Greek, slave or citizen, male or female. All are one in Christ Jesus” (Gal 3:28). Even the Gospels show the importance of women to Jesus’s ministry. Mary, the mother of Jesus, is widely accepted as the first disciple, and the first Apostles, or witnesses to the Resurrection, are all women, including Mary Magdalene, who reveals the news to the initially disbelieving male disciples. When it comes to celebrating the Resurrection, the purpose of a Catholic Mass, Scripture proves women are equally qualified to do so.

If there ever was a time to expand the priesthood, it is now. The Francis Effect has expanded the laity in new ways, welcoming lapsed Catholics disillusioned by social positions of the Church and the sexual abuse scandal, as well as LGBT Catholics. The energy of young people on the side of the Francis Effect can and should be harnessed by a movement to allow women to fulfill their vocation to the priesthood.

However, proponents of ordaining women should acknowledge the difficulty of any movement in an institution as reluctant to change as the Church. Some dioceses in the United States don’t even allow girls to altar serve, and Pope Francis, the face of the inclusive Church movement, has made clear his opposition to ordaining women. Still, if Church leaders want to recruit more priests to end the shortage, they would be wise to open the position to the other half of the population.

Works Cited

Egan, Timothy. “A Francis Effect for a Broken System.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 24 Sept. 2015.

“Frequently Requested Church Statistics.” CARA, Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate, 2017.

Macy, Gary. “The Hidden History of Women’s Ordination: Female Clergy in the Medieval West.” Oxford University Press, 2008.

_________

“Why We Must Act on #MeToo”
Bhargavi Garimella, age 17

In 1997, Tarana Burke was working at a youth camp when a 13-year-old girl told Ms. Burke that her stepfather had been sexually abusing her. Tarana was left speechless — what could she tell the girl, and hundreds of others in her position, that would convey that she understood and felt their pain? Ten years after that conversation, Ms. Burke finally found what she needed to say: me too.

As a survivor of child sexual assault, I have been waiting for these two words for a very long time — seeing the #MeToo movement explode empowered me to share my experiences with others after years of being silent. The #MeToo movement brought me to a place in which I felt that I could openly discuss my experience without judgment or victim blaming. Saying #MeToo is a statement of understanding like no other. But what must remain fundamental is that the movement is about more than awareness and empathy. It is also about changes to laws and policies that perpetuate the imbalance of power between men and women. It is about challenging social norms and a culture in which the victim is instinctively blamed for the crime.

This issue requires us, as a society, to examine ourselves and our culture that allows and encourages this type of behavior. At some point, we must ask ourselves if the “problem” of sexual assault is an unintended consequence or the purposeful product of a system designed to systematically isolate, silence and marginalize those with lesser power. A report from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission found that 75 percent of workplace harassment incidents go unreported — for those who did speak out, 75 percent faced retaliation from their employer. A matter of such magnitude cannot be mended on a case-by-case basis. Comprehensively fixing this issue starts with providing women effective reporting options beyond filing a complaint with HR or talking to their managers — options that often have only the company’s best interest at heart — and giving women decision-making roles in which they have the same chance for success as men.

Although the #MeToo movement is not exempt from criticism, those who call it as a “moral panic” are misdiagnosing it. What #MeToo is a social movement that finally holds powerful men accountable for their actions; as author David Perry writes, #MeToo is not an act of persecution, but rather a rebellion against the powers that persecute. In order for our culture to change and in order for future generations to grow up in an equitable world, we must build on #MeToo as a vehicle for reform in our courts, workplaces and schools. It is a wake-up call and an opportunity to inspire genuine change — an opportunity that we cannot waste.

Works Cited

Beck, Richard. “#MeToo Is Not a Witch Hunt.” Vox. 11 Jan. 2018.

Bennett, Jessica. “The #MeToo Moment: No Longer Complicit.” The New York Times. 7 Dec. 2017.

Campbell, Alexia Fernandez. “How the Legal System Fails Victims of Sexual Harassment.” Vox. 30 March 2018.

Garcia, Sandra. “The Woman Who Created #MeToo Long Before the Hashtag.” The New York Times. 20 Oct. 2017.

Golshan, Tara. “Study Finds 75 Percent of Workplace Harassment Victims Experienced Retaliation When They Spoke Up.” Vox. 15 Oct. 2017.

Gorman, Michele. “1 in 4 Women Experienced Sexual Assault in College, Survey Finds.” Newsweek. 21 Sept. 2015.

Guerra, Cristela. “Where’d the ‘Me Too’ Initiative Really Come From? Activist Tarana Burke, Long Before Hashtags.” The Boston Globe. 17 Oct. 2017.

Klein, Ezra. “When a Culture Produces This Much Sexual Assault, It’s Not an Accident.” Vox. 23 Oct. 2017.

North, Anna. “Want to Stop Sexual Harassment? Start Helping Women.” Vox. 9 Nov. 2017.

Perry, David. “No, #MeToo Is Not a Witch Hunt.” Pacific Standard Magazine. 9 Jan. 2018.

今年，我们收到了创纪录的 9，275 篇论文——或者换句话说，近 400 万字——来自世界各地学生，以回应我们的第五届年度社论大赛，因此选择九名获奖者、26 名亚军和 38 名荣誉奖并非易事。

参与者讨论了当时的重大问题，如枪支管制，气候变化和#MeToo，但他们也谈到了小众话题，例如对女牧师的需求或将“真实犯罪”视为娱乐所固有的危险。许多学生写下了他们个人遇到的问题，比如在上学期间坐得太久，在家庭感恩节聚餐上讨论政治，或者参与公民不服从，以至于梭罗会“在他的坟墓里打滚”。

为了在像这场比赛这样受欢迎的比赛中得到认可，一篇社论需要从第一段开始吸引我们的注意力，并将其保持到最后。论点必须合理，证据确凿，反驳必须解决。这件作品还必须有声音和个性，而不仅仅是对一个问题的基本利弊的总结。

最低要求也很重要。进入第二轮、第三轮和第四轮的论文必须遵守规则，例如，同时列出《泰晤士报》和非《泰晤士报》来源。至少有一个精彩的条目必须从考虑中删除，因为“引用的作品”包括五篇《纽约时报》文章，但没有一篇来自其他任何地方。

从 5 月 24 日开始，我们将在每个上学日发布前九名作文之一的帖子，我们希望您在社交媒体上传播，挂在学校公告板上，甚至可能用作明年比赛的“导师文本”。之后，我们将在一个帖子中一起发布所有亚军。您可以在本专栏中找到它们。

而且，正如我们去年所做的那样，我们正在发布这份名单，列出了进入第三轮评审的 133 名决赛入围者 （PDF），其中包括 59 篇没有完全进入获胜者圈子的社论。

Who’s to blame for ballooning credit card debt and student loans? The public education system, perhaps. American high school students can recite Shakespeare’s sonnets, derive advanced calculus theorems, and explain the Chinese spheres of influence. Yet these same students know little to nothing about economics and personal finance. They know of income tax only as the fifth square on the Monopoly board.

Currently, only five states — Alabama, Missouri, Tennessee, Utah and Virginia — require personal finance courses for high school students. The results speak for themselves: four of these states rank in the top 20 of best average credit card debt. This is a logical correlation. Learning about debt will help someone stay out of it. Yet economists continually blame consumerism and tactics of credit card companies rather than addressing the cause: a fundamental void in our education system.

When students graduate high school, they are thrust into adulthood, whether they join the work force or pursue higher education. They assume immense financial responsibilities almost immediately. How can the government expect 19-year-olds to complete tax forms if they’ve never learned about them in school? Young adults who lack basic knowledge of economics and personal finance are vulnerable to fraud, debt, commercialism and worse.

In the 2012 New York Times article “Back to Classroom for Skills not Taught in High School,” Matthew R. Warren discusses a personal finance course in the Bronx where students learn vital information not taught in their high schools. Warren quotes 22-year-old student Regina Rice, “I can’t manage my money … Yesterday, I bought two pairs of headphones, and I don’t even know why.”

Ideally, parents with lifelong experience would teach their children about personal finance. But, 61 percent of parents only discuss money when prompted by their children. The average American parent lacks the knowledge necessary to teach this information, as many of them live in severe debt themselves, including the 32 percent of U.S. households that carry credit card debt.

The solution? A required course — Personal Finance and the Modern Economy — taught to second-semester high school seniors. It’s vital that students learn basic information about taxes, insurance, mortgages, credit, loans, personal banking, consumerism and the stock market before they are forced to learn it the hard way.

Financial literacy should not be a privilege reserved for children of the Wall Street elite. It is a skill that must be taught, just as vital in today’s economy as reading, writing and arithmetic. So why do we keep treating it like an elective?

Works Cited

“Average Credit Card Debt in America: 2017 Facts & Figures.” ValuePenguin, ValuePenguin, 21 March 2018.

Desjardins, Jeff. “Chart: Are Today’s Students Prepared to Make Financial Decisions?” Visual Capitalist, 29 Sept. 2017.

“T. Rowe Price: Parents Are Likely To Pass Down Good And Bad Financial Habits To Their Kids.” T.Rowe Price, 23 March 2017.

Warren, Mathew R. “Financial Literacy Class Offers Skills Not Taught in School.” The New York Times, 27 Jan. 2012.

For the first time in sixty years, the two Koreas stood undivided. The Pyeongchang Olympics will be marked in history as a symbolic breakthrough for supposedly all Koreans bursting in patriotism. We even glorified it to the extent of shifting South Korea’s policies toward imminent reunification. But did one unified women’s hockey team and flag really alleviate the tensions in the Korean Peninsula? The sporting event may just be a red herring for what is truly happening behind the scenes.

Even with the romanticization of the Olympics, we should not let our guard down about Kim Jong-un’s ulterior motives. “The North may use the Games as a political propaganda opportunity to show that while they may be a nuclear power, they also want to have peace with their neighbors,” said Shin Beom-chul, an expert at Korea National Diplomatic Academy. It is patently obvious that the Winter Games in Pyeongchang were used merely as a “public image makeover” to gain political leverage while the status quo remains greatly unchanged. North Korea is not interested in diplomatically giving up its nuclear program or reunifying unless the conditions are favorable to Kim Jong-un and his regime.

Not only that, the Olympics did not revive the deteriorating relationship between the two countries and the increasingly obsolete concept of reunification. Being a Korean youth myself, I share the majority opinion that there is “more for [our] country to lose than to gain if the two Koreas become united.” Having grown up in an era demonizing North Korea under the conservative Saenuri Dang party, intimidated by the everyday prospect of nuclear war, and challenged by soaring unemployment rates in our country, we are skeptical of a unified Korea, let alone our capacity to accommodate its prodigious cost of $3 trillion.

Though talks of reconciliation have increased as seen in the changing language of the 2007 and 2000 inter-Korean summits, South Korea’s official policy treated it as the first step toward the final political scheme of reunification. But rather than treating reconciliation as a means to an end, what would treating it as the end do for lasting peace?

By eradicating the remnants of our symbolic dream of reunification, we can officially recognize North Korea as an autonomous country and diminish the necessity of its nuclear proliferation used as a deterrent for foreign invasion. Our adamant refusal to legitimize North Korea’s regime exacerbated its political insecurity to the brink of nuclear warfare.

South Korea should stop being fooled by the symbolic role the Olympics played and redirect its focus solely to reconciliation with a sovereign North Korea instead of clinging onto the abandoned dream of reunification.

Works Cited

Kim, Max. “The Korean Unification Flag Isn’t as Unifying as It Seems” The Atlantic, 9 Feb. 2018.

Lee, Cheoleon. “Gallup World Poll: Implications of Reunification of Two Koreas.” Gallup, 12 Oct. 2006.

Qin, Amy.“Protecting an Olympics Held in North Korea’s Nuclear Shadow.” The New York Times, 1 Feb. 2018.

Phillips, Tom. “Costly and Complicated – Why Many Koreans Can’t Face Reunification.” 9 Oct. 2015.

Revesz, Rachael. “North Korea Crisis: Re-unification Alone ‘Would Cost $3 trillion’ After War, Professor Says.” The Independent, 30 April 2017.

Sang-Hun, Choe. “North Korea to Send Olympic Athletes to South Korea, in Breakthrough” The New York Times, 8 Jan. 2018.

Real life acts of violence have long been masqueraded before the public eye, in modes ranging from crime pamphlets to investigative documentaries, but the true crime genre has only recently risen in prestige. Delving deeper into real tragedies and revealing them to the public has its benefits, such as re-evaluating botched or unjust criminal trials and allowing viewers to think critically. Unfortunately, these advantages are outweighed by the genre’s tendency to exploit suffering, lean toward a preconceived narrative, prioritize ratings over morality and manipulate public opinion.

Aside from the initial use of actual crimes as entertainment, victims and their families have no real way to opt out of media coverage, as public footage can be used without their consent. For the sake of the perfect murder story, tragedy is ruthlessly dissected in the limelight without considering those actually affected. Although the coverage of crimes often converts them to tales for public consumption, the prolonged suffering of these victims is gut-wrenchingly real, yet often forgotten by engrossed viewers.

Additionally, the true crime genre is inescapably prone to subjectivity. “If you start out with a presumption of [an individual’s] guilt, you read the documents one way, and another way if you presume his innocence,” according to Janet Malcolm, an acclaimed author. Producers often have their own theories prior to investigation, and thus consciously or unconsciously shape their entire narrative around proving themselves right. To support these preconceived notions, creators can even manipulate evidence by omitting, under analyzing or changing inconvenient yet crucial facts.

Furthermore, producers often sideline ethics in order to sensationalize the coverage of heinous crimes. To captivate viewers, the true crime genre sacrifices reality for dramatic flourishes. For example, the creators of “The Jinx” withheld their prime suspect’s confession from the authorities until the bombshell finale aired, thus suspending justice for theatrics. Apparently, the producers’ slavish commitment to ratings exceeded their moral obligation to condemn the man they are convinced is a serial killer.

Finally, despite its subjective and under-regulated nature, true crime media has a disproportionate influence over public opinion. Investigative documentaries, especially those that heavily imply a person’s guilt or innocence, can easily convince viewers of their conclusions. This inadequately informed consensus can have disastrous consequences, such as waves of hate mail directed at unfortunate individuals linked to a crime investigation.

The true crime genre has the potential to open minds and act as a public judicial review, but in order for it to successfully do so, it must abandon the sensationalisation of tragedy for entertainment’s sake. Otherwise, its inherent flaws overshadow any possible benefits. Additionally, viewers must remain conscious of what they consume and never accept subjective interpretations as indisputable fact.

Works Cited

Davey, Monica. “‘Making a Murderer’ Town’s Answer to Netflix Series: You Don’t Know.” The New York Times. 28 Jan. 2016. Accessed 18 March 2018.

Leszkiewicz, Anna. “From Serial to Making a Murderer: Can True Crime as Entertainment Ever Be Ethical?” New Statesman. 15 Jan. 2016. Accessed 18 March 2018.

Mahler, Jonathan. “Irresistible TV, but Durst Film Tests Ethics, Too.” The New York Times. 16 Mar. 2015. Accessed 18 March 2018.

Schulz, Kathryn. “Dead Certainty.” The New Yorker. 25 Jan. 2016. Accessed 18 March 2018.

Some tap pencils relentlessly against desks. Some remain completely unaware of their rapidly bouncing knees or shaking feet. Some stare into space, lost in whatever daydream that is playing out on the board in front of them, unable to see the math problems on it. Some turn to their phones for a source of interaction — a teacher’s worst nightmare.

Students are restless. And what do schools require them to do? Sit.

The recent implementation of block scheduling in about 30 percent of American high schools is intended to allow students more time to process information and be productive in class. However, productivity is difficult to measure when, throughout 90 minutes of sitting still, students become restless and disengage, hindering their opportunities to learn and wasting their teachers’ time. There could be a simple solution to this problem with multiple benefits: increased movement in the classroom.

Exercise enhances concentration, especially when repeated throughout the day. For many students, walking from one class to another is the only opportunity to move during the school day, and with a block schedule that varies from day to day, physical education class is not the answer.

A high school teacher found after following students for two days that sitting all day left her feeling lethargic and “desperate to move or stretch.” She also experienced difficulty paying attention due to prolonged inactivity, claiming she struggled to keep her “mind and body from slipping into oblivion after so many hours of sitting passively.” Similar results were found by the Institute of Medicine; children who are regularly active “show greater attention, have faster cognitive processing speed and perform better on standardized academic tests than children who are less active.”

The detriments of sitting for long hours of time extend beyond concentration problems; a lack of frequent activity can cause lifelong issues. A study by Stanford University found that long periods of inactivity, specifically sitting, can contribute toward the development of type-2 diabetes, heart disease and obesity.

School requires students to sit for nearly seven hours every day. This disturbs students’ education and puts their health at risk. Simply incorporating movement into classroom activities, stretching during class and offering alternatives to sitting still will improve students’ grades and health.

School’s purpose is to educate students, but the current structure of our schools is an obstacle to students’ education. When will school be designed for the students?

Works Cited

Cruz, Donna De La. “Why Kids Shouldn’t Sit Still in Class.” The New York Times, 21 March 2017.

James, Julia. “High School Students Sit for Too Long, New Health Research Suggests.” Peninsula Press, 10 April 2011.

Strauss, Valerie. “Teacher Spends Two Days as a Student and Is Shocked at What She Learns.” The Washington Post, 24 Oct. 2014.

The Thanksgiving table is a war zone. The soldiers? The conservative aunt who drove all the way from Alabama. The ultra-progressive sibling who makes passive-aggressive comments while passing the potatoes. And, of course the grandparents, who stubbornly reference the good ol’ days when political incorrectness roamed free. Throughout America, families hunker down for the holidays with reluctance and trepidation. Civil conversation concerning the issues facing our country is becoming rarer by the day. But if we can’t talk about the issues, how can we fix them? The Thanksgiving table is a microcosm of the real world discussions in local and state governments, in Washington, in the White House itself. Americans must learn how to talk to each other about politics, from the dinner table to the Oval Office.

I’ve had my fair share of political discourse with friends and family. These conversations escalate quickly and infuriate easily, but haven’t destroyed my relationships. I listen, disagree and discuss. However, when faced with opposing viewpoints, many Americans polarize further. Instead of talking to those with whom they disagree, Americans find like-minded individuals who cater to their political tastes. In fact, according to The New York Times, “Liberals and Conservatives prefer to associate and live near their fellow partisans,” and “would be unhappy if their children married someone with a different political viewpoint.” This is troubling. We develop empathy when we talk with people from different backgrounds who challenge our beliefs.

Our lack of conversation has turned us into our rigid, stubborn grandparents unwilling to consider alternative views. According to Pew Research, 38 percent of Democrats have consistently liberal views, a dramatic increase from 1994 when only 8 percent remained consistently liberal. America’s lack of political plasticity is growing rapidly, creating a chasm between the things we support and the things we don’t. We see this divide every year at the Thanksgiving table. If we can’t set aside what we think we know and talk to our stubborn grandparents, we become our stubborn grandparents. We remain entrenched and the gravy gets cold.

Talking to people we disagree with is hard. But it should be easier to disagree with the people we love. Talking to family is a starting point to bridge that political chasm. Ask your aunt why she feels that way. Ask your grandparents what shapes their beliefs. Ask your siblings to suggest solutions. If we can empathize with our family at the Thanksgiving table, we can empathize with our neighbors, friends and political representatives. Don’t let your dinner table become a war zone. Talk to your fellow Americans. Ask them questions. Invite them to dinner. And most importantly, show up and speak your mind. You might start a new tradition.

Works Cited

Cohn, Nate. “Polarization Is Dividing American Society, Not Just Politics.” The New York Times, 12 June 2014.

“Political Polarization in the American Public.” Pew Research, 12 June 2014.

When I was five, I needed someone to hold my hand as I entered school. When I was twelve, I needed someone to point to the entrance, but I could walk in alone. Now, at sixteen, I don’t need anyone — I’m a different person: independent and mature. Yet, I am treated as if I’m still a child.

After the horrific Florida shooting, students walked out of their classes in honor of the 17 lives lost. As noted in “How Young is Too Young for Protest? A National Gun Violence Protest Tests Schools,” even Utah’s Wood Cross Elementary School staged a protest in the school gym to allow the students to experience “a little civil disobedience.”

Like Wood Cross, the administration at my school staged our protest. The day before the walkout, a minute-by-minute schedule and list of guidelines — including the only two doors we could exit from — were uploaded onto Facebook. The next day, our obedient student body shuffled into the fenced area between our school buildings only to witness teachers’ comments about how “cute” we were and their apologies for being 60 seconds behind schedule. By 10:05, the end of the designated “shouting time,” my friends and I lowered our posters in defeat.

Although I am thankful that my school supports the walkout, nobody needed to be hand-held through this protest. Protesting is fighting and risking consequences, risking falling. Protesting is true civil disobedience. Yet Henry David Thoreau is rolling in his grave thinking about our “protest.” In “Civil Disobedience,” Thoreau does not “lend [himself] to the wrong which [he condemns].” Instead, he fights against it, because he has the right “to do at any time what [he thinks is] right.” We have the same right. Why prevent us from using it?

Maybe the elementary schoolers play along, but I cannot. We already have mock organizations: mock trial, model U.N., and now this walkout. The school coddles us. Highlighted in a New York Times article, the students who excelled after high school were the ones who fell and got up afterward. But if schools are going to cushion each one of our falls, how will we grow up?

I understand schools’ concern: safety first. Parents may be uncomfortable with their children protesting. But the goal of civil disobedience is to make others uncomfortable. Discomfort brings change. Change from our parents’ generation to ours.

We need adults to accept the discomfort of us taking the reins of the gun violence movement and us growing up. Otherwise, if fearful adults keep holding us back, how can we grow up to become fearless leaders?

Works Cited

Saul, Stephanie, and Anemona Hartocollis. “How Young Is Too Young for Protest? A National Gun-Violence Walkout Tests Schools.” The New York Times, 13 March 2018.

Thoreau, Henry David, 1817-1862. Civil Disobedience: Complete Texts With Introduction, Historical Contexts, Critical Essays. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2000. Print.

Tough, Paul. “What If the Secret to Success Is Failure?” The New York Times, 14 Sept. 2011.

In 2015, eleven teachers were convicted of racketeering and other crimes in the infamous Atlanta Public Schools cheating scandal, in which “inordinate pressure” from top administrators to meet standardized test score targets or face severe consequences led the teachers to cheat on state standardized tests. Sadly, such cases of coordinated, large-scale cheating are surprisingly pervasive, underscoring the undue importance attached to standardized test results. These test results are used in an admirable effort at accountability, but the process of accountability via standardized testing is now deeply flawed. Testing has evolved into an industry, a game for test companies and policymakers; everyone benefits — except the students and educators, who are just cogs in the machine.

For instance, as part of the process, teachers are forced to spend more and more time “teaching to the test,” wasting valuable instruction time. This wouldn’t be such an issue if the tests are high-quality or instructive, but they aren’t, for a variety of reasons. First, they’re unfair. Research has shown that the tests nontrivially discriminate against different races and socioeconomic backgrounds. Consequently, since standardized tests compare schools and districts of all different backgrounds, affluent schools are rewarded and struggling schools are punished.

Second, they’re inaccurate. Standardized tests often involve multiple errors or ridiculous content; for instance, the test company Pearson has occasionally misprinted tests, misplaced or misgraded answer sheets, and faced major technical issues. In 2012, an absurd story involving an anthropomorphic pineapple in a contrived remake of “The Tortoise and the Hare” graced the desks of middle schoolers across several states, with senseless questions that stumped even teachers. Clearly, these tests are managed not by educational experts, but by profit-seeking companies.

But most importantly, they test for the wrong things. With their pervasive focus on multiple choice and shallow thinking, standardized tests ignore creativity, grit and depth of understanding, thus turning students into robots. The real world requires deep, innovative thinkers, but tests encourage students to automatize themselves.

Another oft-cited reason for testing is that their objective results allow instructors to better address their students’ needs. However, these teachers have been trained professionally, usually have known the students in a much more personal, holistic and genuine context for several months, and often don’t even get the results back before the end of the year, and so this argument doesn’t hold much water.

Accountability-based testing can still be salvaged. Placing more control in the hands of educators would allow them to rework tests to be more pedagogically meaningful, and results should only be interpreted with the whole context in mind. Otherwise schools will just turn into factories for producing high test scores.

Works Cited

Chapman, Ben, and Rachel Monahan. “Talking Pineapple Question on State Exam Stumps ... Everyone!” New York Daily News, 20 April 2012.

“How Useful Are Standardized Tests?” The New York Times, 17 Feb. 2015.

“Racial Bias Built into Tests.” FairTest.

Strauss, Valerie. “How and Why Convicted Atlanta Teachers Cheated on Standardized Tests.” The Washington Post, 1 April 2015.

Strauss, Valerie. “Pearson’s History of Testing Problems - a List.” The Washington Post, 21 April 2016.