Friday
Editor in chief: Jack Clifford
Managing Editor: Jessica Blanchard
Newsroom: (541)346-5511
Room 300, Erb Memorial Union
P.O. box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403
E-maii: ode@oregon.uoregon.edu
EDITORIAL EDITOR: MICHAEL J. KLECKNER opededitor@journalist.com
In I1CCQ of a better standard
state Senate’s Ways and Means Com
r I nnittee began considering a bill
' I Wednesday that would establish the
JH Oregon HOPE Scholarship, which
would give Oregon high school students with
a 3.0 or higher GPA a free ride at state colleges.
Senate Bill 100, sponsored by Sen. Ryan
Deckert, D-Beaverton, and Sen. Tom Hartung,
R-Cedar Mill, is intended to show high school
students that scholastic achievement is im
portant and induce them to stay in Oregon for
their higher education.
This bill, as written, is not a good idea,
and the Emerald editorial board hopes it
gets killed in committee or gets rewritten
to address what we think are some serious
problems.
Merit-based aid, as a concept, seems reason
able. As a community, lower-income high
school students are offered quite a bit of emo
tional and financial support throughout the
educational process. The Oregon Need grant,
Pell grants and fee waivers may not cover
everyone’s need, but there are programs out
there. So it might be responsible of the state to
also establish a program encouraging students
who excel to continue their high achievement
and showing other students that the state val
ues their success.
However, until need-based grants assist
every person who requires them, until a wider
definition of scholastic aptitude is developed
and until some standards are applied, the
state doesn’t need to be helping those who are
uniquely positioned to help themselves.
According to the Oregon Student Associa
tion, 11,000 students were denied financial
help from the Oregon Need grant because it is
underfunded. Sens. Deckert and Hartung
would be doing much more valuable work if
they fought to get more money from taxpayers
to fully fund need-based student assistance.
As soon as the Need grant covers everyone in
need, then we can talk about making scholar
ships based on merit.
Despite the funding issue, our biggest con
cern was the idea that a 3.0 GPA means that a
student is excelling scholastically. If we want
to encourage students to be intelligent, edu
cated citizens, more or different parameters
need to be
established.
We know of
students who
skate through
easy classes
their senior year
in order to push
their GPA higher.
Does this mean
they’re challenging
themselves or ex
celling? Hardly.
A full definition of
scholarship would in
clude Advanced Place
ment classes (maybe
HOPE students should be
required to take two, for
example), community serv
ice (require a certain number
of hours or a certain number
of different agencies), jobs
(special consideration could be
given to students who have
shown they can balance educa
tion and employment) and ex
tracurricular activities, in addition
to grades.
And what about SAT scores or let
ters of recommendation? Those of
familiar with scholarships and
cial aid know there are many indica
tors of a high achiever. Adopting more
parameters would mean a more compli
cated formula for awarding the HOPE scholar
ship, but it would also do much more to prop
erly encourage students.
The final concerns we have about this ver
sion of merit-based aid involve standards.
Should everyone who meets the scholastic re
quirements be eligible for aid? Even within
merit-based aid, is means testing totally un
reasonable? Why does the state need to give a
free ride to students whose parents make, say,
$100,000 per year? In fact, some wealthier
parents might want their children to leam the
value of both money and education, and they
might require their children to pursue schol
arships or get a job to pay for college them
selves. Denying tnose students tiie Hurt
scholarship won’t force their parents to pick
up the bill.
Another standard we worry about pertains
to the budget. How much money should the
state dedicate to a program just to show sup
port for smart kids? After all, smart kids are
the ones who can easily ferret out scholar
ships from all over the country, send off 30
scholarship applications and probably receive
10 awards. Smart students already have
“HOPE.” How much more do they need, and
should it come at the expense of need-based
grants? Maybe a limit could be set — say, 30
percent — and funding for merit-based aid
would be restricted to a certain percentage of
funding given to need-based grants.
Working through concerns like these is pos
sible, however. We hope the Senate gives this
issue substantial thought and debate. Encour
aging students to become intelligent citizens
who care about learning takes more than just
throwing some money at “B” students. And in
the meantime, there are plenty of lower-in
come students who do want to expand their
education, but there isn’t even enough money
to help them.
This editorial represents the opinion of the Emerald edi
torial board. Responses can be sent to
ode@oregon.uoregon.edu.
Leftfield
Frank Silva
0* •««« -4 •/ **.«»♦*«**» %>■ *. *•■:• *4 A* « ♦ *»4 , fcs ♦* «»-** fw #v * « * «t «t «* ft
■1 ■ i
ft***.**'*
Let’s learn from our heritage
Guest Commentary
Lach
litwer
Our country is one whose history bears the scars
of growing from an imperial colony to the strong,
diverse nation we are today. Some of these scars are
ugly. During World War II, America disenfran
chised many thousands of Japanese-Americans be
cause of their ethnic background. In 1963, Lee Har
vey Oswald, a former U.S. Marine, shot and killed
John F. Kennedy, the president whom many people
credit with having initiated a large portion of the
civil rights movement. Despite the many mistakes
we’ve made, no one has argued that we should dis
own our heritage. Rather, we acknowledge our mis
takes and learn from them.
In the column titled “Flag Folly” (May 1, ODE),
Pat Payne shows us a stellar example of the cultural
intolerance that he is so quick to attribute to those
who disagree with him. By stereotyping and slan
dering Southerners who value their Mississippi
heritage — warts and all — he plays into the culture
of xenophobia and hatred which so many have giv
en so much to remove.
While serving at Keesler Air Force base in Missis
sippi, I came to know quite a few people who iden
tify with their Southern heritage. Most of them were
tolerant, open-minded people, willing to accept at
face value all who are willing to extend the same
courtesy.
Never mind the questionable historical perspec
tives Payne spews regarding the Civil War. It is his
flagrant intolerance for the most fundamental right
of all in a free society — freedom of thought —
which should be particularly offensive to all who
value it. As a serving member of America’s fighting
forces, I can choose to disagree with those who hold
different beliefs than I do, but I’d be proud to give
my life to protect their right to believe as they wish.
I fear, however, that the greatest threat to this free
dom comes not from some foreign enemy, but from
a close-minded, reactionary culture, which can be
found simply by opening a newspaper.
Lach Litwer is a freshman psychology major.
CLARIFICATION
In the Emerald article “Senate hands out $20,395 of
surplus” (May3), the $10,000 from the general sur
plus and the $12,000 from the McArthur Court sub
sidy will cover the cost of the two non-conference
football games next year. Students will not pay out of
pocket.
The Emerald regrets the error.