Arguing the Student Social Contract
"A Nation's Argument". That is the name of the humanities course I am currently taking. Through this course we have learned the necessary elements that make up a good sound argument and have put to practice this skill arguing our own points of view. We also made sure to learn about what makes up a bad argument in order to make sure we avoided things like logical fallacies. We also learned much about the history and arguments that made up our country. From the declaration to the bill of rights. By the end of this unit we were challenged to make our own argument and argue against a rule in our student social contract we believed needed change. With our ideas and newly learned skills ready we created our very own arguments, here is my final result. Thank you for reading!
The Student Social Contract
The main purpose of the student social contract is to provide awareness on the expected and acceptable behavior a student must display while in the school environment in order to represent themselves and the school in a respectful positive way. It serves as a guideline which ensures the student is aware of the expectations set in place to ensure the benefits of a good educational environment for both staff and students.
The problem
The problem comes in with the philosophical vagueness of some of the rules in the student social contract. To show this flaw I have chosen one of the statements in the social contract as an example, this one regards open campus at our school.
“The School may revoke open campus privileges for any individual for any reason.”
No further detail is provided as to what reasons make revoking open campus an acceptable consequence and does not take into account specific circumstances of an individual, allowing for possible misuse of this rule against students. There is a difference between getting open campus privileges revoked as a consequence for constant inappropriate behavior compared to getting it revoked for arriving late to class. Not only does it allow for misuse but it fails to set important expectations for students stepping out of the campus for lunch. Once the students step out of school, during school hours, they are still representing their schools and their actions no longer apply to their own self but the school as a whole body. With inappropriate actions also come harsher consequences because the student is no longer an individual but a representative of the rest of the student body at their school. If restaurants, stores, or dining halls receive disruptive or inappropriate behavior from a student or a group of students the consequences often involve the rest of the school as a whole as it brings a negative impression of the school to the public. Failure to place more precise reasons and higher expectations upon this rule could lead to consequences for the school such as getting banned from food courts due to the behavior and actions of certain students. Stating that open campus can be revoked “for any individual for any reason” does not fulfill this need, leading to a new need to amend this rule.
Syllogism
(P1) student was not given clear guideline as to expected behavior
(P2) a student has failed to comply with the rules
(P3) consequence is needed for the students inappropriate behavior
(C) Any individual may get open campus privileges revoked for any reason
New Amendment
The school may revoke open campus privileges for any individual if there is failure to meet the expected behavior for the individual when setting foot off campus. Expected behaviors are listed as following:
By adding more precise reasons that lead to the revocation of open campus lunch and placing higher expectations regarding student behavior outside campus can eliminate both misuse of this rule and harsher consequences the school may face from owners of these public spaces as a result due to inappropriate behavior from students. The amendment goes into specifics as to the reasons and occasions in which the school may revoke open campus privilege from a student, not allowing the school to possibly abuse this power against the student for any reason. It also places higher expectations on the student as an individual no longer only representing themselves but the school as well. Once the student feels they have clear expectations to meet along with clear consequences in failure to meet these expectations it provides a more clear result in future situations of which this rule may apply.
Syllogism 2
The Student Social Contract
The main purpose of the student social contract is to provide awareness on the expected and acceptable behavior a student must display while in the school environment in order to represent themselves and the school in a respectful positive way. It serves as a guideline which ensures the student is aware of the expectations set in place to ensure the benefits of a good educational environment for both staff and students.
The problem
The problem comes in with the philosophical vagueness of some of the rules in the student social contract. To show this flaw I have chosen one of the statements in the social contract as an example, this one regards open campus at our school.
“The School may revoke open campus privileges for any individual for any reason.”
No further detail is provided as to what reasons make revoking open campus an acceptable consequence and does not take into account specific circumstances of an individual, allowing for possible misuse of this rule against students. There is a difference between getting open campus privileges revoked as a consequence for constant inappropriate behavior compared to getting it revoked for arriving late to class. Not only does it allow for misuse but it fails to set important expectations for students stepping out of the campus for lunch. Once the students step out of school, during school hours, they are still representing their schools and their actions no longer apply to their own self but the school as a whole body. With inappropriate actions also come harsher consequences because the student is no longer an individual but a representative of the rest of the student body at their school. If restaurants, stores, or dining halls receive disruptive or inappropriate behavior from a student or a group of students the consequences often involve the rest of the school as a whole as it brings a negative impression of the school to the public. Failure to place more precise reasons and higher expectations upon this rule could lead to consequences for the school such as getting banned from food courts due to the behavior and actions of certain students. Stating that open campus can be revoked “for any individual for any reason” does not fulfill this need, leading to a new need to amend this rule.
Syllogism
(P1) student was not given clear guideline as to expected behavior
(P2) a student has failed to comply with the rules
(P3) consequence is needed for the students inappropriate behavior
(C) Any individual may get open campus privileges revoked for any reason
New Amendment
The school may revoke open campus privileges for any individual if there is failure to meet the expected behavior for the individual when setting foot off campus. Expected behaviors are listed as following:
- Respect towards environment around them
- Acknowledgement that one's actions are a representation of the school
- Act in a non disruptive way and retain from participating in disruptive activities
- Keep inappropriate language to a minimal or completely retain from using it at all
By adding more precise reasons that lead to the revocation of open campus lunch and placing higher expectations regarding student behavior outside campus can eliminate both misuse of this rule and harsher consequences the school may face from owners of these public spaces as a result due to inappropriate behavior from students. The amendment goes into specifics as to the reasons and occasions in which the school may revoke open campus privilege from a student, not allowing the school to possibly abuse this power against the student for any reason. It also places higher expectations on the student as an individual no longer only representing themselves but the school as well. Once the student feels they have clear expectations to meet along with clear consequences in failure to meet these expectations it provides a more clear result in future situations of which this rule may apply.
Syllogism 2
(P1) Student is given clear guideline regarding expected behavior when leaving campus during school hours
(P2) Clear consequence is set if behavior is not met
(C) School can revoke open campus privileges when the behavior there is clear violations to the expectations set in place
Change
As a result of this amendment clear guidelines have been set and students openly know the expectations they are to carry when stepping foot off campus to enjoy the privilege of eating off campus. The possible danger of more severe consequences outside the schools control such as possible banishment from certain public spaces due to inappropriate behavior displayed by students is reduced when students are made aware of expected behavior and the directly correlated consequences. No major changes to the actual open campus will occur, only a newly precise behavior guideline and the elimination of the vagueness of this rule not allowing authoritarian misuse on the schools behalve.
Involvement With The U.S Constitution
“Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted” is listed as the 8th amendment in the U.S constitution. While it is hyperbolic to state that the revoking of open campus lunch is a cruel and unusual punishment it is no doubt a punishment that could be afflicted upon not only from the school to students but public spaces to the school if it decided the students are causing chaos. Eliminating the vagueness can of course further ensure that the cruel and unusual punishment of revoking open campus lunch does not actually come to happen.
Student Support
(P2) Clear consequence is set if behavior is not met
(C) School can revoke open campus privileges when the behavior there is clear violations to the expectations set in place
Change
As a result of this amendment clear guidelines have been set and students openly know the expectations they are to carry when stepping foot off campus to enjoy the privilege of eating off campus. The possible danger of more severe consequences outside the schools control such as possible banishment from certain public spaces due to inappropriate behavior displayed by students is reduced when students are made aware of expected behavior and the directly correlated consequences. No major changes to the actual open campus will occur, only a newly precise behavior guideline and the elimination of the vagueness of this rule not allowing authoritarian misuse on the schools behalve.
Involvement With The U.S Constitution
“Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted” is listed as the 8th amendment in the U.S constitution. While it is hyperbolic to state that the revoking of open campus lunch is a cruel and unusual punishment it is no doubt a punishment that could be afflicted upon not only from the school to students but public spaces to the school if it decided the students are causing chaos. Eliminating the vagueness can of course further ensure that the cruel and unusual punishment of revoking open campus lunch does not actually come to happen.
Student Support
Students at GCE have already shown support for this new amendment, 4th year student CDH even stated:
“Makes no sense to leave it [open campus rule] open for interpretation, it creates opportunity for misuse of power”- CDH
Co-signers : KAH (3rd year student) GHS (3rd year student) CDH (4th year student)
“Makes no sense to leave it [open campus rule] open for interpretation, it creates opportunity for misuse of power”- CDH
Co-signers : KAH (3rd year student) GHS (3rd year student) CDH (4th year student)
Food Halls, Choose Chicago, 2019
Comments
Post a Comment