Pell Grant Program Analysis

The ACLU would most likely file a lawsuit against any version of this policy if passed because they will say that it violates the separation of church and state because some of the schools that will take students using vouchers provided by the government. A potential harm of this policy is that is it could make it more difficult for children in heavily isolated areas to receive these higher levels of education because it will be difficult for them to have access to a private school. Students in these portions of the state are more likely to be the ones who need public schools than students that live in urban areas. While they will still receive a better education than before, it might not reach the level of the education being received by those in private

Additionally, budget cuts for public schools happen every year, that creates bigger class sizes but not the sufficient teachers or rooms to provide a proper academic environment.

According to the author, when P.L.-94-142 was enacted in 1975, individuals in the field of education were excited that students in need of services would receive the support they need. Additionally, individuals in the field of education were excited that this law would also ensure that money was provided for these services. I believe the author did not address this issue directly because the topic of federal funds is beyond the scope of her research. Although we can have opinions on federal funding, there is not as much that can be done about it, which is why I think the author did not address it.

The audience for the Rogerian argument could include Indiana Commission for Higher Education, Indiana General Assembly, postsecondary institutions, students seeking higher education, and Ivy Tech administration. The tone or attitude of the Rogerian argument by the author toward the CHE, IGA, lawmakers, and postsecondary institutions clearly changed substantially within the parameters of grant reform in Indiana. The tone proceeded through the Rogerian argument with the choice of words and the author’s viewpoints portrayed on grant reform. The voice formatted in the Rogerian argument represented the discussion of “Debate about Grant Reform in Indiana,” in a semi-formal avenue and the author provided a specific points to convey the opposition’s viewpoints relative to current debates such as equality of funding, higher return on investment, and increasing completion rates.

problem lies in the fact that most public schools have fixed costs from heating costs to teaching staff that cannot easily be adjusted or downscaled when a few students leave in a given year. The result equates to “squeezed funding at traditional public schools” (Daniel Simmons Ritchie). School choice is not necessary.

This act was meant to increase the quality of education by providing negative incentives for

However, it is still an issue for students to cough up that money. The idea of making community college free to any student in America has been a dream for low income students for a while. President Obama’s desire to make the tuition of community college to everyone in the nation would only make it difficult for students to get a free education, limit them to essential resources, and discourage students from applying to four year universities. Granting free community college tuition to incoming freshmen will draw “more students to already crowded community colleges”. Along with the overcrowded campuses, a very long waiting list will soon form making it just as competitive to get into a four year university.

The states are responsible for 44% of education funding in the United States with these findings means the areas with high poverty rates will be impacted tremendously.

The cost for colleges must go down so students will not be

The passage of this bill would give parents the choice of where their kids can go to school, and help give a “head start” by granting parents a voucher worth a set amount of money to put towards enrolling their children in private education. Unfortunately, these vouchers are not enough to enroll a child in private-school, meaning

Many people dream of a life filled with riches, but that dream is hard to obtain without a college degree. It is somewhat ironic how people dream of being a successful student and going to college but the cost of tuition turns that dream into a horrible nightmare. It is not a shock to most people when they that college tuition is expensive, but in the past few years it has increased to an all-time high. Lower and middle class students have now begun to realize that college tuition is holding them away from their dreams. Even though college tuition could provide opportunities for job creation and economic growth, tuition is not affordable for the average American household which in effect, prohibits students from taking opportunities like going to college in the first place.

One reason the opposition side of this argument argues that minority scholarships are fair is because, the scholarships are not always distributed by college institutions. Countless organizations, corporations, associations, and minority advocacy groups will offer scholarships to minorities (Minority Scholarships). These groups have every right to give out their money to whoever they would like, but that is not what the debate in this paper is about. The argument is against college institutions giving out the low requirement minority scholarships. If students can get different groups to give them money for school, that is nobody 's business but themselves.

Public school funding Increasing school funding is very important in today’s future American students. Education should be one of the top priorities in the United States to make sure every student has the same opportunity to get the same great education. Increasing public school funding be beneficial for outdated textbooks, lack of technology, and increases more resources for students. These resources would be crucial of generating students of America. These students are the workers, leaders, and inspirations of future America.

I 100% agree with this idea. This can help save so many lives of people that are suffering from poverty. In addition, if colleges were less

Education in any country is very important for one to possess the knowledge for what they seek for in their future career. To be able to attend colleges cost money at the time which is very expensive but reasonable for what they are truly trying to learn. The time and effort people put into colleges is very efficient which means they try their hardest to not waste their time for all the money that was put into their tuition. Colleges mainly live on their federal loans on how many people are willing to put interest into the school campus and the college. With higher free education doesn’t only bring benefits to students but can bring disadvantages which can lead students to take college less seriously, state budgets can become strained, and won’t help in the U.S’s social mobility.