Spoiled students

Students need to realize lots of effort does not necessarily equal a high grade.

“If I do the work and go to class, I deserve an A.”

Such is the mantra of our entitled – and somewhat spoiled – generation.

Since kindergarten, we’ve been told that if we simply put in the required effort, we’ll be rewarded with high grades.

After all, the old saying, “A for effort” didn’t come from nowhere.

But what happens when we get to college and good grades don’t come so easily?

Should we be rewarded with A’s and B’s for merely showing up for class? Of course not.

The New York Times reported Tuesday that college students expect to receive high grades if they put a lot of effort into their work.

What a groundbreaking report, some might say. Those of us actually in college have known for years that frame of mind exists.

But just because an assignment or paper required a lot of work doesn’t automatically make the result A-worthy.

There’s no “magic formula,” as The Times put it, to receiving high grades.

But thanks to parental pressure, a history of high achieving and competition amongst ourselves, we have intrinsic expectations to succeed.

The Red & Black editorial board understands this way of thinking – after all, we, too, were raised with Honor Rolls and Awards Days and teachers and parents praising us all the time.

But college is different, and some of our peers would do well to remember that just doing the reading and showing up for lectures doesn’t equal even a B in a course.

Take a look at your class syllabi. We’re willing to bet “trying hard” isn’t listed as a course requirement or under the breakdown for your grades.

It’s time to be more accountable for ourselves. Final product, not effort, is what counts here.

Students need to grow up and realize that “A for effort” doesn’t cut it anymore. Level of effort does not equal quality of final product.

We may have all been on the Honor Roll in elementary school, but the days of hall passes and playgrounds are behind us. Let’s be responsible young adults and accept the grades we deserve.

- Shannon Otto for the editorial board

An offensive ad?

We understand why an advertisement is upsetting, but it’s just that – an ad.

Holy ad, Batman! A University condom ad got some unexpected attention this week – and offended members of a religious organization.

During the University’s Sexual Responsibility Week from Feb. 8-12, posters were distributed in dorms and on University buses prompting the use of condoms during intercourse.

One poster, however, drew the ire of the Catholic League for depicting part of the famous Michelangelo painting in the Vatican’s Sistine Chapel. The poster showed the fingertips of God and Adam a condom in the middle.

In a letter sent by Catholic League President Bill Donohue to Rodney Bennett, the vice president of student affairs, Donohue said the poster “hijacked [the painting] to promote condoms.”

The letter went on to say the University would never depict the Islamic prophet “Muhammad to hawk condoms. Indeed, only a few years ago an inoffensive depiction of this Islamic figure in a Danish cartoon led to murder and churches being burned to the ground. One can only imagine what would have happened had he been portrayed pushing condoms to youth.”

The editorial board understands where the Catholic League is coming from, but this comparison is hardly valid.

Islamic code forbids Muhammed from being portrayed in any fashion, and to compare what the University did and what happened in Denmark in 2006 is out of line.

Although the poster is in poor taste, it has been noticed and will be remembered, which is the main goal of advertising.

The University was merely trying to promote safe sex, a lesson the Catholic Church itself should teach.

- Michael Fitzpatrick for the editorial board