RWS 280 San Diego State University College Admission Scandal Paper the journal will be due on April 18th, rough draft is week after and then the full essay

RWS 280 San Diego State University College Admission Scandal Paper the journal will be due on April 18th, rough draft is week after and then the full essay.
I will upload the requirement, also will include the link for the story
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/voices/2019… Journal #8:
By now, you’ve hopefully read the two articles I posted last week. For this
journal, I’d like you to think about and compare these two articles a bit. In the
Stauffer article, she argues that our admissions process is flawed and unfair
because it privileges kids from wealthy families who can afford to pay for
advantages that other students can’t afford (or don’t even know exist). Towards
the end of her article, Stauffer includes a quote from Harvard professor
Natasha Warikoo about the fairness of the current admissions process. She
says:
“‘A fair system to me would produce an outcome in which people who are
selected are representative of 18-year-olds overall in the United States,’
Ms. Warikoo said, noting that while wealthy students are
overrepresented, working class and poor students, black, Latino, Native
American and first generation students are underrepresented on most
campuses. ‘We don’t have consensus in the United States about what is
a fair system of selection.’”
On the other hand, Dylan Hernandez argues that the current system works
and that the students who get into good schools genuinely deserve to be there.
Unlike Stauffer, he doesn’t think that the system is unfair and says that lowerincome students have the same opportunities to get into good schools as their
wealthier peers–they just need to work harder and take advantage of different
resources to do so. He says that students like him “must work hard; remain
affable and appreciative; be a quick study; surround [themselves] with sharp,
humble peers and compassionate, wise mentors; and — this is key — capitalize
on donor-supported resources.”
With this in mind, I’d like to return to what you were thinking about last week.
Did these two perspectives change your mind at all? And who do you agree
with? Do you agree with Stauffer that our current admissions process favors
wealthier students and gives them an unfair advantage over students from lowincome families? Or do you agree with Hernandez that our current system is
fair and that if low-income students work hard and take advantage of different
resources they have the same chance at admission as their wealthier peers?
Explain why you agree with the writer you chose.
ESSAY 3: EXAMINE A PUBLIC ARGUMENT
THE PROMPT
Our third unit focuses on the recent college admission scandal, which involved
several wealthy families who were caught cheating or bribing their kids’ way
into some of the nation’s top universities. As part of this unit, you’ve read two
perspectives—one that argues that this kind of cheating, and the college
admission process more generally, is deeply flawed, and another that sees this
scandal as more of an isolated incident and not as indicative of a widespread
problem within the university system. For this paper, you will closely examine
this debate, identifying key concerns on each side. Your paper should do the
following:
1. Begin by briefly discussing the college admission scandal and the
conversation surrounding it as presented by the articles we read for this
unit.
2. For the body of your essay, you should explore the two sides of this
debate (one that says that the college admission process is corrupt and
the other that says that the process is fair). What do people on each side
of this debate argue? What kinds of people do you think are likely to
agree with each side? How do you see the articles we read appealing to
these two separate groups of people?
3. Conclude by saying which side of this debate you agree with and why—
do you think that there is a problem with the college admission process,
or are things good as is?
REQUIREMENTS
Your final essay portfolio should include a copy of your rough draft along with
two completed peer review worksheets.
MLA format. This requires: Times New Roman size 12 font, double spacing, 1
inch margins, appropriate heading and page numbers, correct in-text citations,
and a Works Cited page.
4-5 pages, not including Works Cited page
DUE DATES
Rough draft due: Tuesday, April 28st (emailed to me by midnight)
Final portfolio due: Tuesday, May 5th (submitted on Blackboard by midnight)

Purchase answer to see full
attachment