Summary

• Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
  • Caselist.RoundClass[51]
  • Caselist.CitesClass[60]

Details

Caselist.RoundClass[51]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2017-01-28 01:36:37.704
	1	+2017-01-28 01:36:37.0

Caselist.CitesClass[60]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,7 @@
	1	+Text: Public colleges and universities should privatize
	2	+James A. Dorn, http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1991-11-10/news/1991314063_1_higher-education-system-of-higher-college-education, Privatizing Higher Education JAMES A DORN November 10, 1991, the Baltimore Sun
	3	+Every crisis presents an opportunity to challenge the status quo and embark on a new path. In the case of higher education, one can challenge the system of state ownership and control and ask if we cannot do better. Instead of restructuring the system of higher education from the center, consider the idea of privatization. While privatization and educational choice may appear radical in an environment dominated by government schools, those notions are gaining ground as the budget crisis deepens. Maryland's Secretary of Higher Education, Shaila Aery, has recommended that the possibility of privatizing at least parts of the UM system be given further study, and UM College Park President William Kirwan has stated, "It's essential that we look at the concept of privatization." Privatization would end central planning of higher education and eliminate state subsidies. Ownership and control would be in the hands of trustees who would be directly responsible for the health of their private institutions. Experience has shown that managers of private colleges or universities have a stronger incentive to cut costs, improve efficiency, and innovate than do managers of state-owned schools. The ratio of staff to faculty at Johns Hopkins University, for example, is significantly lower than at UM College Park. Ending state subsidies for higher education would reveal the true cost of college and lead to more efficient educational choices. Higher education is primarily a private rather than a public good: benefits accrue almost entirely to those who receive the education, and tuition can be charged to cover the costs of education. College should be viewed as an investment in one's future. The lifetime income of a college graduate is nearly three times that of a non-college graduate and this premium is likely to increase in the future.
	4	+Solves case- the freedom of speech is not a requirement for privatized schools
	5	+Marcus, Laurence R. Fighting words: The politics of hateful speech. Greenwood Publishing Group, 1996.
	6	+Deeply ingrained in higher education is the principle of academic freedom, which incorporates the concepts of freedom of inquiry and freedom of expression. As John Seigenthaler (1993: 48) of the Vanderbilt University’s Freedom Forum First Amendment Center posits, “the academy should be an open forum—a place where learning is fostered and knowledge revered, but where ignorant, unpleasant, objectionable, offensive points of view might be exposed for what they are, or rejected in debate for what they are, but never suppressed or banned or sanctioned punitively.” At public institutions, academic freedom rests on the First Amendment protection of freedom of speech. While is not necessarily a legal requirement in the independent sector, the principle is strong also in most private institutions, where it is supported by a long tradition of commitment to the value of the inquiring mind. Indeed, the centrality of freedom of expression to higher education has been recognized by the Supreme Court, in Sweeney v. New Hampshire, 354 U.S. 234 (1957). Thus, the intellectual reaction to an incident of hateful speech on campus is that, distasteful as it may be, it falls under the protection of academic freedom or the First Amendment. The gut reaction is often very different, since most on college campuses view hate speech as antithetical to the goals of higher education and the mission of their institutions.
	7	+Competition – analytic

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2017-01-28 01:36:40.138

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+policy judge kinda

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Cypress Falls

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+51

Round

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+3

Team

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+North Crowley Reed Neg

Title

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+4- Privatization CP

Tournament

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Flowermound