And wants to proof read this for me?! 8D
This article was written by Raja Abdulrahim of the Los Angeles Times, and it is addressing an issue at the University of California Los Angeles in concerning many of their students who are interested in taking Islamic studies. Apparently the program was put under review and admissions into the program were frozen in 2007. Three years have passed and admissions into the program have yet to be reopened. Students are worried because, as many people who were are already enrolled into the program graduate, the program will have less and less students and will eventually die out if new people are not admitted into the program. The students are raising attention to the problem with rallies to get it out into the public in hopes that administrators would actually work on getting things done to reopen admissions instead of having it on the backburner.
The main issue in this article is the fact that, in due time, the Islamic studies program will be eliminated without any new students being admitted into the program. Once all the students in the program graduate there will be less funding for the program without new students, leading to the eventual closing of the program. Why is this a major concern for UCLA students in particular? Abdulrahim addresses this in his or her article. The UCLA law professor, Khaled Abou El Fadl, was quoted in the article saying, “"I'm baffled because UCLA has such a large Muslim community and has had an Islamic studies program for 60 years and has such a good reputation internationally.” The program also happens to be one oldest in the country. Of course students would be concerned. Having a large Muslim community would mean that there would be an abundant amount of students interested in taking Islamic studies. Maybe it is their strong point. Maybe they want to know more about the Islamic culture. Whatever the case, they are being denied admission into a program that is of interest to them.
There are a lot of scattered pieces of evidence in the article to support the issue concerning the program potentially being shut down. The article states that admissions into the program were originally suspended back in 2007 because, when it was reviewed, there were problems with regard to the lack of classes and lack of available advisors and faculty. This is a weak premise at first glance, because of how vague it is, but there is a key word in here that, once identified, supports the author’s point; that key word being ‘2007’, which Abdulrahim uses many times in the article. If this issue were addressed three years ago then why has nothing been done to get the program back on the right track? Apparently finances were not the problem, according to what was said in Abdulrahim’s article, so why has there not been any updates concerning the program? It would at least keep concerned students informed, so they would not be worrying about the program being shut down. Of course, mere assurances are not enough to ease one’s worry, such as the assurances provided in the article by Steven Nelson, who told concerned students that their program was ‘not going anywhere’. Actual proof would be required to ease any apprehension in the air. An example of actual proof would be updates on the school website about the program, status reports on where the program currently stood, and the estimated date for when admissions into the program would start being accepted again. Was any of that information provided? Based on what was said by some of the people mentioned in this article, one would think not.
Another piece of evidence provided comes from one of the girls mentioned briefly in the article, Iona Gerbakher. She started up a petition, which obtained more than 3,000 signatures, stating that a program cannot get fixed by cutting off funding and new people, a statement that is very obvious and true. This piece of evidence is strong, given that it is pretty self-exclamatory. How can one fix the problem by cutting off new students? Once all the students from the program graduate, what will happen? Are they trying to start the program from scratch? If so, that may be a poor idea, because of the fact that the program happens to be about 60 years old. There were not any complaints about the way the program was run, so why would there be a need to start from scratch? That would probably require too much money anyway. So if the signs are not pointing to the program being revamped, then they are pointing to the signs at the opposite end of the spectrum, which is the program being shut down. The students are clearly against this, what with the rallies, petitions, and slogans they are broadcasting publicly to bring attention to the problem. Once the problem gets thrown into the spotlight then something will definitely have to get done, and that is what these students are seeking.
The article states that in May of this year, ten students from the program graduated, and only twelve students remain enrolled in the program. Five or six are likely to graduate in 2010. This means that there will only be six or seven students left in that program once those students graduate. This is a strong piece of evidence in regards to Abdulrahim’s article because it makes UCLA look like the administrators are trying to wheedle out all the students in the program before deciding to shut the program down. Why else would the admissions into program have been suspended? There could be a darker reason behind the actions of the school administrators. Of course, this is a gray area that is not covered in the article, but it is definitely worth looking into if one wants to understand the true reason behind the suspension of admissions, right? It would have been better if the author had touched on that.
That gray area I am referring too comes from the event that happened in 2001 and the mindset of America after that tragedy. One must take into the consideration the current standpoint of America today. Currently, America is at war with Muslim countries over in the Middle East. Since that event in 2001, Americans have been less than pleasant towards Muslims because of the whole ordeal, even though they were not necessarily at fault. As much as the country tries to deny it, many of America’s people are very judgmental when it comes to ethnicity. It is a part of human nature to judge, and the ill-mannered feelings towards Muslims were to be expected after that event. We all know someone who has gotten worked up over a Muslim boarding a plane, just because they look ‘suspicious’. Most of that died out over the years, though, but there are people out there still carry that negative mindset with them to this day. It is just an opinion, yes, and it would have been nice if the article had touched on that, because disheartening as it may sound, that could have been a possibility for the suspension of admissions into the program. It would explain their actions, and why it has been three years and nothing is still being done to get admissions into the program going again. Maybe the administrators are trying to put and end to Islamic studies at UCLA. Some protesters even had ‘Scared of Islam? Learn about it’ as their slogans, because they too know of that possible explanation for suspending the program for so long. That is one piece of evidence that the article definitely lacked, maybe because the author was watching what he or she was saying as to not upset anyone, but everyone knows it is a possibility.
Based on the information provided by the article and my own personal thoughts on the subject, I would have to agree with the issue brought up in the article. There is no reason why, after three years of suspending admissions into the Islamic program, that the problem has not yet been solved or there is no proof that the problem is in the process of being solved, aside from assurances from officials that they are ‘working on it’, especially if the problem with the program is not the funding. The article was decent, providing enough good evidence to make the author’s point clear. I, as an uninformed reader, would read the article and lean towards the side that the author is directing us towards, which would be to believe that UCLA is trying to eliminate their Islamic program with the suspension of admissions into that program.
In conclusion, students are concerned about the ongoing suspension of admissions into the Islamic studies program at UCLA because they fear that without new students the program will be removed. The author of this article is bringing attention to this issue and, like the students, wants something to be done about it. There are strong pieces of evidence to support his claim, and the article was written in a way to make it not look as if it were not trying to blatantly point the blame at the school administrators. This helped strengthen the article. Hopefully, the article may bring more attention to the issue and things will get done to fix it.
..... Yeah.. I'm pretty sure only Sapph's gonna help me with that.... *coughs* xD Was worth a shot though.
This article was written by Raja Abdulrahim of the Los Angeles Times, and it is addressing an issue at the University of California Los Angeles in concerning many of their students who are interested in taking Islamic studies. Apparently the program was put under review and admissions into the program were frozen in 2007. Three years have passed and admissions into the program have yet to be reopened. Students are worried because, as many people who were are already enrolled into the program graduate, the program will have less and less students and will eventually die out if new people are not admitted into the program. The students are raising attention to the problem with rallies to get it out into the public in hopes that administrators would actually work on getting things done to reopen admissions instead of having it on the backburner.
The main issue in this article is the fact that, in due time, the Islamic studies program will be eliminated without any new students being admitted into the program. Once all the students in the program graduate there will be less funding for the program without new students, leading to the eventual closing of the program. Why is this a major concern for UCLA students in particular? Abdulrahim addresses this in his or her article. The UCLA law professor, Khaled Abou El Fadl, was quoted in the article saying, “"I'm baffled because UCLA has such a large Muslim community and has had an Islamic studies program for 60 years and has such a good reputation internationally.” The program also happens to be one oldest in the country. Of course students would be concerned. Having a large Muslim community would mean that there would be an abundant amount of students interested in taking Islamic studies. Maybe it is their strong point. Maybe they want to know more about the Islamic culture. Whatever the case, they are being denied admission into a program that is of interest to them.
There are a lot of scattered pieces of evidence in the article to support the issue concerning the program potentially being shut down. The article states that admissions into the program were originally suspended back in 2007 because, when it was reviewed, there were problems with regard to the lack of classes and lack of available advisors and faculty. This is a weak premise at first glance, because of how vague it is, but there is a key word in here that, once identified, supports the author’s point; that key word being ‘2007’, which Abdulrahim uses many times in the article. If this issue were addressed three years ago then why has nothing been done to get the program back on the right track? Apparently finances were not the problem, according to what was said in Abdulrahim’s article, so why has there not been any updates concerning the program? It would at least keep concerned students informed, so they would not be worrying about the program being shut down. Of course, mere assurances are not enough to ease one’s worry, such as the assurances provided in the article by Steven Nelson, who told concerned students that their program was ‘not going anywhere’. Actual proof would be required to ease any apprehension in the air. An example of actual proof would be updates on the school website about the program, status reports on where the program currently stood, and the estimated date for when admissions into the program would start being accepted again. Was any of that information provided? Based on what was said by some of the people mentioned in this article, one would think not.
Another piece of evidence provided comes from one of the girls mentioned briefly in the article, Iona Gerbakher. She started up a petition, which obtained more than 3,000 signatures, stating that a program cannot get fixed by cutting off funding and new people, a statement that is very obvious and true. This piece of evidence is strong, given that it is pretty self-exclamatory. How can one fix the problem by cutting off new students? Once all the students from the program graduate, what will happen? Are they trying to start the program from scratch? If so, that may be a poor idea, because of the fact that the program happens to be about 60 years old. There were not any complaints about the way the program was run, so why would there be a need to start from scratch? That would probably require too much money anyway. So if the signs are not pointing to the program being revamped, then they are pointing to the signs at the opposite end of the spectrum, which is the program being shut down. The students are clearly against this, what with the rallies, petitions, and slogans they are broadcasting publicly to bring attention to the problem. Once the problem gets thrown into the spotlight then something will definitely have to get done, and that is what these students are seeking.
The article states that in May of this year, ten students from the program graduated, and only twelve students remain enrolled in the program. Five or six are likely to graduate in 2010. This means that there will only be six or seven students left in that program once those students graduate. This is a strong piece of evidence in regards to Abdulrahim’s article because it makes UCLA look like the administrators are trying to wheedle out all the students in the program before deciding to shut the program down. Why else would the admissions into program have been suspended? There could be a darker reason behind the actions of the school administrators. Of course, this is a gray area that is not covered in the article, but it is definitely worth looking into if one wants to understand the true reason behind the suspension of admissions, right? It would have been better if the author had touched on that.
That gray area I am referring too comes from the event that happened in 2001 and the mindset of America after that tragedy. One must take into the consideration the current standpoint of America today. Currently, America is at war with Muslim countries over in the Middle East. Since that event in 2001, Americans have been less than pleasant towards Muslims because of the whole ordeal, even though they were not necessarily at fault. As much as the country tries to deny it, many of America’s people are very judgmental when it comes to ethnicity. It is a part of human nature to judge, and the ill-mannered feelings towards Muslims were to be expected after that event. We all know someone who has gotten worked up over a Muslim boarding a plane, just because they look ‘suspicious’. Most of that died out over the years, though, but there are people out there still carry that negative mindset with them to this day. It is just an opinion, yes, and it would have been nice if the article had touched on that, because disheartening as it may sound, that could have been a possibility for the suspension of admissions into the program. It would explain their actions, and why it has been three years and nothing is still being done to get admissions into the program going again. Maybe the administrators are trying to put and end to Islamic studies at UCLA. Some protesters even had ‘Scared of Islam? Learn about it’ as their slogans, because they too know of that possible explanation for suspending the program for so long. That is one piece of evidence that the article definitely lacked, maybe because the author was watching what he or she was saying as to not upset anyone, but everyone knows it is a possibility.
Based on the information provided by the article and my own personal thoughts on the subject, I would have to agree with the issue brought up in the article. There is no reason why, after three years of suspending admissions into the Islamic program, that the problem has not yet been solved or there is no proof that the problem is in the process of being solved, aside from assurances from officials that they are ‘working on it’, especially if the problem with the program is not the funding. The article was decent, providing enough good evidence to make the author’s point clear. I, as an uninformed reader, would read the article and lean towards the side that the author is directing us towards, which would be to believe that UCLA is trying to eliminate their Islamic program with the suspension of admissions into that program.
In conclusion, students are concerned about the ongoing suspension of admissions into the Islamic studies program at UCLA because they fear that without new students the program will be removed. The author of this article is bringing attention to this issue and, like the students, wants something to be done about it. There are strong pieces of evidence to support his claim, and the article was written in a way to make it not look as if it were not trying to blatantly point the blame at the school administrators. This helped strengthen the article. Hopefully, the article may bring more attention to the issue and things will get done to fix it.
..... Yeah.. I'm pretty sure only Sapph's gonna help me with that.... *coughs* xD Was worth a shot though.
