2018 - 2019 Hutt Scholarship Winners

Lake Michigan Credit Union Presents

HUTT 2019

About the Hutt Scholarship Lake Michigan Credit Union is pleased to present the 2019 Lloyd F. Hutt Scholarship winners’ essays. LMCU takes great pride in its ongoing support of education, and encourages students to pursue their dreams. This scholarship program provides financial resources to help make those dreams a reality.

Established in 1990, this scholarship program recognizes and honors the contributions of our founder, Lloyd F. Hutt. Applications were submitted primarily from Michigan and Florida, and included several from other states. We are proud to have provided $391,500 in scholarships to 237 deserving students over the years.

Each year, a topic is selected to serve as the central essay theme. High school seniors are invited to develop and write an essay based on that theme. This year’s topic: “ But we’ve always done it that way. Name something you’d change and why.”

An independent panel of judges was assembled to review all submissions.

Each essay was evaluated for content and passion, rather than writing mechanics. Essays were assessed in a blind process in which the identities of all authors were concealed. Judges had no knowledge of entrants’ grades, accomplishments or school district.

The essays that follow were selected as our 2019 Hutt recipients, and each student author will receive a $2,000 check to be used toward their higher education needs. The following essays appear as they were submitted by the student, without edits.

Congratulations to this year’s winners!

Table of Contents Essay Winners: Andrew Atkins................................................................................................................. 1-2 Katherine Bell.................................................................................................................3-4 Maggie Bentley...............................................................................................................5-6 Dawson Clancy............................................................................................................... 7-8 Ellie Clark......................................................................................................................9-10 Benjamin Coralic........................................................................................................11-14 Haley Denton............................................................................................................. 15-16 Sarah Dressing...........................................................................................................17-18 Savannah Fort........................................................................................................... 19-20 Chantel Lokers...........................................................................................................21-24 Isabella Nguyen......................................................................................................... 25-26 Grace Olthoff..............................................................................................................27-28 Nicholas Stoll............................................................................................................. 29-30 James VanAntwerp.................................................................................................... 31-34 Brandon Zink............................................................................................................. 35-36 Judges: External Judging Panel...............................................................................................37-38

If I had any superpower at all, I would desire the ability to travel through time. Propelling back 50 years, I would like to catch a glimpse of John F. Kennedy, listen to the powerful voice of Martin Luther King Jr, or shake the hand and thank a Vietnam Veteran for his service. But more simply, I would also like to witness a teenager around a jukebox in a burger joint or a student being educated in a secondary classroom.

If my superpower returned me to modern time, I might still find awe in viewing a political figure or desire to listen intently to a voice of change. I still would shake the hand of a military veteran or enjoy watching other teens jamming to the Bluetooth speaker at a fast food restaurant. But if I walked into a secondary school classroom today, I might forget I was in the modern era.

Andrew Atkins Hudsonville High School

Shamefully, education has been virtually unchanged since the mid-nineteenth century. As has transpired for years, most teachers still take the center stage, delivering all the knowledge to students through lectures and note-taking. Most students sit in desks with attached chairs, arranged in rows and columns facing the front of the room. Many students work from antiquated textbooks or workbooks. There may be an exception to this norm… many schools have replaced chalkboards with dry erase boards, some schools are blessed with one-to-one devices in lieu of paper and pencil, and some teachers are trying to give control to the students. However, the factory-model classroom that was designed 150 years ago for rapid processing still seems to exist in so many schools today but does not fully support the education of a student in the 21st century. If you asked a secondary teacher why they teach in this style, you might hear, “Because we’ve always done it that way!” When will education catch up to the fast-paced, collaborative, technologically driven real world?

Andrew intends to pursue a degree in Geology.

EDUCATIONAL CHANGE

Education has to change. Organization and delivery of instruction must meet the needs of the 21st-century teenagers. Our nation has become more complex and diverse, our technological capabilities are more powerful than ever before, and being in constant communication has altered the way we view the world. As stated by Joel Rose from The Atlantic, “The Information Age has facilitated a reinvention of nearly every industry except for education.” Adding technological concepts into a classroom - not just in the form of Google docs word 1

Educational change isn’t just a need of the curriculum: it’s time to change the learning environment as well … out with the traditional attached chairs and desks and in with flexible seating to fit all shapes and sizes of students. Allow classrooms to be comprised of tables and detached chairs - easily moved to form learning groups. Throw in bean bag chairs on carpeting to mimic the learning styles of a student in their own home.

Add the stand-up desks for the growing and changing bodies, or wiggle stools to benefit a student with attention deficit or just too much energy. This flexible seating is not only meeting a student’s best learning style, it is beneficial for collaboration, empowering students by offering a choice of seating, allowing students to choose with whom they work, where they work, and changing positions as needed to create the best learner possible, allowing minds to stay alert and focused. Traditional desks can make a student feel territorial or closed off to collaborating with others. Flexible seating allows students to quickly and easily pair up, work in small groups, or discuss as a whole class – without moving mountains of heavy desks or awkwardly swinging in the seat to establish eye contact when needed. The rows and columns of desks may have been suitable for education 150 years ago, but as times change, so should the learning environment.

processing or generic research - would speak the language of a young adult. Teach students how to collaborate with other classrooms around the world via Google Chat, to Facetime with coaches or mentors who actually work in the industry using the concepts being taught in class, or learn from virtual instructors on Youtube and online software programs like Paylocity or Quickbooks. Prepare students for the real world by bringing the real world into the classroom through technology.

However, just adding technology to the classroom does not innovate the room. Pew Research Center says, “95% of teens have access to a smartphone, and 45% say they are online almost constantly.” If this access is already present, what about combining the desires to be plugged in daily with collaborative teams and cooperative learning? Utilizing these concepts would build positive relationships among students, creating a community that values diversity and fosters positive social skills - which counterbalances the technology turmoil. Students are motivated to help one another learn when they see a real-world focus on teamwork.

This doesn’t mean everything in the classroom has to change, but combine ideas and concepts to create the best learning environment possible. For example, a science class could be taught with a combination of in-class activities, a technological collaborative lab before or after school, and meetings with online mentors who might work in a field of science being studied in class. Couldn’t all classes be a fine balance of teacher-led instruction, collaborating activities, technological connections through social media, and a complete project that would move at the pace of each individualized student with long-range target due dates while still meeting the state standards? Edutopia.org states, “The old-school model of passively learning facts and reciting them out of context is no longer sufficient to prepare students to survive in today’s world. Solving highly complex problems requires that students have both fundamental skills (reading, writing, and math) and 21st century skills (teamwork, problem-solving, research gathering, time management, information synthesizing, utilizing high tech tools). With this combination of skills, students become directors and managers of their learning process, guided and mentored by a skilled teacher.” This is a big change from the teacher-led instruction used in so many classrooms today, ultimately creating greater preparation for the future endeavors of young adults.

Physicist William Pollard once said, “The arrogance of success is to think that what you did yesterday will be sufficient for tomorrow.” It is time to design a new model of instructional delivery and classroom layout that is better able to leverage talent, technology, and time to best meet the unique needs of each student. Every teenager in America deserves to finish high school prepared and inspired to create and live a life full of opportunity, choices, connection, and meaning. This starts with a change in our secondary schools, allowing the modern era to look different than the past. Just because we’ve always done it that way doesn’t mean we cannot change … and if my superpower comes true, I hope to time-travel into the future to see the significant impact on the youth of America as a result of these educational changes.

2

Puppies are adorable. Who does not like a sweet bundle of energy that is in a soft, lovable package?

Who can resist the smell of a puppy or the kiss of a puppy? As I intend to pursue my career in veterinary medicine, I ponder my love for all animals and I have concern for their well being. I think about things that I may have the power to influence when I become a veterinarian. One area where I have concerns is breeding animals for human preferences, specifically puppy mills. For many years, people have looked to puppy mills to bring a fun, loving companion into their families. Although breeding puppies may have started out with good intentions, I personally do not agree that it is acceptable to irresponsibly breed puppies because “we’ve always done it that way,� and this is something that I would change given the opportunity.

Katherine Bell Forest Hills Central High School Katherine intends to pursue a degree in Pre-Veterinary Medicine at Purdue University.

Earlier this school year, I was asked to write a satirical essay. I chose to research puppy mills and their impact on animal welfare in our society. In my research on this topic, I discovered many sad facts about the irresponsible breeding of puppies. Puppy mills have been around since the post-World War II era creating a proliferation of animals to be bred each year. According to The Puppy Mill Project, around two million dogs are bred in the U.S. each year alone coming from ten thousand different puppy mills. The Puppy Mill Project also emphasizes that the crippled, unwanted, or useless puppies are often times killed in ways that disregard the proper use of euthanasia, which includes drowning or shooting.

The puppies in normal condition are then sold all across the country to people who may be looking for a companion.

Those rescued from the mills are brought to animal shelters.

People find puppies adorable, which is why breeders constantly create, sell, and profit from this highly demanded yet profligate practice. Producing puppies in large quantities provides potential owners with options. There are so many breeds to choose from, allowing people to purchase a dog tailored to them.

They may choose from many physical and behavioral characteristics that they desire which vary largely in dogs, even within a litter. Although puppies from mills may supplement some longing and loneliness present in households; the use of puppy mills to breed these puppies does not specifically cure any societal problems. In fact, mass producing puppies causes

BREEDING IN BULK

3

society more troubles than advantages. The ASPCA states, “Approximately 1.5 million shelter animals each year are euthanized (670,000 dogs) . . . .” Many of the 670,000 dogs are rescued from the mills and taken to shelters. Those rescued are simply wasting space, and not all of them get adopted. According to The Dodo, “Puppies are sold to pet shops, sometimes before they’re weaned from their mothers.”

I am not saying that puppy breeding is categorically bad, but there needs to be regulation regarding the number of puppies born to the number of puppies being adopted.

For example, if a breeder makes thousands of dollars selling two or three puppies out of a litter of seven or eight puppies, they may feel that this is sufficient profit for them. They may not feel that taking the remaining puppies that were not purchased to the animal shelter for most likely euthanization is unethical. In addition, many puppies that are bought are turned into shelters by the buyers when the puppy misbehaves, becomes inconvenient, or when they become grown and not that tiny, cute puppy anymore. I feel that not only do breeders have a responsibility to their human customers, but they have a responsibility to the animals that they are using to breed and to their offspring as well. In addition, people who are buying puppies need to be educated on what to expect from buying a puppy and how to best care for their new companion.

When I become a veterinarian, I plan on being an advocate for animals. Owners need to be responsible for their puppies and breeders need to be responsible for the puppies that they bring into the world. This is something that can be discussed when a veterinarian takes care of a pregnant breeding dog as well as when an owner with a new puppy comes into the veterinary clinic. I am an advocate for adopting puppies and dogs from shelters and rescue organizations. I am a very besotted owner of Coco, our rescue dog, and I am always happy to tell her adoption story. I have spent over 200 hours volunteering at a cat rescue shelter and understand that when an animal is adopted from a shelter, it makes room for the next animal to be saved shelter.

4

The 2016 Presidential Election was one of the most popular elections in American history. At 84 millions viewers, the first debate between the TV-icon Donald Trump and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was the most watched Presidential debate since 19801.

While it was one of the most popular and outspoken elections of all time, the more popular candidate didn’t come out victorious. Clinton gained 2.8 million more votes than her counterpart, making the 2016 election the largest margin of victory -- or defeat -- in American history. While she won the popular vote, the Electoral College cost her the Presidency, accumulating only 227 Electoral Votes. While the Electoral College was founded to equalize voting power throughout the country and keep small states in the candidates’ eyes, that does not mean it still benefits Americans today. Such a marginal defeat as the 2016 Presidential Election is a message to all Americans that while the Electoral College is something the country has “always done that way,” it is not something that should always be done.

Maggie Bentley Grandville High School Maggie intends to pursue a degree in STEM at Lansing Community College.

Founded during the Constitutional Convention and protected by the Twelfth Amendment, the people do not vote for the President directly. Rather, the people’s votes create a majority in each state, which tells their Electors which candidate to vote for. This means that each state has a minimum of three votes (two for each senator, and at least one for each representative).

From there, it’s a winner-take-all system for the Electoral Votes. This gives individuals in small states greater voting power because they are over-represented, meaning each representative for their state resides over a fewer amount of people. In other words, it takes less votes in less populous states to gain an electoral vote as it does for larger states. While this was the intention of the Founding Fathers when the Electoral College was created in 1787, they could never have imagined our country so large and populous as it is today. Under and overrepresentation are at extremes today, outdating the Electoral College. For example, in the 2016 election, the state of Wyoming cast a total of 255,849 votes.

With 3 Electoral Votes, that means there are 85,283 votes per Electoral Vote. The State of California -- on the other hand -- cast 14,181,604 votes, but each of the 55 Electoral Votes is worth a whopping 257,847 individual votes of the people3. This means that one vote

“But We’ve Always Done It That Way”

THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE EDITION

5

equal voting power and voting rights to all citizens and would most benefit the people as a whole. Nevertheless, skeptics claim that it would lead candidates only to the country’s largest cities, as well as cause coalition building. While it is common sense that in a popular vote, candidates would spend a lot of time in more populated areas, it would be illogical for candidates to only spend their time campaigning in large cities. As of 2018 the United States has around 328 million people, 8.5 million of them -- or 2.4% -- live in the country’s largest city, New York. America’s 10 largest cities account for only 7.6% of the country’s population5, so obviously, candidates would spend much more time outside of the country’s urban areas. A candidate who only goes to the biggest cities is campaigning against his own benefit. On top of that, coalition building or tyranny of the majority would not be a problem in today’s modern age of technology, where people can research the candidates in seconds. Moreover, it would be impossible for the majority of the population to group together as a voting block.

in Wyoming is worth three votes in California. In a country founded on the belief of unity and equality, why are we using such an absurd and unjust method to elect our leader? While it may have made sense 200 years ago when the country was new and small, in America today the Electoral College is unjust and outdated.

While smaller states are benefiting from overrepresentation, that does not mean they are getting the attention the Founding Fathers intended.

In theory, the Electoral College would bring candidates to smaller states, but in reality it does almost the opposite. In the last stretch of the 2016 Presidential campaign, both candidates spent a combined total of 82 days in the the same 12 states; only four of those twelve states have less than 10 Electoral votes.

Together the candidates spent 60% of these 82 days in Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and North Carolina, which have 29, 20, 18, and 15 Electoral Votes, respectively4.

Visiting only 12 states and spending most of their time in only four, the candidates ignored a massive sum of the country. Is this what the Founding Fathers intended? Moreover, since the Electoral College is a winner-take-all system, candidates do not care for states where they win by large margins, nor do they care about big or small states. The only states they pay any attention to are swing states, especially those with a larger number of Electoral Votes. In the aspect of campaigning and caring equally for every state, the Electoral College is failing.

Just because something has always been done a certain way doesn’t mean that it should. The Electoral College may have worked 200 years ago when the country was small, but in today’s world, it’s an outdated and unjust philosophy. It causes extreme underrepresentation of large states in the country known for equality, and is a red herring for anti-tyranny and equal care for all states.

In 2016 the country voted for Senator Hillary Clinton, yet she did not win the Presidency. In a democratic society such as this country, that should be unacceptable.

The 2016 election is a perfect example of how impractical the Electoral College is, and why it should be removed.

Obviously, the Electoral College is unjust and illogical by today’s standards. It’s time to throw away the excuse of “but we’ve always done it that way” and change the country’s means of electing a leader. The best option for this is a direct, popular vote because it would give

Works Cited 1 https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/09/27/495692196/clinton-trump-showdo wn-is-most-watched-presidential-debate 2 https://www.history.com/topics/us-presidents/us-presidential-election-2016 3 https://transition.fec.gov/pubrec/fe2016/federalelections2016.pdf 4 https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/hillary-clinton-donald-trumps-campaigns-numbers/story?id=43356783 5 https://www.moving.com/tips/the-top-10-largest-us-cities-by-population/ 6

The harsh reality of it is, we live in a society that values many of the wrong things entirely. Rather than praise a person for their character, we tend to praise people for their talents or so called “celebrity status”, even despite poor character in many cases. We would rather recognize a famous actor or musician for their publicized talent, rather than a war hero for his or her efforts to keep our country safe and free. We tend to appreciate the athleticism of certain individuals playing professional sports, rather than appreciate the teachers that educate the future of our nation. Our society as a whole completely idolizes and values the wrong things and individuals.

Hardly anyone recognizes the flaw in our culture and how it’s negatively affecting our future simply because we’ve always done it that way.

Dawson Clancy Gull Lake High School

While I do enjoy watching my favorite celebrities in the upcoming movies, and look forward to my favorite artists releasing new songs, I am able to realize that those are not the important things that we should value and respect. On December 15, 2018, Staff Sergeant Justin Gallegos was posthumously awarded the Distinguished Service Cross, the Army’s second highest valor award.

He stood among four of his platoon mates under heavy fire from a Taliban raid, and proceeded to fight as long as possible. He saved many lives and laid down his own for all Americans. He left behind friends and family, including a wife and two kids. His heroic deeds, and many like his, go virtually unnoticed by the public, which I think is absurd. He deserves nods from everyone in America, recognizing his efforts for his family and his country.

After all, he did so for each and every American. Alongside the heroic soldiers and public safety officers, teachers also deserve more recognition than they receive. They take it upon themselves to prepare and educate our nation’s youth for the future. That is potentially the most important job in America, and I believe it deserves the recognition of such. They should take the place of professional athletes, both financially and in the eyes of America. These teachers, soldiers, firefighters and police officers are working harder towards the right things than the entertainers and athletes, and they deserve the recognition and idolship of American and cultural heroes.

Dawson intends to pursue a degree in Sports Management.

CHOOSING OUR IDOLS

By no means am I saying that our current “celebrities” and entertainers are bad people and shouldn’t be given the spotlight they are, I’m just pointing out that 7

they are in the public’s eye for the wrong reason, most of the time. Ashton Kutcher is known for his many movies and television roles, but he is also the co-creator of a foundation to combat human trafficking all across the globe. Most people don’t know that about him, they just see him on the television screen. As honorable as his charity is, he is not getting the recognition for that, rather for his punchlines and raunchy comedies that are viewed by millions. I believe that the public’s eye should point towards those doing good for mankind.

Kutcher should be appreciated for his work in fighting human traffickers before his acting abilities. There are other actors and musicians that use their platform for good, but many more that do nothing at all with it. It completely baffles me that there are people like Staff Sergeant Gallegos out there going completely unnoticed, while others are being shown to our youth as icons or role models because of some talent they possess. Just because the American people have always put these celebrities on a pedestal doesn’t mean that we need to continue to do so.

I strongly suggest we, as an entire community, start to appreciate the things in life that actually matter.

Appreciate those that lay down their lives every single day. Appreciate those that take an oath to keep our neighborhoods safe. Appreciate those that vow to educate our youth to the best of their abilities, so we can look forward to the brightest future possible.

And it starts with us. We can research and recognize those people that are constantly working to better our country. If we start appreciating them, others will join.

And they will encourage their kids to do the same.

Pretty soon, we have a snowball effect. The celebrities of the next generation will be the soldiers, teachers and firefighters rather than the rappers, actors and athletes. Our youth will begin to value compassion and selflessness, and learn to appreciate the people that have sacrificed so much. We can make this universal change to better our culture and recognize those that do so much for us. Just because we’ve always done it that way doesn’t mean we can’t make a change to better our nation.

8

We all know that healthcare costs in the United States are too high. Life-saving medicines are costing crazy amounts of money and then some people who need the medicine can’t get it. I have been a type 1 diabetic since age 4 and need insulin to live. There are insulin price wars going on right now and they will continue until something in our broken health care system is fixed. I’d like to change the health care system in the United States of America to help more Americans be able to afford medical care and medications.

Insulin prices have tripled since 2004, but no major formula changes have occurred. So what has changed?

The pricing is all the more infuriating when you consider that the patent for the discoverers of insulin was sold for one dollar to ensure that the life-saving medication would be available to everyone. Why did the price of insulin go up? The companies who make insulin make minor changes to their formulas so retain their patents and to ensure generics are not allowed to be created.

The cost to manufacture the insulin has not changed since the late 1980s.

Ellie Clark Grandville High School Ellie intends to pursue a degree in Electrical Engineering at Michigan State University.

In the United States of America, we have private insurance companies that will negotiate prices for medications with the corporations that make medicine. The drug companies want their drug chosen by the insurance companies because the insurance company decides which drugs they will cover for the large number of consumers they represent. More consumers only being allowed to use one specific drug means more profit for the drug company. The drug companies have little competition so they have been able to raise their prices on drugs that people need to live with no checks and balances in place to keep it fair for the consumer.

The companies raise the cost of their drugs so they can give the insurance companies a discount if they pick their product as the product they cover for their insured. Most of the time the pricing negotiations are hidden from the people who use the medicine - except for those without insurance and they have to pay the full price.

IT’S TIME FOR A CHANGE

Even people with insurance have to live with constantly changing brands of insulin because the insurance companies are always looking for the next best deal for the makers. It is an endless game of catch up for normal people.

9

It is cheaper to buy insulin in other countries because they don’t have private insurance companies. I personally know people who drive to Canada to buy insulin because it is four times less expensive and it is the same brand of insulin. We need to figure out how to fix this problem so no matter who you are and how much you make for living you can get the life-saving medicine you need.

When people think about America, they think that America is for the people. Is it really when people can’t get lifesaving drugs because they don’t make enough money?

America needs to go to a single payer healthcare or universal system because everyone is covered.

Everyone is given the opportunity to see a doctor when they are sick, get treatment, or need medicine.

It doesn’t matter if you are rich or poor. In a single payer system insurance companies are paid the same as patients, the costs are controlled by the government.

There aren’t different rates for the people who are insured versus those who aren’t. Having a single payer reduces the cost of healthcare. Canada has a single payer system and their spending is $2,233 less per person than in America. Having this type of system would allow people to have access to life-saving medicine instead of rationing or not having the medicine they need to live.

If the United States of America were to create a universal health care system where everyone was covered, there would be less of a price gouging situation we are in now.

There is pushback against change because this is the way it’s always been in the United States, and people are afraid of change. Private insurance companies would no longer be needed, as everyone would use the universal health system. Drug companies would need to bring their costs down or not have their drug be covered by the one insurance carrier. There would be checks and balances to ensure companies weren’t pushing up the price because there are no alternative drug options. I am hoping I can help educate people about the issues with our current health system and help to bring about change for a universal health system in the United States of America. My life and the lives of millions of Americans depend on having access to drugs that keep them alive.

10

Rapturous, yellow jittery surges of electricity. Flowing and swimming as they feather throughout the immense pinkish blob of the brain. The brain is the capacitating generator of knowledge, responsible and adequate for functioning endless imagination. These ideas coursing through the brain are the natural gift we have been given to surpass the current foundations of issues we face. The satisfying feeling of that bright light bulb engaging into something new, that... is an idea. Ideas are revolutionary proposals that have only escalated in numbers and sophistication through time. The wheel, the nail, the compass, the printing press, the telephone, the lightbulb, the internet, and the computer, are only a handful of basic fundamental inventions that have become a surmountable stepping stone in the progress of mankind. The current dilemma the world faces, is that our future innovators might not ever become aware that they are... the future innovators. Due to the educational system brainwashing them, by the slow obliteration of creativity, and the destruction of any other creative idea adequately.

Benjamin Coralic East Kentwood High School Benjamin intends to pursue a Mechanical Engineering degree at Ferris State University.

Ironically, the educational system strives to shape students into key members of future society. Instead that method ends up completely fixating the minds of the students by fixating their views towards what’s best for society.

Even when the students wield infinite capabilities, they are still expected to obey and follow school orders.

A blank, influenced, specific, bland education designed for the students of the world is not captivating, nor is it working for the fate of the world. Creativity seems to be obsolete in today’s education around the world.

Everyone inevitably has a plan for their future, which has been significantly contrasted with the philosophies of the educational system. Dreams and aspirations are dismantled into realistic views of what the school system believes will benefit society.

OUR EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM KILLS STUDENTS’ CREATIVITY

Parents all around the world expect a diploma from their children no matter what. The reason for that, is a high school diploma is the inevitable step to finding a suitable career, while it may also determine what college students are accepted to as well. However, the fact is by then, students have already paved their mind into a shaped stone of a brain, instead of the sponge of learning it was designed to be. By then, the schooling in which they’ve gone through has already established 11

the time of his death, held a net worth valued over 11 billion dollars. Many people are clueless to know that his success was possible without a college degree.

Jobs had to drop out from school, because his parents couldn’t afford the ludicrous prices of college. Richard Branson was also a dropout, although he dropped out earlier, more specifically in high school. Branson was the founder of Virgin Mobile, and owns Virgin Atlantic Airways. Again, another fact that many people don’t know, is Branson was dyslexic. Dyslexia made it difficult to learn, due to how abstract and specific the guidelines and learning is in the average school.

Poor academic performance was practically inevitable for Branson. More honorable dropouts include Dave Thomas, David Green, Larry Ellison, Kevin Rose, Michael Dell, and Rachael Ray. Jobs, Branson, and the other successful icons mentioned, would’ve been called failures, but instead proved to the world that creativity is priceless, and education will never be of the same value. Albert Einstein is presumed to be the most intellectual human to ever grace the planet Earth, and he has supported that value, as he once said; “Imagination is more important than knowledge.”

“right,” or “wrong” answers. Restricting them to stay inside the box, and think of only what is supposedly expected of them. As children, kids aspire to become what they have always dreamed of. Dreams of being astronauts, or pro-athletes, doctors, president....etc.)

Infinite possibilities and motivation to be someone in the world. Teaching students through all the years of schooling, to be something else, or tell a child their dream is “silly”, is absurd. Thinking outside of the box should be rewarded, but instead kids are told their dreams or ideas are “stupid” or “ridiculous.” Which ends up disastrously backfiring, because those kids are heartbroken and contempt the feeling to be wrong, and end up never producing innovative out of the box ideas again. Carrying that frightening feeling to be “wrong” again into adulthood, only further complicates the innovation of the future. Different ideas in the workplace, sooner or later become the pariah of the office. Only because it doesn’t qualify or reach the guidelines of what is strictly expected, those ideas challenge authority even if they’re for the better. Why do we focus so much on one correct answer, when there are infinite different ways to reach that answer, or even challenge that answer.

The educational system tends to forget the most massive, and vital detail… Students hold the power, as they are the ones being educated. Students in today’s education have a voice and they shouldn’t be ignored or avoided.

Children start out actively engaging in the construction of endless creations, shapes, and forms of Legos.

Roaming around in the backyard in imaginary realities, gracing around the fresh cut grass in the warm summer day. Believing that they are discovering Mars, or sailing in an expedition to Greece, to even fighting off an entire army of intruders. The scenarios are endless, and that imagination defines kids and their unique ability to envision anything with no restrictions or guidelines.

The endless questioning that drives parents nuts by asking the simple word “why”. The selective number of children that are just “different” than the average kids, get picked on. Unique students with their own captivation of imagination are bullied, just because they think differently than the other kids. Soon those kids become the classroom pariahs. Teachers then begin to feed those kids that they’re daydreams are impossible and they need to snap out of it and get back into reality. The way that education is enforced.

Slowly, slowly, picking apart the vibrant color of imagination, right up until it becomes a blank, dead, grey, post-apocalyptic wasteland. Transitioning from

Sir Ken Robinson, a well-known British author and speaker, is famous and encouraged for his philosophies. Robinson has defied this issue, as he is a respected and qualified speaker for educational topics, and as a result of his credibility, more and more people are continuing to realize a resolution is a must.

Robinson stated numerous intelligent arguments and facts, more specifically stating a proposition to this topic that undoubtedly strengthens my idea of a “right,” or “wrong” answer. In which he states in a TED Talk; “A system that values obedience over curiosity isn’t education and it definitely isn’t science.” Robinson brilliantly identifies, that this expectation of one right answer is turning students into obedient followers, and slowly carving out creativity from school. Robinson states that it definitely isn’t science to back the argument of his, that it doesn’t take an intellectual being to identify this incorrect teaching. A simple economic consumer, in an average daily life can see that we are incorrectly raising students through the educational system. Like Robinson said, it doesn’t take a scientist, who has to make precise calculations and answers.

Nonetheless, is a fixed educational system so valuable after high school? Steve Jobs created Apple, and at 12

having billions of spectacular, diverse, innumerable visions, to getting spoon-fed a right answer up until you’re capable to find that singular answer yourself. Student zombies of nothingness are created, and they feed on the brains of sole answers.

What can society do? People of this daily infrastructure of society need to organize a change. Our future shall, and will be determined by the destined young innovators. This is a society issue, because our progress in mankind must continue to progress, but how will it? When the next “Steve Jobs” may be corrupted by the educational system fixating his/her mind. Those innovators may never even know their destiny, and again, that they are the future.

In the end, the world needs to understand the educational system is interfering with imagination and creativity.

Imagination has a priceless value over expensive education, and it doesn’t take the most prestigious college to become successful, when one can revolutionize the world with a limited amount of education. After all, Albert Einstein definitively stated “Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”

13

14

As I stood in the choir room, packed full of forty-five other anxious auditioners, and three daunting directors, my heart pounded with reckless abandon inside of my chest. The words “Hi, I’m Haley and I will be singing ‘My Favorite Things’ from The Sound of Music” left my mouth while the words ‘What on Earth are you doing here?! Are you crazy? You don’t belong here! Girl, you can’t sing to save your life!’ flooded through my mind.

Even though I’ve been a varsity athlete all four years of high school and obviously way ‘too cool’ for the drama department I found myself for some inexplicable reason shoving an audition packet into my backpack one day and completing it carefully. Despite the fact that I had never considered theatre once during my high school career -much less musical theatre where that awfully scary act of singing makes up a majority of the auditionI had, on a whim, decided to try out for the spring musical.

Now, it is noteworthy to point out that I’d never performed anything for anyone, and never before had I sung in front of anyone, nor did I have any intentions of ever doing so.

Ever. Prospect of failure and the foreignness of it all was terrifying. The mere thought of it sent my stomach to shambles. But apparently, that’s what has to be done in a theatre audition so, I swallowed my pride, and did it.

In those moments, standing as the center of attention after my name was called, (first I might add!) the duration of the sixteen measures I was required to sing, and the twenty minutes it took me to stop trembling after my audition that evening I regretted my choice to try this…a lot.

Haley Denton Northview High School Haley intends to pursue a degree in Engineering at Michigan State University.

NEOPHOBIA

But not really. As it turns out, those moments of downright discomfort were symbolic and caused a lightbulb to go off in my reflecting, no longer regretting, brain. I had just done something I never thought I would as I had never realized I wanted to. If one would have told me a year ago even two weeks ago for that matter- that I would have auditioned and become a part of the show, I would have ridiculed the notion. But evidently that notion was false as I am somewhat of a ‘theatre nerd’ today only a few weeks later. These vulnerable experiences of mine brought me to the conclusion that something had been missing from my life that I have been fortunate enough to find this year, something that too many people -who seem to have life all put together- are yet to pinpoint, something that I would love to live to see changed.

This ‘something’ I identified was the fear I held of the journey which had been binding and far great enough 15

to convince me that I was happy without and had no care for the destination. In other words, people in general are afraid to try new things and this prevents them from realizing true potential and intangible wealth.

This is undeniable. This is a limiting factor for us as a human race and as individuals. This is an area where the world would welcome, and benefit from change.

It is true that some are fearful of this proposal in itself, and it’s not false to say that this applies to many. In fact, it can even be labeled as ‘neophobia’ which is the fear of anything new or unfamiliar. This fear of seizing what scares us brings this argument full circle, creating an endless loop where positive change, progress, and betterment cannot be made. Our instincts tell us to remain within our comfort zones, where internal peace and external success are ensured. It’s human nature.

While it cannot be altered to include an immunity from reaction to foreign concepts or hesitation due to the idea of initial unsuccess, the willingness to expand ourselves to new horizons can be a conscious effort.

It is impossible to exercise fearlessness of new things but it is entirely within our power to embrace the challenges and rise to them, bettering ourselves and those around us along the way. Imagine a world where the riches of possibility are chosen over the safety blanket we often choose to take cover beneath. All this does is silence our potential as a people. In a place where open-minded individuals with a willingness to further their understanding and appreciation of cultures, actions, and personalities outside of their own, much more unity and harmony could be found.

Simple qualities such as these are a few that our community needs desperately.

While it might be true that ‘we’ve always done it this way’, getting along just fine within the comfort zones we’ve established for ourselves, a new outlook on the commodities we fear would be nothing but beneficial.

A deeper understanding of our personal capabilities can be found when we challenge ourselves beyond the ways in which we limits ourselves. The opportunities available to us that we preferred to ignore before because of their intimidation, will be taken rather than missed.

Finally the destination will be within reach as the distress of the journey no longer has the power to restrain us from achievement. We have nothing stopping us. Only we have the ability to make neophobia obsolete by willing ourselves to choose experience over comfort.

From now on, let’s do it this way.

16

Imagine an island in the ocean. Chances are you thought of a tropical location, warm and lush with gorgeous, sandy beaches. Consider this, another type of island exists. It consists of floating barges of plastic bottles and packaging- human made objects left to decay in the environment. Air, water, and land are all subject to this treatment and every species of plant and animal, including ourselves, can feel the harmful effects. If any one thing should be changed, plastic bags should no longer be used by consumers in a commercial setting.

Getting rid of them, while just a portion of a larger problem, is an excellent step in the right direction.

Plastic bags have become an integral part of everyday life; however, the utility they provide lasts such a miniscule amount of time. When compared to the time they will spend as pollutants or ever-so-slowly decomposing in a landfill, they do more harm than good. Recycling is only done a small fraction of all bags and while it is still the best means of disposal, it is complicated. Because of how recycling facilities depend on machinery with rotating shafts to sift different materials, the flexible nature of bags allows them to get stuck and halt the recycling process of all materials. Worse yet, in landfills where there is a lack of air and light, the decomposition process is nearly nonexistent and contaminated runoff is always a possibility. If the bags end up in the water, turtles mistake them for food and eat them. On land, birds consume shredded bags for the same reason. There is hardly a good ending for any plastic bag which begs the question of why we use them.

Sarah Dressing Livonia Stevenson High School Sarah intends to pursue a degree in Mechanical Engineering.

FOR THE SAKE OF ALL OF US

Reducing usage would simplify the disposal process by decreasing what needs to be disposed of, though it would also help to decrease manufacturing waste.

Producing anything takes time, money, and resources.

Oil, a major input for production, is used by the millions of barrels. If manufacturing ceased or slowed, we would not only benefit from a decrease in plastic, but also from a decreased dependence on fossil fuels.

And this isn’t the only benefit. Manufacturing also includes transportation. Between raw materials going to a factory and the finished product going to market, a decrease in production would reduce the carbon dioxide emissions that result from the movement of plastic bags in the economy.

17

Ridding ourselves of plastic bags is a plausible change.

One way to enact this is a bag tax. For example, Ireland has implemented a plastic bag tax. Following the enactment of this, littering as a result of plastic bags has decreased substantially and the revenue generated by the taxes furthers other environmental initiatives. Another model for reducing plastic bags is to ban them altogether. By giving people little to no choice, plastic bag usage would decrease. Kenya has come up with a ban enforced by the threat of imprisonment or heavy fines in order to combat the devastating environmental problems caused by plastic.

Regardless of the method, there are several potential ways for us to reduce or eliminate plastic bags.

Already, there are so many alternatives, including backpacks, reusable totes, or even no bag at all.

Using alternatives is an achievable goal. Purchasing reusable totes is inexpensive and what’s even better is that people might not even have to buy new bags.

For many, there is a bag at home that would make a great grocery bag! When compared to other efforts to fight pollution like purchasing solar panels or electric cars, buying a reusable bag is more affordable and affects a significantly greater number of people. Not everybody lives in a place where they can install solar panels and not everyone uses private transportation, but everybody has shopped in a store. The number of people affected proves there is room for widespread change if plastic bag usage ceased.

Reduce, reuse, and recycle. We hear it often enough, but what we don’t hear enough is that the order is important. By reducing first, there is less that needs to be reused and recycled. The most effective change that we could make regarding plastic bags in the environment is to decrease their use to the best of our abilities. If we are able to get rid of plastic bags, since they are so common right now, it would be a permanent and noticeable change. It is a small lifestyle change for each individual to use alternative bags, but it has such a monumental impact for the world. Getting rid of these bags would bring much-needed attention to the issue of pollution and it would encourage more action to help the environment. A more sustainable approach to our lives would ensure the health of our planet in the years to come.

18

Ever since I was a little kid I have had a fascination with big machines, especially planes and trains. A fact no doubt fed by my home’s proximity to Detroit Metro Airport and Willow Run Airport in Ypsilanti, Michigan. Or perhaps my fascination came from the shaking ground caused by the power of a 60 mph Amtrak train passing by the railroad crossing in our small downtown. I am reminded of the memory of one particular Saturday on the way to the ice cream shop with my father.

We were walking across the tracks after a long freight train had just passed. Following the rear of the train with his eyes, my dad looked down and asked if I knew why the rails were spaced a little over 4 1⁄2 feet wide (4 feet, 8.5 inches to be exact). Why not something different he asked. Of course I didn’t know the answer, so he proceeded to tell me a very interesting story, something he read years before. What follows is an abbreviated account of the original story my dad read and told me on that day.

Savannah Fort Huron High School Savannah intends to pursue a degree in Pre-Veterinarian Sciences at Michigan State University.

The US standard railroad spacing is 4 feet, 8.5 inches is because that is the way they built them in England, and the US railroads were built by English expatriates.

The English build them like that because the first rail lines were built by the same people who built the prerailroad tramways, and that’s the gauge they used.

And that is because the people who built the tramways used the same jigs and tools that were used for building wagons which used that wheel spacing.

2000 YEAR OLD STANDARD

Why did the wagons have that particular odd wheel spacing? Because if they tried to use any other spacing, the wagon wheels would break on some of the old, long distance roads in England, because that’s the spacing of the wheel ruts.

Well who built those old rutted roads? The first long distance roads in Europe were built by Imperial Rome for their legions and the roads have been used ever since. The ruts in the road? Roman war chariots first formed the initial ruts, which everyone else had to match for fear of destroying their wagon wheels. Since the chariots were made for Imperial Rome, they were all alike in the matter of wheel spacing. The United States standard railroad gauge of 4 feet, 8.5 inches derives from the original specification for an Imperial Roman war chariot.

19

built into our smart speakers (Alexa; Google Home) to summon our self- driving vehicle to pick us up from work. The inventor of the 3D printer wasn’t satisfied with a device used to transfer ink onto paper, ‘the way it has always been done.’ Because of Charles Hull, our high school is able to 3D print objects that even nonengineering students marvel at.

My dad then took the story to another level (again I’m sourcing the original story).

When we see a Space Shuttle sitting on its launch pad, there are two big booster rockets attached to the sides of the main fuel tank. These are solid rocket boosters, or SRBs. The SRBs are made by Thiokol at their factory in Utah. The engineers who designed the SRBs might have preferred to make them a bit fatter, but the SRBs had to be shipped by train from the factory to the launch site.

The only limit to our creativity is our own complacency or stubbornness. If I could change anything about the phrase, ‘but we’ve always done it that way’ it would be to highlight the differences in the quotes by Charles Duell and Thomas Edison. They speak pretty plainly for themselves.

The railroad line from the factory had to run through a tunnel in the mountains. The SRBs had to fit through that tunnel. The tunnel is slightly wider than the railroad track, and the railroad track is about as wide as two horses’ behinds. So, the major design feature of what is arguably the world’s most advanced transportation system was determined over two thousand years ago by the width of two horse’s behinds!

When he finished his much shorter narrative of this story, I asked him if it was true or something he made up. He looked at me with the smile I knew meant I’d have to figure it out on my own. With the help of internet, I have found several sites that classified this story urban legend.

However, I believe it brilliantly highlights the topic of this essay. When people are not motivated or challenged by creative thinking, when they are afraid to make a mistake or don’t think outside the box but simply rely on past practice, we run the risk of solving 21st century problems based on 11th century ideas.

Those who refuse to adapt to the rapidly changing environment are doomed. Borders Books, Toys R US, and Sears/Kmart, are a few examples of companies that banked their futures on ideas of the past. They never anticipated or planned on the emergence of millennials, Generation Z and shifting consumer trends. As a result, they are no longer in business or fighting for survival.

What was it US Patent Commissioner, Charles Duell, said in 1899? “Everything that can be invented has been invented”.

Compare that mindset to the concept captured in this quote by Thomas Edison, “I have not failed. I have just found 10,000 ways that won’t work”. Companies following this path are the eBays and Amazons. Look at the revolution caused by the introduction of Apple’s iPhone in 2007. Thanks to their forward thinking, we carry computers in our pockets that also happen to make phone calls. Or maybe we use the artificial intelligence 20

Homeschooled students all around the world thrive in the loving educational environments their parents create for them; however, many are not allowed to participate in the joys of various aspects of public school life, including sports. Almost a 50/50 divide exists in how states view this issue, and the larger half of the United States of America does not allow homeschoolers to participate in sports. For example, as a former homeschool student, I only had two ways to participate in the sport I loved: one option was to continue being homeschooled but participate in club gymnastics which involved more time and money, or the other was to give up my homeschooled education and take a minimum of four public school classes so that I could participate on the school’s team. I hated the choice I was presented with; I loved my homeschool education and I was torn on what to do. Homeschoolers all over the U.S are presented with my same situation and sadly are forced to choose one of these two options.

“There are approximately 1.7 million students who are homeschooled in the U.S…” (The Washington Post) to better their education; these talented students should be allowed to participate in sports through a public school organization instead of being forced to adjudicate the choice that I had to make.

Chantel Lokers Rockford High School Chantel intends to pursue a degree at Cornerstone University.

Homeschool families pay taxes that support public schools, therefore, they should be allowed to participate in public school sports programs. Families across the United States must pay taxes, some of this money going directly to public schools. “On average, it costs $10,615 to send a kid to public school for a year” (Money Planet), and a large chunk of this is paid in taxes. Families that have chosen to homeschool their children still “pay taxes that fund the public schools” (NFHS) and yet receive no benefits from their hardearned money. What gives local schools the right to exclude children from their own community sports team?

Absolutely nothing; intransigent states still have these rules simply because they are hesitant to make change.

Homeschool families form part of the public school tax base faithfully each year and should be able to receive the same benefits as all the other families; by not allowing homeschoolers to receive these benefits, public schools are turning an easily solvable problem into a situation of intolerance.

TALENT LEFT OFF THE ROSTER

21

in football. Because of this opportunity, he got a full ride scholarship to the University of Florida to be their quarterback. Because of this opportunity, Tebow played in the NFL for five seasons. “[Tim Tebow] won all three of the most prestigious collegiate football awards in America [in 2007]” (Bleacher Report), which quite possibly would have never happened if he was not allowed to play on a public-school team. Tebow’s story substantiates this argument even further. A homeschool child who is excluded from a public school sports team is also being told that he is excluded from all opportunity to obtain college sports scholarships unless he goes to a club version of his sport, requiring more money and time. So many homeschoolers have the potential to be as successful as Tebow, but they never get the chance: their families have chosen what they feel is the best option for their children’s personal education and they were not allowed in sports on a public school team.

“Several scholarship opportunities are given to students who have played sports in high school…” (Scholarships).

Because of this, homeschoolers may have less potential to earn a scholarship than public school students since they are being short-changed from playing on public teams.

Homeschool students should be allowed to compete on community sports teams; keeping them off would be prejudice. There is no clear reason to keep homeschool children off of these teams. Some fear homeschoolers would crowd out public school students’ opportunity to be on a roster, while others say public education is provided by the government, therefore, there are always strings attached (HSDLA). These arguments are feeble. Fear of losing a roster spot to a homeschooler’s family’s child is like saying a person with a different skin color has to be excluded because that child may take a roster spot. No one would dare take that position, yet the prejudice against these families who are homeschooled remains. This position is blatant and baseless. We must take down these unnecessary prejudices against homeschool students who pay their taxes and are great community citizens. We must challenge this groundless prejudice. Public schools have no legitimacy to exclude a homeschool family from reaping the rewards of playing in their community public school sports teams! Twenty-two states allow homeschooled students to participate in public school sports programs (HSDLA), but many of those states have various hoops the students and their families must jump through in order to participate. In Michigan students must take 66% of their classes at the public school in which they wish to play sports, making that person more of a publicschool student than a homeschooled one, overriding the family’s desire to homeschool. The schism between states proves to make playing to a child’s forte, if it is in the sports world, difficult. Do you see the prejudice?

They are excluded unless they change the entire scope of their deeply held beliefs in homeschooling. This prejudice is totally unnecessary. Let homeschoolers play public school sports. No harm will result from this decision; in fact, by allowing homeschoolers to play on public school sports teams, homeschoolers will have a chance to receive rewards later on in life because of participation in public school sports.

The few arguments that are out there against homeschoolers participating on public school sports teams are shallow at best, even ludicrous. Some say, “there is also the possibility of abuse by coaches trying to lure the most-talented homeschoolers” (Washington Post) to their teams. They think this may lead to a “danger of discouraging [public school] students…” (Washington Post) from trying out for the team because they fear that the team will be already full of homeschooled students with great talent. This is a very cavil remark. Coaches in charge of sports teams representing schools want the best athletes, regardless of how they are educated.

Besides, homeschoolers would still have to try out for a public-school sport; they would not automatically get on to the team. Just because homeschoolers would be playing on a public team does not mean that they would be favored above any of their public schooled teammates. Another argument says “… [homeschoolers playing public school sports] would shortchange the public-school students who work hard for grades” (HSLDA). This is a far cry from a tenable argument.

Yes, most public-school students do work hard for grades, but homeschoolers do as well. I personally have four friends in high school who are homeschooled and dualenrolled in one to three colleges in their junior year.

All of them have A’s in their college classes as well as

Keeping homeschool students from a community sports team narrows their chances for college scholarships in their desired sport. Former NFL quarterback Tim Tebow, a homeschool student from Florida, is a perfect example. Luckily for Tebow, the state of Florida does not leave talent off the roster.

In his state, homeschoolers are allowed to play sports for a public school. Because Tebow got this amazing opportunity to play on a public school team that not all homeschoolers get, he was able to excel 22

in the subjects their parents teach them at home. One of them even has a straight 4.0 GPA in all of her college classes. Therefore, saying that homeschoolers playing public school sports would shortchange the public-school students who work hard for grades is simply not true; homeschoolers work just as hard, if not harder, than public school students.

Disputes against homeschoolers playing public school sports are sparse; so many talented students across the United States are being shorted from a life-changing opportunity because of these false arguments. Homeschool families have made the best possible decision for their children and their education. These families are still paying taxes in support of public school programs; their children should be able to take part in the programs offered. The remaining twenty-eight states in America must allow homeschoolers to play public school sports in order to eliminate needless prejudice against homeschool families, allowing the gifts and talents of homeschooled children to be expressed in the world of sports which will enrich our society. We can no longer leave untapped talent off the roster. Turning children away from public school sports programs simply because they are not enrolled in the school system is like throwing away the only precious rose in the midst of thorns.

Works Cited Scholarships.com. “Athletic Scholarships.” Scholarships for College Free College Scholarship Search 2017, www.scholarships.com/financial-aid/ college-scholarships/scholarships-by-type/athletic-scholarships/.

Collins, Peter. “2007: The Year Tim Tebow Won All 3 Top College Awards in America.” Bleacher Report, Bleacher Report, 11 Apr. 2017, bleacherreport.com/articles/1073686-2007-the-year-tim-tebow-won-all-three-top-college-awards-in-america.

“Equal Access Participation of Homeschooled Students in Public School Activities.” HSLDA | National Center Issues Analysis: Equal Access: Participation of Home Schooled Students in Public School Activities, J. Michael Smith, President — Michael P. Farris, Chairman, 1 Apr. 2011, www.hslda.org/docs/nche/000000/00000049.asp.

Board, Editorial. “Should Home-Schoolers Play on Public School Teams?” The Washington Post, WP Company, 17 Feb. 2012, www.washingtonpost. com/opinions/should-home-schoolers-play-on-public-school-teams/2012/02/17/gIQAiO0iKR_story.html?utm_term=.af78b84f2a4d.

Sieck, Ben. “A House Divided: Homeschool Students on School Sports Teams.” NFHS, 20 Apr. 2015, www.nfhs.org/articles/a-house-dividedhomeschool-students-on-school-sports-teams/.

Vo, Lam Thuy. “How Much Does The Government Spend To Send A Kid To Public School?” NPR, NPR, 21 June 2012, www.npr.org/sections/ money/2012/06/21/155515613/how-much-does-the-government-spend-to-send-a-kid-to-school.

23

24

We grew up learning active shooter drills with the alphabet. We grew up wondering if we could actually fit through our classroom windows or how hard the glass would be to break if we ever needed to run. We grew up together, huddled against the back wall of the class, silently hoping to whatever god that would listen that it was all just a drill. We grew up with our eyes plastered to the TV screens, watching as students just like us became the victims of senseless killings. We’re still growing up, but we refuse to stay silent. Life after life is constantly being taken at the merciless hand of gun violence in schools all across America. Children are becoming targets, pawns, and foot soldiers in a war they never signed up for. These children are our future and we can not afford to let another one down. When will we stop accepting tragedy and start expecting change? Teenagers all across the world are standing and marching in solidarity for the justice of their brothers’ and sisters’ lives, yet many lawmakers, politicians, and other government officials are afraid to stand with us. There needs to be a change in our country’s gun laws and similarly, in our country’s mentality towards this ever growing crisis. We need change and we need it now more than ever.

Isabella Nguyen West Catholic High School Isabella intends to pursue a degree in Health Sciences.

School shootings happen more often than people like to think. From Columbine in 1999, to Sandy Hook in 2012, to Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in 2018, this problem has been manifesting itself in our culture and feeding on our country like a parasite. In these past few years, the United States has endured a disturbing spike in school shootings with both 2016 and 2017 setting a dangerous precedent of around fifty incidents of gun violence in schools. However, last year faced the blunt and truly unforgiving end of the violence with ninety four reported incidents. This number averages out to be about two school shootings per week in the average thirty five week school year (Lopez, 2018). While these numbers educate us on the magnitude of the problem, this goes far beyond figures or statistics. It’s about the college students at Virginia Tech who were putting in their life’s work towards a degree. It’s about the high schoolers from Santa Fe High who were eager for the best years ahead of them. It’s about every kid who has seen the news stories and are petrified to go to school everyday

A NATIONWIDE CRISIS

25

due to the prohibition of a national gun ownership database, surveys have shown that around forty percent of people live in a household with some type of firearm (Enten, 2018). With no knowledge on how many of these households have or don’t have safety measure for their firearms, we can never assume that all firearms are inaccessible to teenagers living there.

This speaks to an even greater issue of safety not only in schools but in the household itself. The lack thereof of required gun restrictions and safety measures for firearms within in the home creates a dangerous concoction that can easily lead to irresponsible and even deadly gun use. This push for stricter guns laws and a stronger gun policy is in no way meant to place blame on just one group or person, because in all truth, regardless of gun ownership, we are all at fault.

because of them. It’s about every victim’s potential that has been so savagely stolen. Each precious life that has been taken is a representation of the urgency and importance of why we need laws and preventative federal measures to protect these young men and women. These students are more than a rising number on the TV screen or in the morning newspaper. They are individuals and we can not afford to forget that.

Finding a permanent solution to this violence should be a top priority for this country, however, frustratingly, we are met only with our own government’s inaction.

Weapons have defiled school grounds for far too long, yet the federal gun laws remain stagnant in a time when every student, women, man, and child are looking for some sort of protection. While individual states are taking steps to remedy a solution with bans on assault weapons and proposed bills to tighten gun laws, the national gun policy remains the same. The guns laws in the U.S. permit any person over the age of eighteen to legally purchase a shotgun or a rifle along with ammunition. These laws also state that every person who purchases a firearm must submit to a background check, however this is only a brief obstacle, seeing as this background check can be completed in ten minutes, for those with past criminal behavior (Schuster, 2018).

Although this law prevents known criminals from obtaining a firearm, it does little to prevent high school students with no criminal history, which research shows are a majority of school shooters, from obtaining one. Similarly, the government has not implemented any Child Access Prevention (CAP) laws or any laws that promote the safe storage of firearms within a home at the federal level.

There is also no requirement for gun owners to lock up their firearms nor is there a penalty for not doing so (Child Access Prevention, 2018). Consequently, this lack of supervision and easy access to a firearm within the home is how many school shooters have obtained their weapons. Although no one knows just how many or who owns a gun in the United States

So, I sit here, begging our congress and our president to bring the nation together and take an unflinching stand against gun violence in our schools. Propose stricter gun laws and stronger gun policy to defy the ubiquitous threat of violence in our schools.

Say something, do something, do anything because whatever we are doing now is not enough. We need to do better not only for the safety of our people but for the generations to come, so that they will no longer be raised under the constant erroneous notion that school is a place to be feared. Knowledge should and will remain the only weapon allowed in the classroom.

There will come a day where fear no longer captures the mind of America’s students. There will come a day when education is no longer synonymous with violence.

There will come a day when kids won’t have to map out an escape route every time the lockdown alarm goes off. Until that day comes, we have to fight to change not only the laws, but our own stagnant mentality in order to properly and respectfully honor the fallen sons and daughters of our country.

Works Cited Schuster, Kathleen. Deutsche Welle, 11 Aug. 2018, www.dw.com/en/8-facts-about-gun-control-in-the-us/a-40816418.

Lopez, German. Vox Media, 10 Dec. 2018, www.vox.com/2018/12/10/18134232/gun-violence-schools-mass-shootings.

“Child Access Prevention.” Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, lawcenter.giffords.org/gun-laws/policy-areas/child-consumer-safety/childaccess-prevention/ Enten, Harry. CNN Politics, 15 Feb. 2018, www.cnn.com/2018/02/15/politics/guns-dont-know-how-many-america/index.html.

26

Once a upon a time, there was a man, named Lyndon B. Johnson. Yes, after the assassination of John F. Kennedy, Johnson became our thirty-sixth president.

During his presidency, Johnson was known for quite a few memorable things, but one of his actions still affects us today: Daylight Savings Time. Daylight Savings Time (DST) is practiced in several countries around the world and many states in the U.S.; however, what purpose does it serve? The only purpose DST serves is forcing millions of people out of bed earlier and possibly endangering mankind. Now, one may disagree by believing that DST conserves energy, helps farmers, and has no repercussions, but sit back and buckle up, because you are about to go on a ride.

Grace Olthoff

Many argue that DST saves energy, but there is no proof that DST actually conserves energy. From an article from LiveScience explains, “Overall, the researchers concluded, daylight saving time does save on electricity for lighting, but it also increases the use of electricity for heating and cooling.” The article also includes how several studies have conflicted with each other because some have shown potential conservation while others counter them. Oh, and what about gasoline preservation? Nope, ironically, Daylight Savings Time entices people out to go to the mall, local parks, and beaches, which means people will drive their vehicles to their destination. A section from New York Times states, “Daylight saving increases gasoline consumption . . . No one is more aware of that than gas stations, which is why the Association for Convenience and Fuel Retailing, a lobbying group for convenience stores, has pushed to start daylight saving time earlier in the year. In 2010, Jeff Miller, the group’s chairman at the time, said the industry had added an estimated $1 billion in annual sales since the organization lobbied to add a month to daylight saving in 1986.” Now, imagine what the acquisition must be present-day! So, even though Daylight Savings Time may disguise itself as a practice that conserves energy, do not be fooled, for it does not.

Coopersville High School Grace intends to pursue a degree in Biology at the University of Michigan - Dearborn.

A Key to Mankind’s Extinction:

DAYLIGHT SAVINGS TIME

Based off a previous and brief observation, one main reason DST exists is for the economy, not for the environment. A commentary from New York Times expounds, “Extra daylight means extra time to spend money.” This valid point then reveals how much the 27

DST does have consequences. Despite these reasons and others, Daylight Savings Time still exists. And yet, why? So we can savor our life more? Well, if we keep this practice up, we will eventually not going to be savoring anything. Our resources, from our food to our energy sources, will become depleted. I know this minor practice does not seem like it contributes a lot to our Earth, but DST does add its toll on our planet. So, even though Daylight Savings Time is meant to grant us a more enriching life, it may be a reason why our precious time is cut short . . . permanently.

leisure industries have benefited from Daylight Savings Time. An example is that a golf company could profit from two-hundred million dollars to four-hundred million dollars if another month of Daylight Savings Time was added. This side note proves even more how DST does not prevent the loss energy, but instead drain people’s wallets.

In the academic curriculum, most schools would recite the same explanation for why Daylight Savings Time remains—farmers. However, peculiarly, agriculturists actually oppose DST. They say that DST disrupts their schedules. This leads to unsatisfied results, such as milking dairy cows. By pushing the clock back an hour, the cattle have to wait even more before getting milked. Since the livestock do not understand (and I am not sure if we humans do too) why they must wait, they could become more antsy and cause issues for the milkers. Even if the bovine acclimate to change, by the time they do, the clocks are then moved ahead an hour, which could create problems for milk production.

The cows’ bodies have underwent the adaptation of producing milk later in the day, so when the farmers begin to milk them, there may not be enough milk to maintain a community or society. Anyway you look at it, Daylight Savings Time seems like a hassle, not only just for us humans, but also for animals.

Daylight Savings Time is confirmed to allow people have more light for the evenings, so, people can life pleasurable. However, little do people realize that Daylight Savings Time can trigger masked health concerns. The reason why is because DST affects our circadian rhythm, or our “body clock.” By doing so, our bodies have difficulty responding to the immediate change, which studies have found causes more harm than gain. An article from Time and Date informs us that, “A Swedish study found that the risk of having a heart attack increases in the first 3 weekdays after switching to DST in the spring . . . A Danish study found an 11% increase in depression cases after the time seasonal change. The cases dissipated gradually after 10 weeks.” Another section from Time and Date links the connection of how many more workplace injuries and traffic accidents occur right after the time transition. These examples reveal how Daylight Savings Time may fabricate suffering.

So, it can be noted how the beliefs of DST have been proven false. One, DST does not conserve energy; two, DST does not benefit agriculturalists; and three, 28

Ahh, the lazy days of summer vacation… relaxing by a lake, roasting hotdogs over a campfire, lounging in a hammock, late nights, sleeping in, playing games, and getting together with friends. Summer break is one of the most highly anticipated times of the year for students throughout the United States. For most, it is a three month period of relaxation and joy, freedom, friends, and fun.

Summer represents a respite from the challenges and responsibilities of the long school year, and nationwide, students anxiously await days of summer for slower, less demanding schedules and more time for leisure.

Despite the excitement and joy students associate with long summer breaks, there are significant negatives which lurk behind these seemingly happy, carefree days. Summer is, unfortunately, also a three month period of lost learning. In academic communities, this is commonly referred to as “summer learning loss” or “summer slide”. According to studies by the Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA), an organization for academic assessment, students lose between 20% to 50% of their previous year’s academic progress during summer break, with older students losing more knowledge than their younger counterparts, and lowerincome students generally losing more than their higherincome classmates. Based upon the NWEA’s findings, third-grade students lose on average 20% of their past year’s reading skills and 27% of their past year’s math skills. Older students lose even more knowledge than younger students, and by the summer between seventh and eighth grade, students lose an average of 36% of their reading skills and 50% of their math skills. Sadly these academic losses represent a “two steps forward one step back” trend in summer break learning loss.

Nicholas Stoll Forest Hills Eastern High School Nicholas intends to pursue a degree in Business and Environmental Science at Michigan State University or University of Michigan.

Summer Slide and Hunger

IT DOESN’T HAVE TO BE THIS WAY

In addition to their greater academic loss, lower-income students also risk hunger during summer months. This is because they no longer receive essential free meals provided by their schools’ food programs. According to National Public Radio (NPR), approximately 30.3 million children in the United States receive free or reducedprice lunches. During summer break, NPR reports only about 2.6 million children still receive these meals, which means over 90% of these students must search elsewhere for their meals, and many struggle to satisfy their hunger.

29

controversial. However, I think that the enormous longterm benefits of such a change are worth fighting for in our nation. Educators and administrators should carefully re-assess our schools’ current weaknesses and work with local, state, and federal government agencies to devise, and ultimately implement, newly improved, expanded school calendars. “But we’ve always done it that way” with summer vacation should not be a philosophy that dictates the important need for change, improvement, and growth in American public schools.

Seasonal hunger and cyclical learning loss highlight two of the major flaws of our country’s public educational system. Some may argue that summer vacation is a hallmark of a student’s school year and that it has been part of public schools’ calendars for over one hundred years. However, it doesn’t have to be this way. Implementation of a year-round public school schedule would solve these two major problems, and would also create numerous benefits for the rest of the school year.

Schools’ current summer vacation schedules are based upon an outdated timeline that was originally developed during the country’s agrarian years, when schools did not have air conditioning and classrooms became unbearably hot during warmer months. Due to the heat and uncomfortable classroom conditions for students and teachers, schools began closing for several months in the summer. This trend continued until it was finally incorporated into a typical public school calendar in the late 19th century. Since that time, there has been little change in school calendars; three-month summer vacations became the standard.

The current nine-month calendar used in public education is antiquated and even detrimental to learning. Although 3-month summer breaks have existed for over 10 decades, I advocate for a year-round schedule for schools. A yearround school calendar would help eliminate the two main problems created by long summer breaks. First, by incorporating shorter, more evenly spaced vacation periods, a year-round school program would lead to greater academic continuity for both students and teachers. It would also enable students to maintain on-going academic progress without months’ long gaps, thus avoiding the “summer slide” and leading to enhanced long-term academic success. Equally as important, year-round calendars would also help decrease the risk of hunger for millions of students who rely on schools’ meal programs. Other benefits of year-round school programs are numerous and include continued utilization of schools’ facilities, increased number of school days per year, fewer days required for parents to arrange possible child care services, increased number of paid work days for teachers/staff, continued social/academic engagement for students, and decreased risk of vacation boredom for students.

I am fully aware that implementation of a dramatically different educational system such as year-round public school would be challenging, costly, and highly 30

One of the most interesting books I read this past summer was Charles Duhigg’s The Power of Habit, in which he describes the incredible control our habits have over our decisions and behaviors. Interestingly, he argues that the habits of families, companies, and societies follow the same patterns as individual habits. Duhigg says that habits are useful because they save us the mental effort of making conscious decisions. However, there is a disadvantage when things are done purely out of habit: people sometimes start the car when it’s already running or walk into the kitchen and forget why.

The same failures of thinking afflict society as well, and our culture can find itself doing something simply because “We’ve always done it this way.” One cultural habit that ought to be changed is the forty-hour workweek.

Although the forty-hour week was a victory of organized labor when it was introduced, in its current form it is unfair and inefficient. Economic changes over the last fifty years have made it possible to work less and make more money.

Who doesn’t want that?

James VanAntwerp Grand Rapids Christian High School James intends to pursue a degree in Chemical Engineering.

A brief look at the history of US labor relations allows us to understand why a forty-hour workweek is our standard.

The first major company in the US to institute a fortyhour workweek was right here in Michigan: the Ford Motor Company. In 1914, Henry Ford cut hours at all Ford plants from forty-eight to forty hours a week without a corresponding cut in pay. In an interview with Samuel Crowther, Ford explained that he did not institute this change out of the goodness of his heart, but rather in response to economic pressure. Ford found that workers were less efficient when they worked long hours. In fact, his employees got more done during a forty-hour week than a forty-eight hour week. Ford prophetically wrote “The economic value of leisure has not found its way into the thought of industrial leaders to any great extent.

While the old idea of ‘lost time’ has departed, and it is no longer believed that the reduction of the labor day from twelve hours to eight hours has decreased production, still the positive industrial value -- the dollars and cents value -- of leisure, is not understood.” His words proved true in 1940 when the Fair Labor Standards Act made a forty-hour workweek law, and required overtime pay for hourly workers who worked more than forty hours in a week. Ford’s prediction is still true today; the benefits of working less than forty hours a week, for business and the economy, is not yet understood.

Working Hard, or Hardly Working?

THE FUTURE OF THE FORTY-HOUR WORKWEEK

31

are stuck spending forty hours in an office where they are hardly working simply because “we’ve always done it this way.”

The primary reason for changing the forty-hour workweek is that it no longer matches our economic reality. Major economic shifts in the last fifty years have necessitated major economic changes, but not enough changes have come. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported in 2014 that labor productivity in the business sector grew in a steady, linear fashion from 1947 to 2013. In fact, during the recession of 2007-2009, labor productivity in the US business sector increased, even though output and hours worked fell. This pattern is common in economic recessions; when the going gets tough, businesses and markets trim and pinch, and come out the other side slim and efficient. As data from Economic Policy Institute shows, increased productivity in cycles of economic growth and loss translated to rising wages for the American worker from 1947 until 1973.

In addition to jobs with inflated hours, we have whole economies with inflated jobs. A recent paper by two Dutch economists polled 27,000 workers in thirtyseven countries, and asked if their job was contributing to society. Seventeen percent of workers doubted their job contributed anything, and eight percent said they were sure it didn’t. If a full quarter of the workforce is useless, we are living the broken windows fallacy. It doesn’t matter if everyone has a job if those jobs are meaningless.

By expecting workers to do more work than they realistically should, we have built a job market where many jobs are useless. By cutting working hours drastically, we can eliminate the useless parts of the workforce without suffering higher unemployment. Imagine how much happier employees would be to work hard if their job no longer felt drawn-out, boring, or meaningless.

However, in the years since 1973, productivity (and GDP with it) have risen nearly seven times faster than wages. Although the US is making more money, most people aren’t seeing it. More thorough analyses of American wealth inequality has been done elsewhere, but suffice it to say that working Americans aren’t getting their fair share. Cheap computing and automation have made significant improvements in economic productivity since 1973, but that change in economic conditions has not changed economic practices.

Workers are creating more and more value for their employers but continue to be paid the same real wages.

In fact, if wages tracked with increasing productivity calculated by the Economic Policy Institute, US minimum wage would currently be about twenty five dollars per hour. With more equitable distribution of wealth, and the GDP growth the US has experienced since 1973, regular workers could be working less and taking more money home.

Not only is working forty hours a week unnecessary, it is also detrimental to good health and happiness. A 2003 study from the University of Melbourne found that working more than 25 hours a week had a detrimental impact on cognitive function, but working less than 25 hours a week can improve cognitive function. These effects are more pronounced among older workers. Work can be detrimental to emotional health as well as cognitive function. Scientific research on satisfaction has shown that one of the only things that correlates directly to happiness is how much time people spend commuting to work. If workers did not have to work on Fridays, for example, they would reduce commuting time by 20%, making them happier, healthier workers. In fact, some companies have already begun expecting a four-day, thirty-two hour workweek in order to bring some of the outlined benefits to their workers. By reducing the time employees are expected to spend at work, they can enjoy lives with better emotional, mental, and physical health.

Another reason for reducing the time in a workweek is the psychology of worker effectiveness. Workers are not able to focus and work effectively for a full eight hours in day. A 2016 study in the UK found that workers were only productive for about three hours in an eight hour day. The rest of the time was spent reading news, checking social media, chatting with coworkers, eating, and other non-essential tasks. The workers knew it too. Of the nearly 2,000 workers, four in five admitted that they weren’t productive throughout the work day. If workers are working less than 40% of the time, why not stop pretending to be busy, and spend our time on what we want? Employees are bored and unhappy because they

The future of work will also be one with shorter workweeks, out of necessity. As automation and productivity increase exponentially, there will be simply less work for humans to do. A 2017 report from the McKinsey Global Institute says that although less than five percent of all jobs will be completely automated, 60% of all jobs can be at least 30% automated. Less work to do should mean less work is expected of employees. Many futurists, such as Jeremy Rifkin, argue that in the future, full-time jobs will be optional by necessity. Globally, more people will 32

be able to work than there will be work for them to do. So although we can kick the can further down the road and continue to expect a forty-hour workweek like we’ve always had, sooner or later, the way people are employed has to change.

The current culture of work in the US has a habit of expecting forty hours a week for full time employment, but that is a habit we can, and should, change. Historically, the time in a workweek fell as labor productivity increased.

The digital revolution and increased automation allow us a world where work is better for everyone. Rather than creating a labor shortage, better working hours could draw sectors of society who have historically left the workforce back into it by offering them labor they like. Expanding benefits to those workers who are now considered part-time could significantly alleviate problems in the healthcare market. With reduced expectations on employees, and more opportunity for employment, opportunities would become available for more people to support themselves. Workers could stop wasting time at work, and become more effective at what they do. So although we have always done it this way, a forty-hour workweek is something we will need to change if we want a better society.

Works Cited Creedy, John, and Rosanna Scutella. The Role of the Unit of Analysis in Tax Policy Reform Evaluation. Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, 2003.

Crowther, Samuel. “HENRY FORD: Why I Favor Five Days’ Work With Six Days’ Pay.” The World’s Work, Oct. 1926.

Duhigg, Charles. The Power of Habit: Why We Do What We Do in Life and Business. IDreamBooks Inc, 2015.

Dur, Robert, and Max Van Lent. “Socially Useless Jobs.” SSRN Electronic Journal, 2018.

Hilbrecht, Margo, et al. “Highway to Health? Commute Time and Well-Being among Canadian Adults.” World Leisure Journal, vol. 56, no. 2, 8 Apr. 2014, pp. 151–163.

Johnson, Chris. “How Many Productive Hours in a Work Day? Just 2 Hours, 23 Minutes...” Vouchercloud, Invitation Digital Ltd, 2016.

Kajitani, Shinya, et al. “Use It Too Much and Lose It? The Effect of Working Hours on Cognitive Ability.” Melbourneinstitute.unimelb.edu, University of Melbourne , Feb. 2016.

Manyika, J., et al. A Future That Works: Automation, Employment, and Productivity. McKinsey Global Institute, 2017.

“Mind/Body Health: Job Stress.” American Psychological Association, American Psychological Association.

Mishel, Lawrence, and Josh Bivens. “Understanding the Historic Divergence Between Productivity and a Typical Worker’s Pay: Why It Matters and Why It’s Real.” Economic Policy Institute, 2 Sept. 2015.

Rifkin, Jeremy. The End of Work: the Decline of the Global Labor Force and the Dawn of the Post-Market Era. Jeremy P. Tarcher/Penguin, 2004.

Thomasson, Emma. “Burnout, Stress Lead More Companies to Try a Four-Day Work Week.” Reuters, 17 Dec. 2018.

United States, Congress, Bureau of Labor Statistics, and Shawn Sprague. “What Can Labor Productivity Tell Us about the U.S. Economy?” What Can Labor Productivity Tell Us about the U.S. Economy?, May 2014.

United States, Congress, Office of Financial Management. “Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).” Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), State of Washington, 2017.

“5 Reasons to Spend Time with Your Family.” CABA, The Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales , 10 Aug. 2017.

33

34

Over the past few years, the conversation about the LGBT population has become much more prominent in our communities and cultures. Greater and greater numbers of people are feeling safe and comfortable in who they are as well as who they love. With the changing times, however, there remains one constant that requires important alterations: the lack of education concerning LGBT romantic and sexual relationships in high schools.

According to a study conducted by the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network, fewer than 5% of LGBT students reported having health classes that included topics relevant to the LGBT community. While highlighting every aspect of a heterosexual relationship and the sexual safety that goes along with it, high school health classes fail to have lectures that include realistic depictions of long term gay and lesbian couples and their options in terms of sexual health and family planning.

Brandon Zink Jenison High School Brandon intends to pursue a degree in Psychology at Central Michigan University.

Every video and scenario played out in most current health classes only address the relationship between a man and woman. Our LGBT youth deserve to learn the same topics in a way that is inclusive to their experiences in a safe environment. It has been found that with proper sexual education, the risks of promiscuity and contracting sexually transmitted infections declines sharply. Without teachings that include LGBT relationships, same sex couples are deprived the knowledge that lead to that reduced risk.

In fact, it has been proven that even though gay men make up only about 4.1% of the population, they account for more than half of all new cases of HIV each year.

Additionally, LGBT youths are being deprived of education about their own identities. Without this education, a great deal of the LGBT community finds themselves falling into a state of depression as a result of feeling different than their peers. Unfortunately, a large number will even go as far as taking their own lives as a consequence of feeling as though they are built wrong and not accepted by others. Data collected through The Trevor Project found that LGBT youths are almost five times as likely to attempt suicide compared to hetersoexual youths.

The recognition of LGBT relationships in the classroom would certainly help to alleviate some of the uncertainty and risks that surround our LGBT youth today.

A CALL FOR EQUALITY IN THE CLASSROOM

Further problems involving LGBT sexual education involve the use of misinformation. According to the 35

National School Climate Survey, of the few students that have reported receiving LGBT inclusive sexual education, many of them have said the LGBT group was only ever brought up when discussing risky behaviors, which creates a dangerous and abnormal portrayal of the community.

Another problem of improper education reported in the survey is the exclusion of the T in LGBT. Out of the schools that implement LGBT teachings, many of them fail to recognize the transgender population. Not only do schools need to work to include LGBT information in health classes, they need to also make sure it is being taught thoroughly.

While the health classes that I personally had did an excellent job covering the topic of family planning for couples who plan to conceive, they hardly skimmed the surface of adoption, and never once mentioned the option of surrogacy. When these topics are left out of discussion, it makes it seem nearly impossible for gay and lesbian couples to ever start a family. The two latter options are very legitimate ways to have children for any couple, but they are crucial options for our community’s same sex couples. Without proper knowledge of adoption and surrogacy at a younger age, it is easy for LGBT people to get in the mindset that they will never have children, and this mentality can be quite heartbreaking for those who wish to become parents. Same sex couples have every right that heterosexual couples do when it comes to creating a family, so they should be given the proper cognizance to do so.

It is a tragedy that among this vastly diverse group of people whose place is becoming more widely accepted in our culture, only a miniscule fraction of them are receiving the education that they have a right to; the same right that every straight youth in the public school system is granted. As a gay person who has been through the public school system without any positive homosexual recognition in my health classes, I was lucky enough to have parents who cared to help me research the information I needed. I am more than aware, however, that not every child in the LGBT community is so lucky to have parents as accepting as mine. High school health classes have always been centralized solely around the teachings of information on the heterosexual relationship, and I believe that it is our job, as a united human race, to change these classes to be much more LGBT inclusive.

36

THANK YOU! Lake Michigan Credit Union would like to extend our thanks and appreciation to the judges of the 2019 Hutt Scholarship contest who helped select our 15 winners out of the 1,181 essays submitted this year.

37

External Judging Panel: Christy Buck Mental Health Foundation Gary Ebels Grand Rapids Community College Karalyn Jilbert Mercy Health Keri Kujala Saint Mary’s Foundation Lanny Sperry Retired David Weinandy Aquinas College Deb Warwick Ferris State University Teri Lamaine Bonita Springs Assistance Office Krashawn Martin City of Wyoming Rob Shubow Big Water Technologies

38

LMCU.org/Hutt