[ABANDONED] Equality of Opportunity in Higher Education Act

[Helaw]

OOC: Early, reasonably-written draft that I just vomited out of my brain. Taking suggestions for how I can fit the word 'bamboozle' into this one.

Equality of Opportunity in Higher Education Act
Category: Education and Creativity
Area of Effect: Educational

The World Assembly,

Believing that higher education is an important part of developing any society, as it imparts vast amounts of key knowledge and wisdom on a wide scale,

Praising the measures that many member nations have introduced to promote higher education to their citizens,

Concerned that higher education has the potential to be rife with fundamental bias in favour of certain groups in the admissions process and beyond,

Uneasy towards the notion that higher education may become overly exclusive, thus damaging the scientific and cultural progress of society at large,

Hereby,

1. Defines;

a. 'higher education' as an optional level of education occurring after primary and secondary education, found at institutions such as universities and colleges,
b. 'bias' as an intrinsic preference that an individual or group may have towards or against facilitating a certain race, gender, species, social class, caste, religion, or age group in a manner which does not apply to other groups,
c. 'students', for the purposes of this resolution, as being domestic nationals that are studying at one or more institutions of higher education in a member nation,

2. Declares that member nations must dutifully oversee institutions of higher education to ensure that only overtly stated factors are considered in deciding which students will be selected in any relevant admissions processes and that any potential unexpressed bias is prevented,

3. Establishes the Equality of Opportunity in Higher Education Committee (EOHEC), with the founding objective of providing individuals and groups with a straightforward legal pathway of reporting institutions of higher education that they believe harbour an unspoken bias in admissions processes,

4. Grants the EOHEC the power to;

a. launch investigations into institutions of higher education that are suspected to be covertly biased in their methodology of selecting applicants to accept,
b. formally condemn any institutions that have been found to be biased in any associated EOHEC investigation,
c. inform any relevant national bodies and recommend sanctions and legal action,
d. publish reports that detail confirmed elements of bias in institutions of higher learning.

[States of Glory WA Office]

Neville: Will this proposal as written ban affirmative action?

[Roborian]

"This functionally eliminates any and all private universities with specialized criteria, such as religious schools and womens' colleges. Opposed."

[Helaw]

Neville: Will this proposal as written ban affirmative action?

"Not broadly," states Ambassador Quirell. "Only in terms of higher education. Admissions processes would focus on academic merit, rather than attempting to fulfil quotas or satisfy internal biases towards certain groups. Whether or not member nations choose to remove societal problems that may lead to unequal proportions of different groups in higher education is up to them, either through national legislation or international initiatives."

"This functionally eliminates any and all private universities with specialized criteria, such as religious schools and womens' colleges. Opposed."

"A fair point. I respect that viewpoint, though I may not necessarily align myself with it. Perhaps a change to the draft that allows for overall university policy to be exempt would change things? It's certainly a compromise worth considering."

[Roborian]

"A fair point. I respect that viewpoint, though I may not necessarily align myself with it. Perhaps a change to the draft that allows for overall university policy to be exempt would change things? It's certainly a compromise worth considering."

"Such would be a minimum amendment. As noted, attempts to increase enrollment of disadvantaged minority groups would be banned under this resolution, as would any holistic system taking multiple factors, including race, into account. Though a more minor concern than the blow that would be struck against private universities with specific constituencies, which the suggestion would at least help to rectify, it does involve a great deal of WA involvement in a nation's own social policies."

"It is a valid question whether the enrollment processes of universities are even a national, yet alone an international issue, and thus the expansion of WA power into this area is somewhat difficult to swallow."

[Dragonslinding WA Mission]

"It is a valid question whether the enrollment processes of universities are even a national, yet alone an international issue, and thus the expansion of WA power into this area is somewhat difficult to swallow."

Ser Dawrin Stone: "It is the contention that it is not an international issue, and thus we oppose. International issues must be international in scope, and this or that university accepting this or that applicant is rarely a national issue, let alone an international one. Now, if we were dealing with the enrollment of foreign students, that would be an international issue--but Dragonslund would still oppose."

[Sanctaria]

The Divine Republic is not of the position that individual university admission requirements is something that should be regulated by international law.

[Helaw]

"A fair point. I respect that viewpoint, though I may not necessarily align myself with it. Perhaps a change to the draft that allows for overall university policy to be exempt would change things? It's certainly a compromise worth considering."

"Such would be a minimum amendment. As noted, attempts to increase enrollment of disadvantaged minority groups would be banned under this resolution, as would any holistic system taking multiple factors, including race, into account. Though a more minor concern than the blow that would be struck against private universities with specific constituencies, which the suggestion would at least help to rectify, it does involve a great deal of WA involvement in a nation's own social policies."

"It is a valid question whether the enrollment processes of universities are even a national, yet alone an international issue, and thus the expansion of WA power into this area is somewhat difficult to swallow."

"The amendment will be made, but I would like to counter the point that university enrolment is not an international issue."

Quirrel takes a sip of water.

"Fundamentally, the WA exists to both protect the interests of its member nations, and safeguard the citizens that find themselves a part of it. Though this principle was not cited at its founding, it is obvious that it has evolved to be a force that tackles threats to both individuals and super-nations. The problem, of course, is working out precisely how different parts of that tie together.

"University enrolment is doubtlessly a national issue. Higher education is critical to ensuring that high-skill jobs are occupied, and is essential to the scientific - universities are generally regarded as fountains of research and development - and cultural- studying a nation's past and archiving its history are highly important to national culture - development of each member nation. It is also an individual issue, as it offers citizens a chance to pursue their interests to a greater level of education, and apply that in the world of work to a higher level and with greater impact. Though moving on to university education may be optional for an individual, it is necessary on a wider scale for various reasons, as well as being crucial if the individual desires to advance to a level of work that they simply do not yet have the knowledge and skills for.

"I can see why you may question whether or not this issue is one with long-reaching, international effects. I would like to take this opportunity to apply my above argument on an international scale. Citizens that are foreign students are protected by this proposal, and they are assured that their interest in studying abroad for any reason - an interest in local culture, a desire to see the world, or an aspiration to study at a very highly-ranked foreign university, perhaps - is unaffected by any form of unspoken intrinsic bias. The movement of students, which constitutes the movement of a highly knowledgeable and skilled workforce to new regions, is something that cannot be ignored. Furthermore, national scientific and cultural developments can benefit entire regions and perhaps the whole world. Hence, it is not unreasonable for an international WA movement to cultivate knowledge in member nations and ensure that academic merit alone is judged."

[Kruxonm]

I agree that this act has good intentions and is beneficial, however being mandated by an international government is not in our nation's interests. An amendment which encourages national governments to make such laws corresponding with national circumstances would be recommended.

[Kenmoria]

"Although I support this draft and believe it's policies should be made into law, it is not an international issue, much as I would like to be, and thus I oppose."

[Araraukar]

OOC: Considering that there are, somewhere around the RL world, such things as private universities - for example ones geared towards certain religions - would this ban them from being selective about students based on anything else but merit as well?

Also, have a very thorough read-through of GA #159, Promotion of Intl Education.

[Helaw]

OOC: Considering that there are, somewhere around the RL world, such things as private universities - for example ones geared towards certain religions - would this ban them from being selective about students based on anything else but merit as well?

Also, have a very thorough read-through of GA #159, Promotion of Intl Education.

OOC: The point about private universities was addressed earlier. The draft will be amended to exclude them.

GA #159 makes it difficult. Though I do believe that domestic university enrolment is an issue with international applications and thus should not be brushed aside, #159 deals with international exchange students, taking away a possible dynamic that this resolution could have had. I do not see this draft and that resolution as being mutually exclusive, however.

Though I have made my argument, people seem disinterested in legislating in regards to domestic enrolment, which I can understand. Perhaps a complete lack of support will indicate that this draft is better off in the bin.

Edit: Some small changes with big effects. Institutions would have to overtly state all admissions criteria that would be considered, thus allowing for private universities to operate normally in this regard.

[Roborian]

"The amendment will be made, but I would like to counter the point that university enrolment is not an international issue."

Quirrel takes a sip of water.

"Fundamentally, the WA exists to both protect the interests of its member nations, and safeguard the citizens that find themselves a part of it. Though this principle was not cited at its founding, it is obvious that it has evolved to be a force that tackles threats to both individuals and super-nations. The problem, of course, is working out precisely how different parts of that tie together.

"University enrolment is doubtlessly a national issue. Higher education is critical to ensuring that high-skill jobs are occupied, and is essential to the scientific - universities are generally regarded as fountains of research and development - and cultural- studying a nation's past and archiving its history are highly important to national culture - development of each member nation. It is also an individual issue, as it offers citizens a chance to pursue their interests to a greater level of education, and apply that in the world of work to a higher level and with greater impact. Though moving on to university education may be optional for an individual, it is necessary on a wider scale for various reasons, as well as being crucial if the individual desires to advance to a level of work that they simply do not yet have the knowledge and skills for.

"I can see why you may question whether or not this issue is one with long-reaching, international effects. I would like to take this opportunity to apply my above argument on an international scale. Citizens that are foreign students are protected by this proposal, and they are assured that their interest in studying abroad for any reason - an interest in local culture, a desire to see the world, or an aspiration to study at a very highly-ranked foreign university, perhaps - is unaffected by any form of unspoken intrinsic bias. The movement of students, which constitutes the movement of a highly knowledgeable and skilled workforce to new regions, is something that cannot be ignored. Furthermore, national scientific and cultural developments can benefit entire regions and perhaps the whole world. Hence, it is not unreasonable for an international WA movement to cultivate knowledge in member nations and ensure that academic merit alone is judged."

"While such points, fairly taken, surely reinforce the general importance of universities in development, one does not appear to find a case for government involvement in said argument. That higher education is useful in promoting research and development, historical or cultural study, and promoting high-skill employment is simple enough, and will not be contested, but taking the definition provided for the purpose of the World Assembly-to safeguard the citizens of member nations, the matters can be seen to be quite different. University, as described, is a beneficial addendum, useful. Such a categorization does not well fit with a concept of 'safeguarding' citizens of any nation. One could argue that, rather, the WA is taking the opportunity to promote the advancement of citizens of the various nations, but such is not the given purpose of the WA, and is extremely problematic in itself, given the broad reach that could easily be justified under such a standard. A citizen who elects not to attend university is in no way endangered, and thus the protection of their safety by the WA is not advanced by meddling with the admissions standards of institutions of higher education."

"Foreign students do not appear to be included in the proposal as written, but even with such a conclusion, the argument follows the same lines. A case can be made that 'national scientific and cultural developments can benefit entire regions and perhaps the whole world', though one could easily point to the vast amounts of conflicts driven by cultural 'development' as a counterpoint-but the core issue remains the same: that the proposal is written from a certain conception of benefit rather than from a position of seeking to safeguard, seeing the World Assembly acting outside of its spectrum."

"To add an addition note, while our primary focus has been on admissions standards, the third point, though vaguely worded, has the potential to be problematic. As currently written, this section would only require it to be legal to provide loans to students, which, while potentially an issue for some Communist or like nations, is generally little problem. If this is interpreted, however, to serve as a mandate for national governments to provide loans in amount equal to all short-term costs of higher education, the World Assembly has then pressed itself into the pocketbook of a nation, who may well not be capable of affording such loans, particularly given that no exception is given for those of doubtful credit. Such would, outside its overinvolvement in an issue in which the WA ought not to have authority, financing and budgeting of government, bears the potential for negative economic effects, cutting back against the proposals one positive point of suggestion general prosperity."

"To summarize, if a lengthy speech is too taxing, the proposal does not act to safeguard citizens of member nations, but simply to further one conception of advancement, and may be problematic in its potential mandate for governments to provide risky and likely to be unpaid loans beyond its ability to afford them."

[Jarish Inyo]

The Empire doesn’t interfere with private colleges enrollment process. The only universities the government runs are the Imperial Military Academies. Nor do we interfere with private lending institutions processes. The Empire doesn’t provide financial support to anyone.

As for foreign students, we have none as no foreigner is not granted permission to enter the Empire. With the exception of Harold the compliance gnome.

[Flying Eagles]

You know, if more than half of the WA votes in favour of this resolution then regulation of Universities is a matter of international law

[The Bible Baptist Republic]

Opposed. If the World Assembly is allowed to set college admittance standards, it sets a precedent for a future World Assembly proposal to dictate college curricula standards.

[Essu Beti]

You know, if more than half of the WA votes in favour of this resolution then regulation of Universities is a matter of international law

"Your point?" asks Iksana.

[Helaw]

"While such points, fairly taken, surely reinforce the general importance of universities in development, one does not appear to find a case for government involvement in said argument. That higher education is useful in promoting research and development, historical or cultural study, and promoting high-skill employment is simple enough, and will not be contested, but taking the definition provided for the purpose of the World Assembly-to safeguard the citizens of member nations, the matters can be seen to be quite different. University, as described, is a beneficial addendum, useful. Such a categorization does not well fit with a concept of 'safeguarding' citizens of any nation. One could argue that, rather, the WA is taking the opportunity to promote the advancement of citizens of the various nations, but such is not the given purpose of the WA, and is extremely problematic in itself, given the broad reach that could easily be justified under such a standard. A citizen who elects not to attend university is in no way endangered, and thus the protection of their safety by the WA is not advanced by meddling with the admissions standards of institutions of higher education."

"Foreign students do not appear to be included in the proposal as written, but even with such a conclusion, the argument follows the same lines. A case can be made that 'national scientific and cultural developments can benefit entire regions and perhaps the whole world', though one could easily point to the vast amounts of conflicts driven by cultural 'development' as a counterpoint-but the core issue remains the same: that the proposal is written from a certain conception of benefit rather than from a position of seeking to safeguard, seeing the World Assembly acting outside of its spectrum."

"To add an addition note, while our primary focus has been on admissions standards, the third point, though vaguely worded, has the potential to be problematic. As currently written, this section would only require it to be legal to provide loans to students, which, while potentially an issue for some Communist or like nations, is generally little problem. If this is interpreted, however, to serve as a mandate for national governments to provide loans in amount equal to all short-term costs of higher education, the World Assembly has then pressed itself into the pocketbook of a nation, who may well not be capable of affording such loans, particularly given that no exception is given for those of doubtful credit. Such would, outside its overinvolvement in an issue in which the WA ought not to have authority, financing and budgeting of government, bears the potential for negative economic effects, cutting back against the proposals one positive point of suggestion general prosperity."

"To summarize, if a lengthy speech is too taxing, the proposal does not act to safeguard citizens of member nations, but simply to further one conception of advancement, and may be problematic in its potential mandate for governments to provide risky and likely to be unpaid loans beyond its ability to afford them."

"I understand your opinion, but we must also consider the fact that there are protections for individuals that already exist - in the form of, say, refugee or migrant-student legislation - that override national government sovereignty for the sake of advancing the interests of the individual, and protecting them from what could be seen by them as unjust outside interference in some cases - with these pieces of legislation being of no benefit to people that do not fall into these groups. If we are to limit the WA to legislating on matters that would affect every single citizen in ever member nation, then we will prevent it from looking at particular circumstances that may heavily affect individuals that cannot opt for another path in order to achieve their personal goals, or to live in adequate conditions. Not everyone may be a student, but not everyone will be a refugee or a in their lifetimes, either. Both groups are worthy of protection, along with any group. Furthermore, while university is an addendum to the individual, on an international scale, it is essential to the development of society. Thus, a lack of university attendance by the brightest minds truly can negatively affect an individual who has not gone to university. What if that individual is a business owner, seeking excellently-qualified graduates with the best skills one can have? This individual would not personally need university education, but their employees might. The candidates on offer may have poor degrees due to the fact that they were given places in lieu of the more skilled university applicants, due to some factor that would have caused said applicants to simply apply elsewhere if they were informed of its usage in the admissions system. Preventing inherent, undisclosed bias in the university selection system ensures that this business owner, and those that use their services and goods, benefit from having those with the very best minds working for the business.

"I must note that you have misinterpreted the section on fees and loans entirely. It does not require that the government provide loans to individuals, it mandates that they must provide avenues for individuals to acquire loans, whether that be through the government, through a bank, or through a specialised student loans company. The WA does not seek to guarantee individuals a good deal, just a deal. Anything more than that would most certainly be excessive. If a student is forced to live on noodles for decades to pay copious amounts of interest, so be it. At least then, they would still be able to go to university at all.

"To summarise, the proposal aims to advance the scientific and cultural position of nations, benefit and protect individuals that seek to facilitate this development, and offer businesses the very best possible graduates that have not been discriminated against in any way other than their academic ability, this being something that businesses will be looking for in their best candidates. The proposal does not require that the government offer generous financial aid, just that it ensures individuals have a source of loans available, public or private."

Opposed. If the World Assembly is allowed to set college admittance standards, it sets a precedent for a future World Assembly proposal to dictate college curricula standards.

"We won't set the standards, only eliminate unseen bias. Meaning, you won't be allowed to discreetly measure candidates by the size of the feet, or the pitch of their voice, without telling them that that's how they will be measured as candidates. You can still demand nothing short of geniuses for cake decoration courses."

You know, if more than half of the WA votes in favour of this resolution then regulation of Universities is a matter of international law

"Your point?" asks Iksana.

"I think that was the point. Anything can be considered an international issue when international bodies start caring about it.

"I maintain, of course, that if a resolution about the contents of sandwiches reached quorum, you could probably get people to vote for it. Thus, sandwiches become an international issue."

[Roborian]

"I understand your opinion, but we must also consider the fact that there are protections for individuals that already exist - in the form of, say, refugee or migrant-student legislation - that override national government sovereignty for the sake of advancing the interests of the individual, and protecting them from what could be seen by them as unjust outside interference in some cases - with these pieces of legislation being of no benefit to people that do not fall into these groups. If we are to limit the WA to legislating on matters that would affect every single citizen in ever member nation, then we will prevent it from looking at particular circumstances that may heavily affect individuals that cannot opt for another path in order to achieve their personal goals, or to live in adequate conditions. Not everyone may be a student, but not everyone will be a refugee or a in their lifetimes, either. Both groups are worthy of protection, along with any group. Furthermore, while university is an addendum to the individual, on an international scale, it is essential to the development of society. Thus, a lack of university attendance by the brightest minds truly can negatively affect an individual who has not gone to university. What if that individual is a business owner, seeking excellently-qualified graduates with the best skills one can have? This individual would not personally need university education, but their employees might. The candidates on offer may have poor degrees due to the fact that they were given places in lieu of the more skilled university applicants, due to some factor that would have caused said applicants to simply apply elsewhere if they were informed of its usage in the admissions system. Preventing inherent, undisclosed bias in the university selection system ensures that this business owner, and those that use their services and goods, benefit from having those with the very best minds working for the business.

"I must note that you have misinterpreted the section on fees and loans entirely. It does not require that the government provide loans to individuals, it mandates that they must provide avenues for individuals to acquire loans, whether that be through the government, through a bank, or through a specialised student loans company. The WA does not seek to guarantee individuals a good deal, just a deal. Anything more than that would most certainly be excessive. If a student is forced to live on noodles for decades to pay copious amounts of interest, so be it. At least then, they would still be able to go to university at all.

"To summarise, the proposal aims to advance the scientific and cultural position of nations, benefit and protect individuals that seek to facilitate this development, and offer businesses the very best possible graduates that have not been discriminated against in any way other than their academic ability, this being something that businesses will be looking for in their best candidates. The proposal does not require that the government offer generous financial aid, just that it ensures individuals have a source of loans available, public or private."

"The word 'protection' is again used, in a case it should not be in this situation. As noted, this is not a protection of any rights, but a mandating of government standards and regulations in a circumstance in which many nations have none established. There is no spectre from which potential students are being protected from-with or without the implementation of this law, they come under no threat of harm. Rather, what this proposal seeks to do is to modify the criteria for what is functionally a luxury service, as you yourself have noted, its benefits coming from economic and cultural advancement rather than the protection of any human rights. The World Assembly would be taking it upon itself to direct policy that is nearly entirely intranational in substance, comments on potential foreign exchange students not changing the fact that the vast majority of this proposition is purely domestic. You state that the lack of a university can negatively affect an individual, but this is true only relatively, and relative negative effect is present in every inequality. A person unable to receive a ten million dollar inheritance from a parent is negatively affected as well, speaking in this relative sense. A winner of an international prize with significant prestige negatively affects the losers. The World Assembly cannot step in on grounds of negative effects due to another's action, because the only end result of such a policy must be a fully communistic system on an international level-one that not only has been proven to fail, but is far outside the responsibilities of this body."

"To call university education "essential to a society" is quite demonstrative of the position from which this is written. While such education can certainly be shown as useful, to call it essential to society is to quite blatantly impose a certain perception of ideal society onto every nation in this Assembly. A society is perfectly capable of functioning absent any higher education, or with limited higher education. Perhaps a nation's GDP would be lower in such a circumstance, but such is no measure of a society's function, and imposition of certain culture values as to societal mandates is extremely problematic from this institution."

"Forcing government involvement in banks or companies in order to guarantee a loan is available is once again mandating policy that the WA has no business in. Many member nations remove government interference or ownership from the private sector, with good reason, and forcing such to provide ill-advised loans, for if they were well-advised, they would be provided, is imposing on sovereignty in a significant way."

"The summary concludes my point as well. This proposition is written from a position of opinion of cultural benefit of university. In your culture, that may well be the case. In others, quite possibly not so. A certain view of productive economic and cultural policy should not be forced onto all nations with vastly different domestic policies on this matter. The international aspect of this bill seems largely limited to seeking to improve the outcomes, from a perspective of opinion, of various nations, and thus serves only to act as domestic policy would."

[Helaw]

"I understand your opinion, but we must also consider the fact that there are protections for individuals that already exist - in the form of, say, refugee or migrant-student legislation - that override national government sovereignty for the sake of advancing the interests of the individual, and protecting them from what could be seen by them as unjust outside interference in some cases - with these pieces of legislation being of no benefit to people that do not fall into these groups. If we are to limit the WA to legislating on matters that would affect every single citizen in ever member nation, then we will prevent it from looking at particular circumstances that may heavily affect individuals that cannot opt for another path in order to achieve their personal goals, or to live in adequate conditions. Not everyone may be a student, but not everyone will be a refugee or a in their lifetimes, either. Both groups are worthy of protection, along with any group. Furthermore, while university is an addendum to the individual, on an international scale, it is essential to the development of society. Thus, a lack of university attendance by the brightest minds truly can negatively affect an individual who has not gone to university. What if that individual is a business owner, seeking excellently-qualified graduates with the best skills one can have? This individual would not personally need university education, but their employees might. The candidates on offer may have poor degrees due to the fact that they were given places in lieu of the more skilled university applicants, due to some factor that would have caused said applicants to simply apply elsewhere if they were informed of its usage in the admissions system. Preventing inherent, undisclosed bias in the university selection system ensures that this business owner, and those that use their services and goods, benefit from having those with the very best minds working for the business.

"I must note that you have misinterpreted the section on fees and loans entirely. It does not require that the government provide loans to individuals, it mandates that they must provide avenues for individuals to acquire loans, whether that be through the government, through a bank, or through a specialised student loans company. The WA does not seek to guarantee individuals a good deal, just a deal. Anything more than that would most certainly be excessive. If a student is forced to live on noodles for decades to pay copious amounts of interest, so be it. At least then, they would still be able to go to university at all.

"To summarise, the proposal aims to advance the scientific and cultural position of nations, benefit and protect individuals that seek to facilitate this development, and offer businesses the very best possible graduates that have not been discriminated against in any way other than their academic ability, this being something that businesses will be looking for in their best candidates. The proposal does not require that the government offer generous financial aid, just that it ensures individuals have a source of loans available, public or private."

"The word 'protection' is again used, in a case it should not be in this situation. As noted, this is not a protection of any rights, but a mandating of government standards and regulations in a circumstance in which many nations have none established. There is no spectre from which potential students are being protected from-with or without the implementation of this law, they come under no threat of harm. Rather, what this proposal seeks to do is to modify the criteria for what is functionally a luxury service, as you yourself have noted, its benefits coming from economic and cultural advancement rather than the protection of any human rights. The World Assembly would be taking it upon itself to direct policy that is nearly entirely intranational in substance, comments on potential foreign exchange students not changing the fact that the vast majority of this proposition is purely domestic. You state that the lack of a university can negatively affect an individual, but this is true only relatively, and relative negative effect is present in every inequality. A person unable to receive a ten million dollar inheritance from a parent is negatively affected as well, speaking in this relative sense. A winner of an international prize with significant prestige negatively affects the losers. The World Assembly cannot step in on grounds of negative effects due to another's action, because the only end result of such a policy must be a fully communistic system on an international level-one that not only has been proven to fail, but is far outside the responsibilities of this body."

"Individuals have a right to be judged fairly in any scenario according to a variety of factors that pertain to them (including credit scores, academic ability, gender, so on), but it is unfair to judge them on undisclosed factors. If you wish to see this resolution as protecting rights, that is how it should be done. You may also see it as protecting interests, which it does by granting individuals the opportunity to be fairly judged (according to their rights) to achieve a personal goal of attending a specific university. The 'spectre', here, that we are protecting them from, is unfair, unexplained treatment in their personal pursuits that otherwise would have led to them contributing healthily to society. We are not legislating on the minimum level of cosiness that blankets should have here. We are dealing with something that is in an entirely different league in how it ultimately contributes to individual nations, regions, and indeed the world. To contest that university research, development, and the creation of highly-skilled alumni exclusively affects individual nations with no outward effect is simply silly, and implies a very narrow view of academic and workforce movement. Science and academia, perhaps unsurprisingly, have legs.

"Furthermore, if you are content to argue that relative success and wellbeing is nothing that the World Assembly should concern itself with, I urge you to repeal each and every resolution that declares individual rights or freedoms that this Assembly has written into law. After all, not everyone will find themselves spiralling as a result of that. Or, rather, we should repeal every resolution, as they all involve the Assembly clearly stepping in on grounds of negative effects due to another's action. The World Assembly exists as a body that promotes freedoms, rights, and fair principles, and everything it does could be done on a domestic level, but is done internationally due to shared interests and a belief in the international merit of what resolutions seek to protect, at the cost of the sovereignty of national governments and bodies. If you dislike having your sovereignty walked upon, you are always welcome to leave."

A person unable to receive a ten million dollar inheritance from a parent is negatively affected as well, speaking in this relative sense. A winner of an international prize with significant prestige negatively affects the losers.

"Negative treatment is not what this resolution would solve. If the winner of that international prize is selected due to some undisclosed factor rather than the merit of what they did as a part of the competition, that is indubitably unfair treatment of the contestants overall, which is what would be addressed if this resolution was about international competitions. The fact that there are losers is no concern, as that is unavoidable and not something worth preventing."

"To call university education "essential to a society" is quite demonstrative of the position from which this is written. While such education can certainly be shown as useful, to call it essential to society is to quite blatantly impose a certain perception of ideal society onto every nation in this Assembly. A society is perfectly capable of functioning absent any higher education, or with limited higher education. Perhaps a nation's GDP would be lower in such a circumstance, but such is no measure of a society's function, and imposition of certain culture values as to societal mandates is extremely problematic from this institution."

"You are misinterpreting my words. The development of society, past a certain point, relies incredibly heavily upon the existence and usage of higher education on a wide scale."

"Forcing government involvement in banks or companies in order to guarantee a loan is available is once again mandating policy that the WA has no business in. Many member nations remove government interference or ownership from the private sector, with good reason, and forcing such to provide ill-advised loans, for if they were well-advised, they would be provided, is imposing on sovereignty in a significant way."

"Perhaps, if you are enraged as a result of its presence, you would be pleased to see the removal of the financial section?"

[Jarish Inyo]

the are no WA resolutions

refugee or migrant-student legislation

. Neither group is guarantied an college education. College admittances is not an international issue. Nor is it even a national issue.

[Helaw]

the are no WA resolutions

refugee or migrant-student legislation

What's that?

Neither group is guarantied an college education.

"Of course not. Perhaps you're missing the point of this proposal, and assuming it would change that fact?"

College admittances is not an international issue. Nor is it even a national issue.

"I disagree, and would recommend you actually read what has been written and what I have said in order to understand both the issue itself, and what is actually being proposed here."

[Jarish Inyo]

the are no WA resolutions

What's that?

Neither group is guarantied an college education.

"Of course not. Perhaps you're missing the point of this proposal, and assuming it would change that fact?"

College admittances is not an international issue. Nor is it even a national issue.

"I disagree, and would recommend you actually read what has been written and what I have said in order to understand both the issue itself, and what is actually being proposed here."

Damn, there are a lot missing from what I thought I had written. I blame the cat. What should have been there is that there is no are WA resolutions refugee or migrant-student legislation guaranteeing them access to college.

WAR 159 is not an immigrant-student legislation. It does not guarantee anyone the ability to attend college in other nations. Nations do not have to let anyone into their borders. Nor does the institute of higher learning that they are required to nominate actually meet the Office for Education Exchange guidelines.

WAR 57 doesn't actually offer any protections to refugees.

I'm not missing the point. You want nations to interfere with institutions of higher learning acceptance process for some perceived bias. And you want nations to either provide grants and loans or force financial institutions to give it to those you wouldn't be able to pay them back. Both are not within the preview of the WA's authority.

I've read your statements. And do not believe your arguments are enough to prove that college admissions is an international issue in any form.

The development of society, past a certain point, relies incredibly heavily upon the existence and usage of higher education on a wide scale.

This statement alone is in accurate. Society have and will continue to develop without the existence and usage of higher education on a wide scale.

[Helaw]

What's that?



"Of course not. Perhaps you're missing the point of this proposal, and assuming it would change that fact?"



"I disagree, and would recommend you actually read what has been written and what I have said in order to understand both the issue itself, and what is actually being proposed here."

Damn, there are a lot missing from what I thought I had written. I blame the cat. What should have been there is that there is no are WA resolutions refugee or migrant-student legislation guaranteeing them access to college.

That is true, yes. I am not attempting to refute that.

WAR 159 is not an immigrant-student legislation. It does not guarantee anyone the ability to attend college in other nations. Nations do not have to let anyone into their borders. Nor does the institute of higher learning that they are required to nominate actually meet the Office for Education Exchange guidelines.

It does not, and I am not trying to refute that either. Your post was fractured enough that I presumed you were claiming that there were no resolutions at all on refugees or migrant students.

WAR 57 doesn't actually offer any protections to refugees.

Elaborate. I am fairly sure that it does, and that it was the entire point of the resolution. Unless, of course, you mean university-related protections, in which case I agree with you.

I'm not missing the point. You want nations to interfere with institutions of higher learning acceptance process for some perceived bias. ANd you want nations to either provide grants and loans or force financial institutions to give it to those you wouldn't be able to pay them back. Both are not within the preview of the WA's authority.

The latter is something that I am very happy to compromise on, and the former is true, though clearly framed negatively. If there is an element of bias found following investigation that was not properly communicated, nations are advised to do something about it, and are further ordered to keep on the lookout themselves. Interference takes whatever form the nations wish, as all this resolution does is declare that they should be aware of it happening, and that the EOHEC should make recommendations on how to counter bias and produce reports for the public to read. Nations still have autonomy over how the bias is actually treated, they are just put under a certain amount of pressure to remove it from the equation.

Speaking of the loan section, it is now gone.

Your first implied that you believed this draft is guaranteeing university education for all. This is patently untrue. However, your second post clearly showed that you do know what this proposal is about. The first post did not show this, which is why there is a misunderstanding between us.

I've read your statements. And do not believe your arguments are enough to prove that college admissions is an international issue in any form.

That is fair, and you are welcome to have your own opinion. I am always interested in hearing the thoughts of others here. If a large majority of others see it as not requiring international legislation, then I am happy to let this draft drift away and work on other things. I do have one or two potentially interesting ideas for GA resolutions other than this one that I think would be fun to play around with and receive feedback on.