I got this in an email from a North Dakota reader attending Williston State College who is taking a final test in a composition class which requires an essay about whether or not students agree with government-run health care:

I have to write a paper about whether or not I agree with government sponsored heath care. But the thing is that I have to support my argument with the sources supplied to me. And all of the information supplied to me is basically FOR government sponsored health care. Is it fair that I have to write a paper arguing something that I don’t agree with?

So far the only thing in the information given to me that is against it states “No literal reading of the US Constitution acknowledges any right to heath care.” I can’t support a personal opinion with out correct documentation. As I am not provided any documents that support that opinion, I can’t really buck the system and pass.

Nice how that works, no?  Students are told to formulate and express an opinion about an issue, but can only use the sources provided by the professor and all of those sources support a single point of view on the issue.

The dilemma this student faces is do you just come out in favor of universal health care to get a good grade from the professor?  Or do you put down how you really feel about universal health care and risk getting a poor grade on your final test?

Does anyone remember when universities used to promote independent thinking?

And, on a side note, what kind of a college-level course provides students with sources and then asks them to write a paper?  Shouldn’t students be finding their own sources?  Or would that be too dangerous?  I mean, heaven forbid they find some research which indicates that universal health care is a utopian pipe dream and then formulate an independent thought on the subject or something.