“What Were the Major Reasons for the Creation of the State of Israel Essays

â€Å"What Were the Major Reasons for the Creation of the State of Israel Essays â€Å"What Were the Major Reasons for the Creation of the State of Israel Essay â€Å"What Were the Major Reasons for the Creation of the State of Israel Essay The state of Israel emerged on May 15, 1948. It was the first Jewish state to be established in nearly 2,000 years and was the culmination of efforts by the Jews to secure a homeland for themselves.This paper will explore the major reasons for its creation. It will be shown to be a long enduring quest that has biblical origins. Subsequently both biblical history and geography will be worthy of mention as they are integral to the question I will furthermore suggest that the Jewish belief from the bible forms a basis for motivation for the creation of a state. Allied with this belief is the persecution sufferred by Jews when they dispersed worldwide during exile.This persecution, they felt, could end if they were able to realise a state of their own, whereby they would be able to govern and protect themselves from others who would persecute them. However, the bible and events thousands of years ago have been ‘stepping stones’ in the outcome of 1948 . Accordingly, I will concentrate on the more recent ‘stepping stones’ that facilitated the creation of the Israel state. Some of the areas that have been selected include the Zionist Movement, World War One, World War Two and myriad of politics that came to the fore during this period.In particular I will discuss the Balfour Declaration and its effect on the situation, and comment on whether it was a turning point in the Zionist quest for the creation of the state of Israel. 2 Two more points are worthy of mention. Firstly, this paper does not intend to debate or suggest an Arab versus Israel, Jew versus Muslim situation even though their religions are different and and are a factor. Secondly, it is not a debate on the Palestinian claim for the land in question.It is rather an exploration on ‘why’ Jews sought this area of land and the subsequent chain of events whereby this was successfully realised in 1948. GEOGRAPHICAL, BIBLICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND The area of Israel, formerly Palestine, is at the eastern end of the Mediterranean Sea and is bounded by Lebanon in the north, to the north east by Syria, to the east and south east by Jordan and to the south west by Egypt. To the west is the Mediterranean Sea. Its total area is about 23,000 square kilometres (Harper 1986, p. 4) This particular area, as one of the oldest recorded in mankind’s civilisation has experienced numerous occupations. However, this situation sees two main ‘claimants’ to the land. The Palestinian claim is simple; they believe they were first inhabitants of the land descending from the ancient tribes of the Philistines and Canaanites. They argue the land is theirs perhaps much the same as the French regard France as their country, for example. The Jewish claim is not as straight forward. It has a complex historical and biblical argument. On the religious level, the Jews believe that God promised Palestine to them. The Book of Genesis in th e bible’s Old Testament records that Abraham, the father of the Jews, was told by God â€Å"the whole land of Canaan , where you are now an alien, I will give as an everlasting possession to you and your descendants after you†. (Harper, 1986 p. 16) The Jews claim their right to this land originates directly from the bible. Historically, the Jewish claim to Palestine rests on Jewish habitation, there from about 1300 B. C. hen the tribes of Israel (after initial exile from there due to famine) escaped under Moses’ leadership from Egypt, where they were enslaved, entered and conquered Palestine from the Canaanites, Philistines and other tribes living there. This occupation lasted some 700 years. From then on there was a series of occupations such as Romans, Persians and Turks. (Cattan, H. , 1971 p. 148) It should be mentioned at this stage, religion plays an important role in the situation. Palestine is the Holy Land of three of the world’s major religions Islam, Judaism and Christianity.They all have significant historical and religious sites in this region. (Harper, 1986, p. 17) The biblical claim, supported by the historical claim by the Jews, is at the heart of the major reasons for the creation of the state of Israel. Its creation was based on the belief by Jews that the land was promised to them by God. Even though there has been a series of ‘take overs’ and occupations by others in this area and the occurrence of numerous ‘persecutions’ of Jews (which will be commented on later 4 n greater detail) worldwide since, causing other reasons for Jews to seek refuge in a homeland of their own, the Biblical reasons should not be underestimated as a major factor for the state of Israel being realised in the first place. It was after Jewish exile and disaspora thereafter worldwide and the subsequent ramifications of this that caused renewed motivation for the creation of the Jewish state. One such example came i n the form of Zionism. ZIONISM Since the abovementioned exile, the Jews experienced a broad disaspora and settled in numerous parts of the world, notably Europe and the United States.There had been many persecutions of the Jews during this period. In particular, this occurred during the nineteenth century in Russia and eastern Europe, where there were many incidents of violence. These events caused a political movement called Zionism to emerge. This was the earliest organised claim by the Jews to Palestine and commenced in 1897. Zionism’s founder was an Hungarian Jew, Theodor Herzl. He believed strongly that anti-Semitism would occur in any nation which contained Jews.It is important to add that at this stage of world history many parts were being divided up into smaller individual states. This gave an independance from previous rulers and importantly gave an opportunity to manage and protect affairs. This development gives rise to a major reason for the state of Isreal being formed. If a state was created for the Jews in which to live, they could govern independantly and 5 therefore provide an opportunity to defend and protect themselves from persecutors. Without its creation, they reasoned, the persecution would simply continue.In 1897, Herzl led the first Zionist congress whereby the motivation was harnessed in the form of a programme which preferred the ideal of the establishment of a publicly and legally secured home in Palestine for the Jewish people. At first though, other sites for the Jewish people were considered; in Africa and South America. These were resisted as the Zionists realised the emotional attraction of Palestine could be a powerful force if harnessed to a political ideology. This period was important in that it was a re-awakening for many Jews unhappy with the way they had been treated.The movement gradually gained strength and momentum and organisation and created a significant wave of Jewish emigration back into Palestine. The Je ws set up many settlements on land purchased from absentee Arab landlords. Much of the money needed was funded by the increasingly powerful Zionist Movement. At the start of this period, Palestine had almost 500,000 Arabs living there compared to the 50,000 Jews. By 1914, 60,000 Jews had emigrated there, purchasing some 100,000 acres of Palestinian land. (Barker, 1980 p. 9)In the chronology of events this period displays the emergence of the Zionists as a vital one in re-establishing the ideals of the Jews and overtly making things happen. This re-awakening caused the ‘ball’ to begin rolling. However, it was World War One that transformed the Zionist prospects for the foundation it had laid. 6 WORLD WAR ONE Palestine was under the control of the Turkish Ottoman Empire and had been so for a considerable time. The Zionists had appealed to the Turks ideas of returning to Palestine which was refused. (Harper, 1986 p. 4). The British however were not so unsympathetic and off erred a small area in the African Continent. Even though this offer to the Zionists was refused, it is an important event in so much as it was an overt offer by the British and a sign of sympathy and understanding in the Zionist quest. The onset of World War One saw an interesting situation develop. When Turkey joined Germany and Austria against Britain, France and Russia, its defeat was expected to bring about the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and thus end Turkish domination of Palestine.This had important ramifications for Zionists, who supported the British, as it would further enhance their chances for their re-establishment in Palestine afterwards. For the Arabs this was important too. They also supported the allies against the Turks, their motivation being the end of the Ottoman rule over them. What soon occurred was to be arguably one of the major and decisive turning points in to the Zionist quest. Before what happened is revealed, an interesting ‘what if’ shou ld be considered ! What if Germany and the Turks had succeeded in World War One thus re-enforcing the Ottoman domination and control of the region?Whilst this can only be 7 speculative at best, one thing is likely the events that occurred due to the victories won during the war would not have been possible had Germany and the Turks won World War One. During World War One, Britain had encouraged the Arab Independence movement but had little intention of giving the Arabs the power they had been promised once the Turks, with invaluable Arab assistance, had been defeated. (Harper, 1986 p. 32) During this period two developments occurred that had important ramifications for both Arabs and Jews.The first was the secret Anglo-French-Russian accord known as the Sykes-Picot Agreement which divided between France and Britain, all of the areas in the region. Arabs recarded this a betrayal by the British, as the region of Palestine came under British control. (Baker, 1986 p. 31) The Zionists b y this time had political roots in Britain. In 1917, thanks to the efforts of Zionist Chaim Weizmann’s lobbying, the British Government issued a document that was to change the course of Middle-Eastern history. In the form of a letter from the British Foreign Secretary, Lord Balfour, a pledge known as the Balfour Declaration was made. THE BALFOUR DECLARATION A TURNING POINT â€Å"His Majesty’s Government views with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country†, so said the pledge made by Lord Balfour on behalf of the British Government.This pledge was eventually approved by its allies and subsequently incorporated in the terms of the Leag ue of Nations Mandate over Palestine, granted to Britain in 1922. This mandate was one of the major turning points in the Zionist quest. It not only had been agreed to by the British, but endorsed by its allies. Furthermore, it had been achieved without any consultation or negotiation with the incumbent inhabitants the Palestinians. The fact that this was done indicates that Britain was prepared to not only implement the mandate but enforce it regardless of any resistance.This mandate then saw a wave of immigration into Palestine by the Jews. However, the mandate was not the only reason for mass migration of Jews. During the 1930’s when Hitler’s persecution of European Jews gathered momentum, Jewish immigration soared dramatically, so much so that workers had 9 risen to a third of total population there. Out of this saw Arab alarm and subsequent hostility between the two occurred. In the middle of this was the British, trapped by the undertaking of the Balfour declara tion on one hand, and the promises made to the Arabs on the other.In the wake of continual violent confrontations between Jewish settlers and Palestinians, the British were increasingly finding the mandate difficult to maintain. In 1939 the British Government issued a White paper that envisaged the creation of a bi-national state of Palestine that limited Jewish immigration. (Cattan, H. 1971 p. 150) This was denounced as a betrayal by the Zionists. In an effort to placate the problem, the British had in so doing, incensed the situation further and violence was experienced.The British, as well, by this time had other more pressing problems in the wake of World War Two. This period also saw the important emergence of a militant aspect of the Jews, which stood apart from the increasing organisation and administration of the Zionists. Instead of immigration slowing down, the opposite occurred. Illegal immigration and settlement was stepped up and mass sabotage and resistance was organis ed or effected by the Zionists. This was a clear indicator that the Zionists, with their ‘foot in the door’ had no ntention of stopping in their quest for the creation of their own state. 10 WORLD WAR TWO During the war there was a general truce between the Zionist and British with the Jews feeling that until Germany was defeated, disruption of the British bases could not be justified. Indeed, during the war years, the British even trained some of the Jewish officers, thereby increasing the Jewish knowledge and ability even further. (Barker, 1980 p. 12) After the war, significant realisations came to the fore that ultimately assisted the Jewish cause. But it came at a huge cost.The systematic murder of six million Jews in the Nazi Germany holocaust caused near universal support for the Zionists’ effort to secure a new, safe future within an independent state. The significance of the holocaust points to another major turning point. The political sympathy and subse quent influence of a powerful United States after the war ensured the debate increased. Furthermore, Britain was not the power it used to be as a consequence of depletion both economically and materially, Britain was more than ever dependent and influenced by the Americans. THE UNITED NATIONSIn the United States a powerful and influential Jewish community mobilised itself to persuade the government to back Zionist ideals. 11 In 1947, the British Government turned to the United Nations for assistance in solving the situation in Palestine. On November 29 the United Nations General Assembly, after strong American pressure by President Truman, voted to partition Palestine into Arab and Jewish states. This plan was eagerly welcomed by Jews but denounced by the Arabs. At the same time the British declared an end to the mandate due to cease May 14, 1948. Barker, 1980 p. 12) The United Nations’ decision was another major turning point. The power and influence of the fledgling United Nations was being tested and of course brought many new countries into the bitter lobbying process that occurred. The dispute had now become the resposibility of many new countries that were part of the UN. THE CREATION OF THE STATE During the period of the United Nations decision and the British mandate withdrawal, both Jew and Arab saw tensions increase between each other. There were many violent uprisings.In one such incident, at the Arab village of Deir Yassin, 254 civilian inhabitants were massacred by the Jews. This along with other events, saw a mass exodus of fearful Palestinians to neighbouring states. By this time the tide had turned. The Zionists had been systematically preparing for war and were well organised and trained. Terrorism was rampant and the British did 12 little to stop violence in the last days of their mandate. In fact, during the British withdrawal of troops, a distinct direction of neutrality was demonstrated.On May 14, 1948, just prior to the last withdr awal of British troops thereby ending the mandate, Ben Gurion read Israel’s Declaration of Independence to a Jewish audience in Tel Aviv. A provisional government was formed which was instantly recognised by two of the emerging superpowers, the United States and Russia. Thereupon the realisation of Jewish dreams had been fulfilled. 13 SUMMARY This paper has discussed the major reasons for the creation of the state of Israel. The quest for statehood and independence has been sought by Jews for nearly 2000 years.Both biblical and historical claims have significance in this discussion and are, I have argued, form a basis of Jewish beliefs for independence. However, it is the series of events that have occurred from the 19th and 20th centuries that real progress has been made in attaining the state of Israel. The ‘stepping stones’ of events have, it has been discussed, all played roles in facilitating the quest. Some have been more important than others. The ‘B alfour Declaration’ in particular was offered as a major turning point in the Zionist quest.So too the Jewish need to create a place so as to protect them from the experiences of persecution. The Jewish origins coupled with the recent events of the 20th century relate to each other and in between the ‘stepping stones’ of incidents have culminated in the outcome of the acquisition of an independant state of Isreal.BIBLIOGRAPHY BOOK REFERENCES: Encyclopaedia Brittanica, 15th Edition, (1982), International Press, New York, U. S. A. , Volume 10 p 886; Volume 1 p 758 Barker, A. J. (1980), Arab Israeli Wars Ian Allan Ltd. , Shepperton, Surrey, England, pp 9 43 Bible (1976), Old Testament American Bible Society, pp 4 88 Bromley, S. (1994), Rethinking Middle East Politics Edited by Polity Press, Cambridge, U. K. pp 6 16 Cattan, H. (1971), The Palestine Problem: The Palestinian viewpoint in the Middle East: a handbook Edited by M. Adams, Great Britain, Anthony Bland Lt d. , pp 146 160 Harper, P. (1986), The Arab Israeli Issue. Wayland Publishers, West Sussex, England, pp 8 43 Mansfield, P. (1992), A History of the Middle East Penguin Books, London, England, pp 1 7 ; pp 85 135 Miller, A. (1988), The Palestinians: the past as prologue Current History, Volume 87, number 526, pp 73 76 ; pp 83- 85

Stewart’s Calculus 8th Edition, Section 1.1, Question 2, Pg. 19

Stewart’s Calculus 8th Edition, Section 1.1, Question 2, Pg. 19 SAT / ACT Prep Online Guides and Tips This posts contains a Teaching Explanation. You can buy Calculus by Stewart here. Why You Should Trust Me: I’m Dr. Fred Zhang, and I have a bachelor’s degree in math from Harvard. I’ve racked up hundreds and hundreds of hours of experienceworking withstudents from 5th gradethroughgraduate school, and I’m passionate about teaching. I’ve read the whole chapter of the text beforehand and spent a good amount of time thinking about what the best explanation is and what sort of solutions I would have wanted to see in the problem sets I assigned myself when I taught. Question: If $f(x) = (x^2-x)/(x-1)$ and $g(x)=x$, is it true that f=g? Page in 8th Edition: 19 Short Answer: No, f≠  g. For input x = 1, f(1) is undefined since the denominator is zero, whereas g(1) = 1. Homework Answer: Same as short answer. Motivated Answer:We’re asked if f = g, but the equations for f and g look very different. You might be tempted to say, â€Å"No the functions are different because the equations look different.† However, functions can be the same even if the equations look very different. Remember, functions take in inputs, and spit out outputs. Two functions are only equal if they always give you the same outputfor a given input.You can’t manually test every possible input value using pen and paper, since it would take up too much time! But you can try to test whether the equations are the same. So we can write:$$(x^2-x)/(x-1) =? x$$(Here =? means, we’re not sure yet if it’s equal or not.) Now if you’ve taken algebra before, you might recognize that you can write this as$$(x^2-x)/(x-1)=(x(x-1))/(x-1)=? x$$It’s tempting to cancel out the (x-1) and conclude that$x(x-1)/(x-1) = x$, but this is not perfectly true. Remember when you cancel things out from the top and bottom of the fraction, the bottom cannot equal zero. This means that we have the caveat here is that x-1≠  0.If x – 1≠  0 in this cancellation, then x≠ 1. This gives us the clue we need to get the answer, which is that we can try to put 1 into both equations.$f(1)=(1^2– 1)/(1-1)$ ,so f is not defined at $x=1$. $g(1) = 1$, so g is defined at$x=1$.Now, we’ve proven that f≠ g. Remember, if we can find for any input x, the functions f and g give different outputs, then f and g are different, no matter how similar f and g are for other inputs! Get full textbook solutions for just $5/month. PrepScholar Solutions has step-by-step solutions that teach you critical concepts and help you ace your tests. With 1000+ top texts for math, science, physics, engineering, economics, and more, we cover all popular courses in the country, including Stewart's Calculus. Try a 7-day free trial to check it out. Video Solution:

Are We Academic Capitalists Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Are We Academic Capitalists - Assignment Example The current trend of education is grounded on academic capitalism. Faculty and students are viewed in terms of generating revenue and commercial value. Capitalism includes the reshaping the organizational sites, professional workforce, and terms of academic responsibilities to achieve the goals of the academic capitalists. The United States school program is integrated with the monopolistic capitalism. The line between the public and private institution was unclear. To financially survive, schools trained students to fill the needs of industry. Faculty members are defined as managed professionals. The following cases show capitalism is permeating the academic institutions. Case1. An increasingly part time profession. In Eastern Oregon State College and other academic institutions, the academic capitalists to hire terminated full time faculty members as part time teachers. Later, the part time faculty was reduced to teach only status. Lastly, the same faculty member was retrenched. Ca se 2. An increasingly managed profession. In 1982, the President of Sonoma State University insisted he had to revise the current programs. The school had to resolve the declining enrollment issue. Resolution included retrenchment of 53 full time faculty members. Senior was the basis for terminating faculty members. Case 3. An increasingly Capitalistic Profession, globally. Ronald Collins, New Wave University in Australia, Water Systems Institute head. Collins use direct product revenues, grants, and royalties to financially keep his group surviving. The institute generated more funds compared to the University. The institute hired more employees compared faculty members. Case 4. Increasingly commoditized faculty-graduate student relationships. At Nouveau University, commercialization of the academic institution widened the gap between faculty members and the students. Part time faculty members have increase by more than 43 percent. Businesses partnered with schools to generate mark ets for a new product or service. Full time faculty members were replaced by part time faculty members. PART II. The article The Neo-Liberal University (Slaugher &&Rhoades, 2000) emphasized public colleges and universities typify the neoliberalism-based entities. The academe supports the corporate competitiveness by playing major parts in the knowledge-based global economy. The academe trains students to blend with industry by becoming industry’s future leaders or managers of major corporations. Likewise, schools train students to create products and processes to fill the needs of the business industry players. Basically, the major goal of schools is to fill industry’s need for global competitiveness. Academic capitalism includes the public colleges and universities’ investment in business ventures. The ventures include startup companies precipitating from the cooperative efforts of the faculty and student s. with the academic setup, the schools’ startup companies do not have to suffer the pains of unprofitable or unsuccessfully business ventures, unlike non-academic business ventures. Public support cushions the ill effects of unsuccessful business ventures. The schools serve the educational needs of students who can afford to pay their school fees. The students use grants, loans and other sources to pay for their educational trainings. The academic institutions’ implementation of a market model translated to a restructuring that benefits the professional and high technology

Marketing planning Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Marketing planning - Assignment Example The shop has established more than 290 shops across the globe but United Kingdom is the core business market for the company (Pret A Manger, 2013b). Schwartz (2004) has rightly pointed out that in previous occasions, companies establish marketing plan on the basis of its allocated budget but now companies decide marketing plan on the basis of its strategic objectives. Schwartz (2004) has also pointed out that modern marketers are emphasizing more on customer satisfaction and customizing the product offering as part of marketing plan. Sheth and Sisodia (2006) have also pointed out that changing pattern of marketing planning includes the marketer’s willingness to incorporate psychological, economic and informational shift of customers as integrated element of market planning. Pret A Manger (2013b) has reported that it earns annual revenue of 380 million pounds from its global business operation, and the company has reported that it has sufficient liquid asset to finance its stra tegic decisions. For example, recently Pret A Manger had struck a deal with by investing more than 1 million pound with Vitrue which is a social media management platform in order to target local youngsters who frequently use social networking sites (NMA Staff, 2012). Digital marketing strategy of the company has also helped them to achieve $280,000 increased in store operational revenue. Such examples are showing that Pret A Manger has sufficient capabilities in order implement new marketing plan which can be recalibrated in accordance with the customer demand. â€Å"Examine the marketing environment and analyse the internal factors and external factors (such as PEST) assessing the strengths/weaknesses and opportunities/threats in order to conduct a marketing audit† Ans.1b- As UK is the major business interest for Pret A Manger hence the researcher has decided to conduct a strategic audit of the coffee business of the company in context to UK business environment. Letâ€℠¢s try to shed light the coffee industry of UK in order to understand why companies including both restaurants like Starbucks, Pret A Manger etc and retail sellers like Nestle and Green Mountain etc are changing their marketing plan to cater to the demand of Britons. Market Value Market Value Forecast Market Volume Market Volume Forecast Market Share More than $2,500 million with growth rate of 4.8%. The sales volume coffee selling through retail channels and franchisee based restaurants will touch $3,000 million within next three years. 140.7 million kg with growth rate of 0.7%. The market volume will touch 150 million kg mark within next couple of years. Tata Global Beverages Limited and Starbucks are the market leader with consolidated market share of more than 29%. (Marketline, 2012a) It is evident from the above statistics that there is ample opportunity exist for Pret A Manger in order to penetrate more in UK coffee industry but they need to create a sustainable marketing plan to achieve a niche position. Now, the researcher will try to understand the business environment for Pret A Manger by considering both internal and external factors. PEST will be used to external environment analysis and Porter Five force will used for internal market audit. Table 1: PEST External Environment Characteristics Opportunity for Pret

Getting The Extra Bit Out Of Your Employees Essay Example for Free

Getting The Extra Bit Out Of Your Employees Essay An employee is required to contribute 40 to 48 hours of productive work in terms of service or visible output. The very purpose of employment is for the employer to generate enough revenue so that he can not only pay your wages, but also make some profit for himself and retain a portion of the profits for contingencies. It is widely accepted that in most cases though the employer is required by law to pay the employee for all the 365 days of the year, the employee output is restricted to some 250 days or in that region. Thus, even when the employee is not working, the employer has to support him/her. The manufacturing sector can lay down norms to measure the output of each employee and relate it to the quantum of work produced. But, in the services sector it is difficult to quantify the output of each individual. The flow of work can also not be uniform in the case of the services sector. Evaluation: In this context, let us examine the working of a Supermarket. The flow of customers into the supermarket will vary during the day as also during the month. In most cases, the evenings will see more customers coming in, while the mornings will see fewer of them. The noon period of the day can be thinner still. Thus, we have a situation where the productive output of the employee is not available to the employer all through the 7 or 8 hours that he/she spends in the Supermarket. So, the effective throughput (actual time spent in producing goods/services) diminishes to anywhere between 5 and 6 or 4 and 6 hours. The employer has to earn adequate revenue to compensate the employees and even take care of eventualities. Therefore, in most parts of the world, employers, particularly in the services sector, manage to get that extra bit of work done by each employee. Institutions, enterprises or organizations strive continuously to optimize their return on investment and use employee motivation as a major tool to achieve this. After all, it is the collective performance of employees that would manifest itself into a successful enterprise. It is not essential at all times to monetize motivation. There are several other means of motivating the employees to get optimal results. For example, in the case under discussion, we need to get an extra 30 minutes of work from each employee. The employer is unwilling to pay for that extra time or simply cannot afford to. So many terminologies and reasons will be attributed to safeguard that extra bit of money. But, heads of departments still have to achieve the desired results and with no extra money available in their hands. Conclusion: Though money is very important to employees, other factors go into employment. In the instant case, the manager can explain to the employees that by spending an extra 30 minutes after the scheduled time and reorganizing the merchandise for the next day, they will be able to start right away when they commence work on the following day. Customers walking in during the first hour will be able to transact their business quickly and this in turn will bring in more of such early customers. Another method is to address all the employees together and evolve a pattern whereby some employees can report early for work and leave at the scheduled time, some employees can shrink their breaks to accommodate the extra time required, and some can even leave late. After all, every one of us spend a lions share of the daylight hours in our respective breadwinning activity. With the correct methodology employed, getting employees to contribute 30 minutes of extra work per day can be achieved without denting the employer’s purse.

Legalization of Marijuana :: legalized marijuana

Legalization of Marijuana Marijuana is the cause of much commotion and debating, as the question of legalization becomes more of an issue. Drugs are a major influential force in countries all over the world today. Legalization is an option that has not had a chance, but really should be given one. Although many people feel that legalizing marijuana would increase the amount of drug use, marijuana should be legalized because it will reduce the great amount of money spent on enforcement, and will therefore increase our countries revenue and lessen crime, and will also be useful in treating certain medical conditions. Marijuana, also known as pot, weed, bud, herb, ghanja, grass, wacky tabacci, funky bhudda, green, indo, mary jane, hemp, kif, bones, funny stuff, etc. is a substance obtained from the dried leaves and flowering tops of the pistillate hemp plant. It is technically known as cannabis sativa and is a tall, widely cultivated Asian herb of the mulberry family. There are many di fferent ways of getting this drug into one's system. The most common method consists of rolling the finely chopped substance in thin papers to make marijuana cigarettes or joints. It is also smoked through a pipe or through a water filtration system known as a bong. Legalization is considered unnecessary by many people. They feel that it will increase the amount of drug use throughout the world. They state that in many cases, drug users who have quit, quit because of trouble with the law. Legalization would eliminate the legal forces that discourage the users from using or selling drugs. They also say that by making drugs legal, the people who have never tried drugs for fear of getting caught by the law, will have no reason to be afraid anymore and will become users (Snyder, 1988). Legalization will be profitable to global economies in two ways. It will allow for money spent on drug law enforcement to be spent more wisely and it will increase revenue. There have been escalating cost s spent on the war against drugs and countless dollars spent on rehabilitation. Every year in the United States, ten billion dollars are spent on enforcing drug laws alone. Drug violators accounted for about forty percent of all criminals in federal prisons (Marijuana retains.., 1990, p.A-6). In 1989, a Republican county executive of Mercer County, N.J., estimated that it would costs approximately one billion dollars to build the jail space required to house all the drug users in Trenton alone(Talah, 1993, p.

Literary Translation Essay

Literary studies have always, explicitly or implicitly, presupposed a certain notion of `literariness’ with which it has been able to delimit its domain, specify, and sanction its methodologies and approaches to its subject. This notion of `literariness’ is crucial for the theoretical thinking about literary translation. In this paper, I have attempted to analyze various recent theoretical positions to the study of literary translation and sought to understand them in the context of the development in the field of literary studies in the last three decades of the twentieth century. The recent developments in the literary studies have radically questioned the traditional essentialist notion of `literariness’ and the idea of canon from various theoretical perspectives. I have contrasted the traditional discourse on literary translation with the recent discourse in order to highlight the shift in the notion of `literariness’ and its impact on translation theory. The traditional essentialist approach to literature, which Lefevere (1988:173) calls `the corpus’ approach is based on the Romantic notion of literature which sees the author as a quasi-divine `creator’ possessing `genius’. He is believed to be the origin of the Creation that is Original, Unique, organic, transcendental and hence sacred. Translation then is a mere copy of the unique entity, which by definition is uncopy-able. As the translator is not the origin of the work of art, he does not possess `genius’, and he is considered merely a drudge, a proletariat, and a shudra in the literary Varna system. This traditional approach is due to the Platonic-Christian metaphysical underpinning of the Western culture. The `original’ versus `copy’ dichotomy is deeply rooted in the Western thought. This is the reason why the West has been traditionally hostile and allergic to the notion of `translation’. The traditional discussion of the problems of literary translation considers finding equivalents not just for lexis, syntax or concepts, but also for features like style, genre, figurative language, historical stylistic dimensions, polyvalence, connotations as well as denotations, cultural items and culture-specific concepts and values. The choices made by the translators like the decision whether to retain stylistic features of the source language text or whether to retain the historical stylistic dimension of the original become all the more important in the case of literary translation. For instance, whether to translate Chaucer into old Marathi or contemporary are very important. In the case of translating poetry, it is vital for a translator to decide whether the verse should be translated into verse, or into free verse or into prose. Most of the scholars and translators like Jakobson (1991:151) believe that in the case of poetry though it is â€Å"by definition impossible †¦ only creative transposition is possible†¦ â€Å". It is the creative dimension of translation that comes to fore in the translation of poetry though nobody seems to be sure of what is meant by creativity in the first place. The word is charged with theological-Romantic connotations typical of the `corpus’ approach to literature. The questions around which the deliberations about translation within such a conceptual framework are made are rather stereotyped and limited: as the literary text, especially a poem is unique, organic whole and original is the translation possible at all? Should translation be `literal’ or `free’? Should it emphasize the content or the form? Can a faithful translation be beautiful? The answers to the question range from one extreme to the other and usually end in some sort of a compromise. The great writers and translators gave their well-known dictums about translations, which reflected these traditional beliefs about it. For Dante (1265-1321) all poetry is untranslatable (cited by Brower 1966: 271) and for Frost (1974-1963) poetry is `that which is lost out of both prose and verse in translation ‘(cited by Webb 203) while Yves Bonnefoy says `You can translate by simply declaring one poem the translation of another† (1991:186-192). On the other hand theorists like Pound (1929, 1950), Fitzgerald (1878) say† †¦Ã‚  the live Dog is better than the dead Lion†, believe in freedom in translation. The others like Nabokov (1955) believe â€Å"The clumsiest of literal translation is a thousand times more useful than prettiest of paraphrase†. Walter Benjamin, Longfellow (1807-81), Schleriermacher, Martindale (1984), seem to favour much more faithful translation or believe in foreignizing the native language. While most of the translators like Dryden are on the side of some sort of compromise between the two extremes. Lefevere has pointed out that most of the writings done on the basis of the concept of literature as a corpus attempt to provide translators with certain guidelines, do’s and don’ts and that these writings are essentially normative even if they don’t state their norms explicitly. These norms, according to Lefevere, are not far removed from the poetics of a specific literary period or even run behind the poetics of the period (1988:173). Even the approaches based on the `objective’ and `scientific’ foundations of linguistics are not entirely neutral in their preferences and implicit value judgements. Some writings on translation based on this approach are obsessed with the translation process and coming up with some model for description of the process. As Theo Hermans (1985:9-10) correctly observes that in spite of some impressive semiotic terminology, complex schemes and diagrams illustrating the mental process of decoding messages in one medium and encoding them in another, they could hardly describe the actual conversion that takes place within the human mind, `that blackest of black boxes’. Lefevere notes, the descriptive approach was not very useful when it came to decide what good translation is and what is bad. Most of recent developments in translation theory look for alternatives to these essentializing approaches. Instead of considering literature as an autonomous and independent domain, it sees it in much broader social and cultural framework. It sees literature as a social institution and related to other social institutions. It examines the complex interconnections between poetics, politics, metaphysics, and history. It borrows its analytical tools from various social sciences like linguistics, semiotics, anthropology, history, economics, and psychoanalysis. It is closely allied to the discipline of cultural studies, as discussed by Jenks (1993:187) in using culture as a descriptive rather than normative category as well as working within an expanded concept of culture, which rejects the `high’ versus low stratification. It is keenly interested in the historical and political dimension of literature. Paradigm shift’ to use Theo Hermans’ phrase or the `Cultural turn’ in the discipline of translation theory has made a significant impact in the way we look at translation. Translation is as a form of intercultural communication raising the problems that are not merely at the verbal level or at the linguistic level. As Talgeri and Verma (1988:3) rightly point out, a word is,’ essentially a cultural memory in which the historical experience of the society is embedded. H. C. Trivedi (1971: 3) observes that while translating from an Indian language into English one is faced with two main problems: first one has to deal with concepts which require an understanding of Indian culture and secondly, one has to arrive at TL meaning equivalents of references to certain objects in SL, which includes features absent from TL culture. The awareness that one does not look for merely verbal equivalents but also for cultural equivalents, if there are any, goes a long way in helping the translator to decide the strategies he or she has to use. Translation then is no longer a problem of merely finding verbal equivalents but also of interpreting a text encoded in one semiotic system with the help of another. The notion of `intertextuality’ as formulated by the semiotician Julia Kristeva is extremely significant in this regard. She points out that any signifying system or practice already consists of other modes of cultural signification (1988:59-60). A literary text would implicate not only other verbal texts but also other modes of signification like food, fashion, local medicinal systems, metaphysical systems, traditional and conventional narratives like myths, literary texts, legends as well as literary conventions like genres, literary devices, and other symbolic structures. It would be almost tautological to state that the elements of the text, which are specific to the culture and the language, would be untranslatable. The whole enterprise of finding cultural equivalents raises awareness of the difference and similarities between the cultures . It also brings into focus the important question of cultural identity. Else Ribeiro Pires Vieira (1999:42) remarks that it is ultimately impossible to translate one cultural identity into another. So the act of translation is intimately related to the question of cultural identity, difference and similarity. A rather interesting approach to literary translation comes from Michel Riffaterre (1992: 204-217). He separates literary and non-literary use of language by saying that literature is different because i) it semioticicizes the discursive features e.g. lexical selection is made morphophonemically as well as semantically, ii) it substitutes semiosis for mimesis which gives literary language its indirection, and iii) it has â€Å"the` textuality’ that integrates semantic components of the verbal sequence (the ones open to linear decoding)-a theoretically open-ended sequence-into one closed, finite semiotic, system† that is , the parts of a literary texts are vitally linked to the whole of the text and the text is more or less self contained. Hence the literary translation should â€Å"reflect or imitate these differences†. He considers a literary text as an artefact and it contains the signals, which mark it as an artifact. Translation should also imitate or reflect these markers. He goes on to say that as we perceive a certain text as literary based on certain presuppositions we should render these literariness inducing presuppositions. Though this seems rather like traditional and formalist approach, what should be noted here is that Riffaterre is perceiving literariness in a rather different way while considering the problems of literary translation: `literariness’ is in no way the `essence’ of a text and a literary text is, for Riffatere one that which contains the signs which makes it obvious that it is a cultural artefact. Although he conceives of literary text as self-contained system, Riffatere too, like many other contemporary approaches sees it as a sub-system of cultural semiotic system. However, if one is to consider Riffatere’s notion of `text’ in contrast to Kristeva’s notion of intertextuality one feels that Riffaterre is probably simplifying the problem of cultural barriers to translatability. The assumption that literary text is a cultural artefact and is related to the other social systems is widespread these days. Some of the most important theorization based on this assumption has come from provocative and insightful perspectives of theorists like Andre Lefevere, Gideon Toury, Itamar Evan -Zohar, and Theo Hermans. These theorists are indebted to the concept of `literature as system’ as propounded by Russian Formalists like Tynianov, Jakobson, and Czech Structuralists like Mukarovsky and Vodicka, the French Structuralists thinkers, and the Marxist thinkers who considered literature as a section of the `superstructure’. The central idea of this point of view is that the study of literary translation should begin with a study of the translated text rather than with the process of translation, its role, function and reception in the culture in which it is translated as well as the role of culture in influencing the `process of decision making that is translation. ‘ It is fundamentally descriptive in its orientation (Toury 1985). Lefevere maintains, `Literature is one of the systems which constitute the system of discourses (which also contain disciplines like physics or law. ) usually referred to as a civilization, or a society (1988:16). ‘ Literature for Lefevere is a subsystem of society and it interacts with other systems. He observes that there is a `control factor in the literary system which sees to it that this particular system does not fall too far out of step with other systems that make up a society ‘ (p.17). He astutely observes that this control function works from outside of this system as well as from inside. The control function within the system is that of dominant poetics, `which can be said to consist of two components: one is an inventory of literary devices, genres, motifs, prototypical characters and situations, symbols; the other a concept of what the role of literature is, or should be, in the society at large. ‘ (p. 23). The educational establishment dispenses it. The second controlling factor is that of `patronage’. It can be exerted by `persons, not necessarily the Medici, Maecenas or Louis XIV only, groups or persons, such as a religious grouping or a political party, a royal court, publishers, whether they have a virtual monopoly on the book trade or not and, last but not least, the media. ‘ The patronage consists of three elements; the ideological component, the financial or economic component, and the element of status (p. 18-19). The system of literature, observes Lefevere, is not deterministic but it acts as a series of `constraints’ on the reader, writer, or rewriter. The control mechanism within the literary system is represented by critics, reviewers, teachers of literature, translators and other rewriters who will adapt works of literature until they can be claimed to correspond to the poetics and the ideology of their time. It is important to note that the political and social aspect of literature is emphasised in the system approach. The cultural politics and economics of patronage and publicity are seen as inseparable from literature. `Rewriting’ is the key word here which is used by Lefevere as a `convenient `umbrella-term’ to refer to most of the activities traditionally connected with literary studies: criticism, as well as translation, anthologization, the writing of literary history and the editing of texts-in fact, all those aspects of literary studies which establish and validate the value-structures of canons. Rewritings, in the widest sense of the term, adapt works of literature to a given audience and/or influence the ways in which readers read a work of literature. ‘ (60-61). The texts, which are rewritten, processed for a certain audience, or adapted to a certain poetics, are the `refracted’ texts and these maintains Lefevere are responsible for the canonized status of the text (p179). `Interpretation (criticism), then and translation are probably the most important forms of refracted literature, in that they are the most influential ones’ he notes (1984:90) and says, ` One never translates, as the models of the translation process based on the Buhler/Jakobson communication model, featuring disembodied senders and receivers, carefully isolated from all outside interference by that most effective expedient, the dotted line, would have us believe, under a sort of purely linguistic bell jar. Ideological and poetological motivations are always present in the production, or the non production of translations of literary works†¦ Translation and other refractions, then, play a vital part in the evolution of literatures, not only by introducing new texts, authors and devices, but also by introducing them in a certain way, as part of a wider design to try to influence that evolution’ (97) . Translation becomes one of the parts of the `refraction’ â€Å"†¦ the rather long term strategy, of which translation is only a part, and which has as its aim the manipulation of  foreign work in the service of certain aims that are felt worthy of pursuit in the native culture†¦ † (1988:204). This is indeed a powerful theory to study translation as it places as much significance to it as criticism and interpretation. Lefevere goes on to give some impressive analytical tools and perspectives for studying literary translation, `The ideological and poetological constraints under which translations are produced should be explicated, and the strategy devised by the translator to deal with those constraints should be described: does he or she make a translation in a more descriptive or in a more refractive way? What are the intentions with which he or she introduces foreign elements into the native system? Equivalence, fidelity, freedom and the like will then be seen more as functions of a strategy adopted under certain constraints, rather than absolute requirements, or norms that should or should not be imposed or respected. It will be seen that `great ‘ages of translation occur whenever a given literature recognizes another as more prestigious and tries to emulate it. Literatures will be seen to have less need of translation(s) when they are convinced of their own superiority. It will also be seen that translations are often used (think of the Imagists) by adherents of an alternative poetics to challenge the dominant poetics of a certain period in a certain system, especially when that alternative poetics cannot use the work of its own adherents to do so, because that work is not yet written’ (1984:98-99). Another major theorist working on similar lines as that of Lefevere is Gideon Toury (1985). His approach is what he calls Descriptive Translation Studies (DTS). He emphasizes the fact that translations are facts of one system only: the target system and it is the target or recipient culture or a certain section of it, which serves as the initiator of the decision to translate and consequently translators operate first and foremost in the interest of the culture into which they are translating. Toury very systematically charts out a step by step guide to the study of translation. He stresses that the study should begin with the empirically observed data, that is, the translated texts and proceeds from there towards the reconstruction of non-observational facts rather than the other way round as is usually done in the `corpus’ based and traditional approaches to translation. The most interesting thing about Toury’s approach (1984) is  that it takes into consideration things like `pseudo-translation’ or the texts foisted off as translated but in fact are not so. In the very beginning when the problem of distinguishing a translated text from a non-translated text arises, Toury assumes that for his procedure `translation’ will be taken to be `any target-language utterance which is presented or regarded as such within the target culture, on whatever grounds’. In this approach pseudotranslations are `just as legitimate objects for study within DTS as genuine translations. They may prove to be highly instructive for the establishment of the general notion of translation as shared by the members of a certain target language community’. Then the next step in Toury’s DTS would be to study their acceptability in their respective target language system followed by mapping these texts, `Via their constitutive elements as TRANSLATIONAL PHENOMENA, on their counterparts in the appropriate source system and text, identified as such in the course of a comparative analysis, as SOLUTIONS to TRANSLATIONAL PROBLEMS’. Then a scholar should proceed to `identify and describe the (one-directional, irreversible) RELATIONSHIPS obtaining between the members of each pair; and finally to go on to refer these relationships- by means of the mediating functional-relational notion of TRANSLATION EQUIVALENCE, established as pertinent to the corpus under study-to the overall CONCEPT OF TRANSLATION underlying the corpus. It is these last two concepts which form the ultimate goal of systematic studies within DTS†¦ only when the nature of the prevailing concept of translation has been established will it become possible to reconstruct the possible process of CONSIDERATION and DECISION-MAKING which was involved in the act of translating in question as well as the set of CONSTRAINTS which were actually accepted by the translator. ‘ (1985:21) Toury’s step by step procedure is descriptive, empirical and inductive, beginning with the observed facts and then moving towards uncovering the strategies and techniques used by translator and the implicit notion and presupposition of equivalence rather than treating the notion of equivalence as given. The concept of constraint puts him in the company of Lefevere. The essential question is not of defining what is equivalence in general, whether it is possible or not, or of how to find equivalents, but of discovering what is meant by equivalence by the community or group within the target culture. These approaches are also extremely useful in the area of comparative literary studies and comparativists like Durisin (1984:184-142) whose approach is in many ways similar to Lefevere and Toury in focusing on function and relation of literary translation in the target or the recipient culture. He is of opinion that it is impossible to speak of theories of translation without applying the comparative procedure, as the aim of analysis of a translation is to determine the extent to which it belongs to the developmental series of the native literature. He like the other two theorists discussed, considers the translation procedure as well as the selection of the text being ` primarily determined by the integral need of the recipient literature, by its capacity for absorbing the literary phenomenon of a different national literature, work, etc.  and for reacting in a specific manner (integrational or differtiational) in its aesthetic features’ as well as the norm of time. This type of theorization is far from the traditional paradigm of translation theory that is obsessed with the ideas of fidelity and betrayal, and the notions of `free’ vs. literal translation. Thanks to the proponents of system approach to literary translation, translation studies can boast of becoming a discipline in its own right due to the development of powerful theoretical models. However, the problem with Leferverian system is its terminology. The words `refracted’ and `rewriting’ presuppose that a text can be written for the first time and that it exists in a pre-non-refracted state. These presuppositions take him dangerously close to the very `corpus’ based approach he is so vigorously attacking. Perhaps Derridian philosophy can explain why one is always in danger of belonging to the very system of thought one is criticizing. Another obvious limitation of these types of theories is that they are rather reductionist in their approach. Though Lefevere maintains that the system concept holds that the refracted texts are mainly responsible for the canonized status of the corpus and the intrinsic quality alone could not have given canonized status for them he fails to point out the exact features and qualities of the literary text which solicit refractions. Then there are problematic words like` the system’ which Lefevere points out `refer to a heuristic construct that does not emphatically possess any kind of ontological reality†¦.’ and `is merely used to designate a model that promises to help make sense of a very complex phenomenon, that of writing, reading and rewriting of literature†¦ (1985: 225). Besides types of theories are descriptive and hence have a limited use for the translator as well as translation criticism, which is a rather neglected branch of translation studies till date. Lefevere says that translation criticism hardly rises much above, `he is wrong because I’m right level†¦ ‘(1984:99). He also points out that it is impossible to define once and for all, what a good translation is just as it is impossible to define once and for all what good literature is. And † critic A, â€Å"judging† on the basis of poetics A’ will rule translation A â€Å"good† because it happens to be constructed on the basis of the principles laid down in A’. Critic B, on the other hand, operating on the basis of poetics B’, will damn translation A† and praise translation B’, for obvious reasons†¦ â€Å"(1988:176). He believes,† Translators can be taught languages and a certain awareness of how literature works. The rest is up to them. They make mistakes only on the linguistic level. The rest is strategy. † (1984:99). The perspective of course is that of a value relativist and a culture relativist, which seem to be the politically correct and `in’ stances today, but the stance can be seen as symptomatic in the light of deeper moral crises in the larger philosophical context. An ambitious and insightful essay by Raymond van den Broeck, `Second Thought on Translation Criticism: A Model of its Analytic Function’ (1985) attempts to go beyond the mere descriptive and uncourageous approach of Lefevere and Toury which tries to incorporate the ideas of their theories. Like Toury and Lefevere, Broeck stresses the importance of examination of the norms among all those involved in the production and reception of translations and remarks that it is the foremost task of translation criticism to create greater awareness of these norms but he also gives room for the critic’s personal value judgements. The critic may or may not agree with the particular method chosen by the translator for a particular purpose. He is entitled to doubt the effectiveness of the chosen strategies, to criticize decisions taken with regard to certain details. To the extent that he is himself familiar with the functional features of the source text, he will be a trustworthy guide in telling the reader where target textemes balance source textemes and where in the critic’s view, they do not. But he must never confuse his own initial norms with those of the translator (p. 60-61). Broeck attempts a synthesis of the target culture oriented inductive – descriptive approach and the notorious task of evaluating translation and the result is indeed very useful and commendable as translation evaluation is a neglected branch of translation studies. As opposed to this descriptive approach is Venuti’s The Translator’s Invisibility (1995). With a normative and extremely insightful point of view he examines historically how the norm of fluency prevailed over other translation strategies to shape the canon of foreign literatures in English. He makes a strong case for `foreignness’ and `awkwardness’ of the translated text as a positive value in the evaluation of translation. The other approaches to the study of translation which seem to be gaining ground lay greater emphasis on the political dimension of literary translation. The more recent literary theories like New Historicism are interested in reading the contexts of power relations in a literary text. In his critical exposition of New Historicism and Cultural materialism, John Brannigan (1998) states, `New Historicism is a mode of critical interpretation which privileges power relations as the most important context for texts of all kinds. As a critical practice it treats literary texts as a space where power relations are made visible ‘(6). Such a perspective when applied to the texts that communicate across cultures can yield very important insights and open an exciting way of thinking about translation. Tejaswini Niranjana’s book Siting Translation, History, Post-Structuralism, and the Colonial Context (1995) examines translation theories from this perspective. â€Å"In a post-colonial context the problematic of translation becomes a significant site for raising questions of representation, power, and historicity. The context is one of contesting and contested stories attempting to account for, to recount, the asymmetry and inequality of relations between peoples, races, languages. † In translation, the relationship between the two languages is hardly on equal terms. Niranjana draws attention to a rather overlooked fact that translation is between languages, which are hierarchically related, and that it is a mode of representation in another culture. When the relationship between the cultures and languages is that of colonizer and colonized, â€Å"translation†¦ produces strategies of containment. By employing certain modes of representing the other-which it thereby also brings into being–translation reinforces hegemonic versions of the colonized, helping them acquire the status of what Edward Said calls representations or objects without history ‘(p.3). She points out in the introduction that her concern is to probe `the absence, lack, or repression of an awareness of asymmetry and historicity in several kinds of writing on translation’ (p. 9). Harish Trivedi (1997) has demonstrated how translation of Anatole France’s Thais by Premchand was distinctly a political act in the sense that it selected a text which was not part of the literature of the colonial power and that it attempted a sort of liberation of Indian literature from the tutelage of the imperially-inducted master literature, English. St-Pierre observes the fact that translators when faced with references to specific aspects of the source culture may use a variety of tactics, including non-translation, as part of their overall strategy and use many other complex tactics in order to reinvent their relations in a postcolonial context (1997:423). Mahasweta Sengupta has offered a rather engaging and perceptive reading of Rabindranath Tagore’s autotranslation of Gitanjali. She points out giving numerous examples, of how Rabindranath took immense liberties with his own Bengali originals in order to refashion his Bengali songs to suit the English sensibility. He modified, omitted, and rewrote his poems in the manner of the Orientalists to cater to his Western audience (1996). Bassnett and Trivedi (1999) believe that the hierarchic opposition between the original work and translation reflects the hierarchic opposition between the European colonizer culture and the colonized culture. This hierarchy, they observe, is Eurocentric, and its spread is associated with the history of colonialization, imperialism and proselytization. Because of these historical reasons, radical theories of translation have come up in the former colonies. Recalling how members of a sixteenth century Brazilian tribe called Tupinamba ate a Catholic priest, an act which could have even been an act of homage, Bassnett and Trivedi suggest that the metaphor of `cannibalism’ could be used for the act of translation as it is one of the ways former colonies might find a way to assert themselves and their own culture and to reject the feeling of being derivative and appellative `copy’, without at the same time rejecting everything that might be of value that comes from Europe. Else Ribeiro Pires Viera has considered the translation theory of Haroldo de Campos, a renowned Brazilian translator who uses very interesting metaphors for translating like, perceiving translation as blood transfusion and vampirization which actually nourishes the translator and thus subverting the hierarchic polarities of the privileged original and inauthentic translation in a post colonial context. This type of approach to translation promotes the awareness of political and historical field in which translation operates among the readers as well as the translators. Another significant statement on `The Politics of Translation’ comes from Gayatri Chakaravorty Spivak (1998:95-118) who conceives of translation as an important strategy in pursuing the larger feminist agenda of achieving women’s `solidarity’. ` The task of the feminist translator is to consider language as a clue to the working of gendered agency. ‘ Translation can give access to a larger number of feminists working in various languages and cultures. She advises that a translator must `surrender’ to the text, as translation is the most intimate act of reading. It is an act of submission to the rhetorical dimension of the text. This act for Spivak is more of an erotic act than ethical. She also advises that one’s first obligation in understanding solidarity is to learn other women’s mother tongue rather than consider solidarity as an `a priori’ given.

Gender Criticism Essay

The study of human behavioral pathways can intensify the scope of how each individual is grouped according to preferences. In this aspect, it would be important to study the role of gender ideals in molding the society. Gender criticism is the overall approach in understanding the ideas about the complete make up of men and women (Bedford 1). This includes the notion acceptance of what is masculine and what is feminine. It regards sexuality as a very complex method of classification which basically becomes a reflection of a particular culture based on what is feminine and what is masculine relative to that society’s norms. The study does not regard sexuality as mere classification of heterosexuality and homosexuality. On the other hand, feminist criticism is a study on how the current status of the female segment came to be. The main approach of the study is to utilize literary or language based mediums of social structure to look for certain causalities which lead to the portrayal of females to be that of an inferior species. Moreover, the study intends to look for proofs of segments which can be derived from the literary complexities of cultures as to why male domination came into being. The offset of gender criticism may be coursed upon how feminist criticism came into being. Basically, these two concepts are not really opposites of each other but intertwined in terms of relative scopes of matters (Bedford 1). Many experts argue that the two notions are too complicated to be separated because one factor influences the other in a continuum of understanding towards gender, tradition, sex and culture (Bedford 1). In summary, feminist criticism is actually a variation of gender criticism only that the former specifies what could have provided the avenues to let feminism achieve a kind of status delegated in most societies today. Works Cited Bedford, â€Å"Critical Approaches. † Virtual Lit. 1998. 3 Feb 2008 .

How Much Do SAT Subject Tests Cost

How Much Do SAT Subject Tests Cost SAT / ACT Prep Online Guides and Tips Manycompetitive college programsrequire high school students to submit SAT Subject Test scores to be eligible for admission.This usually means spending a little more money on test registration, but fee waivers are available if you're eligible. In this article, I’ll go through how much each SAT Subject Test costs and how fee waivers work for these tests. How Much Does an SAT Subject Test Cost? When you register for subject tests, there is a basic registration fee of $26.This is not associated with a specific test; it’s just a baseline fee that everyone has to pay.Since you'll pay a registration fee for each test date, it makes sense to take multiple tests on the same date.This saves money because you’ll only pay the $26 once rather than two or three times. It costs an additional $18 on top of the $26 registration fee for most subject tests, but the per-test fee goes up to $26 for the language tests with listening sections.These tests include French with Listening, German with Listening, Spanish with Listening, Chinese with Listening, Japanese with Listening, and Korean with Listening. So, if you took the Math 2 Subject Test and the Japanese with Listening Subject Test, you would be charged $26 (basic registration fee) plus $18 (fee for Math 2) plus $26 (fee for Japanese with Listening) for a total of $70. You can take anywhere from one to three regular subject tests on one test date, but you can only take one listening subject test per test date.This means you might be charged as little as $44 for one test day (registration fee plus one regular subject test) or as much as $88 (registration fee plus one listening subject test and two regular subject tests). In comparison, registration for the regular SAT with the essay costs $54.50. That price drops to $43 if you choose to take itwithout the essay. If you don’t make the regular registration deadline, you'll have to pay a late registration fee of $28.There’s also an extra $28 fee if you decide to change your test date, center, or type of test after registration.Waitlist status is available for SAT Subject Tests for an additional fee of $46.You can read more about the SAT waitlist here. This rabbit would ace the listening subject tests. Can You Get a Fee Waiver for SAT Subject Tests? Yes!If you’re eligible, you'll get two fee waivers for the regular SAT and two fee waivers for SAT Subject Tests.One fee waiver covers a whole day of testing for Subject Tests, so you can take three tests with just one fee waiver if you take them all on the same day!You can also use fee waivers for late registration at no extra cost if you miss the regular deadline. But how do you get a fee waiver?If you’re a student in the US, you can qualify for a waiver if one of the following applies to you: You are eligible to participate in the National School Lunch Program Your family meets income eligibility guidelines set by the USDA Food and Nutrition Service You are enrolled in a government program that helps students from low-income families You live in public housing, a foster home, or are homeless You are a ward of the state or an orphan If you think you may need a fee waiver to take SAT Subject Tests, speak to your guidance counselor.Even if you’re not sure you meet the eligibility requirements, it doesn’t hurt to ask in case you do!If you’re eligible for a fee waiver, you’ll also get four additional free score reports and up to four application fee waivers that are valid at most colleges. You'll get two free passes for SAT Subject Test registration if you're eligible for a fee waiver. Conclusion Individual SAT Subject Tests are less expensive than the regular SAT, but they can get a little pricey if you plan to take two or three of them.For standard registration, you have to pay a baseline fee of $26 plus $18 for each regular Subject Test and $26 for each Subject Test with a listening section.You’ll be charged an extra fee for late registration and for making changes to your registration after you've already signed up. Fee waivers are available for SAT Subject Tests if you’re eligible.You will get two SAT Subject Test waivers, and each waiver covers a full day of testing.Try to take all of your subject tests on the same date so that you only have to pay the registration fee once or, if you got the two fee waivers, can retake the test(s) for free. What's Next? Are you unsure of what your target score should be on SAT Subject Tests? Find outwhat a good score looks like for you. If you're still trying to pick your subject tests, read our guide to deciding which ones to take. If subject tests are stressing you out, take a look at this article detailing the easiest tests you can take to get this requirement out of the way. Need a little extra help prepping for your Subject Tests? We have the industry's leading SAT Subject Test prep programs (for all non-language Subject Tests). Built by Harvard grads and SAT Subject Test full or 99th %ile scorers, the program learns your strengths and weaknesses through advanced statistics, then customizes your prep program to you so that you get the most effective prep possible. Learn more about our Subject Test products below:

The Best Colleges With Low GPA Requirements

The Best Colleges With Low GPA Requirements SAT / ACT Prep Online Guides and Tips Do you have a low GPA? Are you wondering what colleges you can get into despite your low GPA? Out of all the schools in the country, we've compiled a complete list of colleges with low GPA requirements and ranked the best ones. Even if you have a low GPA, that doesn't mean a great education is out of reach for you. Keep reading to figure out what your options are for higher education. The Big Picture: What You Can Do With a Low GPA If you are looking at your low GPA with worry, let us reassure you: you can absolutely get a great education no matter what college you end up going to. For example, did you know that the vast majorityof people profiled in Forbes Magazine’s list of â€Å"30 under 30† (basically a list of about 450 young entrepreneurs, artists, and inventors who are making a name for themselves in a bunch of different fields) went to their local or state college? And not only that, but most of them actually found their business partners there as well! // Yes, the old line is totally true: it’s up to you to make the most of where you are. How? Well, for one, you can research classes and professors by asking your advisors and friends or by looking at online reviews. No matter where they teach, most professors tend to love their subject- after all, they’ve devoted their whole life to studying it!- so seek them out during office hours. Trust me, they'll love to talk with you! Now, let us show you the many choices and possibilities open to you, even if you didn't put your best foot forward in high school. Read on to learn about the following: Colleges that have alternative applications, some of which do not even require a transcript University systems in which you can transfer from one campus to another Great state schools with less competitive admission requirements // What's a Low GPA for College? First, we should clarify what we mean by a low GPA. The definition of a low GPA depends heavily on your personal goals and target colleges, but a general rule of thumb is that any GPA below a 3.0 puts you in the lower range for most colleges in the country. It's true that a 3.0 is the average GPA in the country, but remember that many high school students also don't go to college. Thus, the ones who do go to college usually end up having higher GPAs. As you'll see below, the average GPA of lower-tier colleges is in the 2.9-3.3 range. GPA can also be complicated because of unweighted and weighted GPAs, and how colleges consider the difficulty of your coursework. Even if you have a low GPA, you can compensate for it if you took a difficult course load, as colleges will reward you for your academic ambition. // Here are a few guides you might want to check out as you read this article: What Is a Good GPA? What's a Bad GPA for College? What's the Average High School GPA? How Do I Apply to College With a Low GPA? Finally, keep in mind that even with a low GPA, you still have a great shot at getting into college if you do well on the SAT/ACT. If a low GPA doesn't represent your academic potential well, you can show colleges your true ability through tests that are standardized throughout the country. Maybe your GPA is hiding you behind a mask? Want to build the best possible college application, to compensate for a lower GPA? We can help. PrepScholar Admissions is the world's best admissions consulting service. We combine world-class admissions counselors with our data-driven, proprietary admissions strategies. We've overseen thousands of students get into their top choice schools, from state colleges to the Ivy League. We know what kinds of students colleges want to admit. We want to get you admitted to your dream schools. Learn more about PrepScholar Admissions to maximize your chance of getting in. Does Your GPA Not Show the Real You? // If you have a low GPA but know that you are capable of so much more, three colleges now give you a totally different way to apply! Goucher College: How about this for a revolutionary idea: you only submit a two-minute video about yourself. That's it. No transcript, no test scores- just you explaining why you deserve admission. Bennington College: Similar deal here in that there's no need to submit a transcript or test scores. Instead, you'll turn in a self-curated collection of your work that speaks to your creative and intellectual abilities. Bard College: Even though Bard still requires a transcript, you can opt to answer several college-level essay questions. Just think: an amazing performance would be a surefire way to prove you can do better than your GPA suggests! Just ... a ... little ... longer! Do You Need More Time to Prove Yourself? // If you just need a little more time to demonstrate what you can do, think about applying to a less competitive campus of a state university system. You can then transfer to a more rigorous campus in the same system. Below is our list of the least competitive campuses in larger and more competitive state university systems. In this chart, we've included the average GPA of admitted applicants as well as the current acceptance rate for each school. (Pro tip: click the school names to see your chances of getting in with our Admissions Calculator!) School Average GPA Admission Rate Indiana University Northwest 2.96 79% Louisiana State University Shreveport 3.29 81% Penn State Schuylkill 2.90 73% Rutgers Camden 3.30 58% SUNY Potsdam 3.29 74% Texas AM Kingsville 3.35 82% University of Arkansas at Little Rock 3.21 59% University of Colorado at Colorado Springs 3.37 91% University of Illinois at Chicago 3.25 77% University of Louisiana at Monroe 3.41 94% University of Maine at Presque Isle 3.04 77% University of Maryland Eastern Shore 2.80 57% University of Massachusetts Dartmouth 3.20 76% University of Michigan at Flint 3.29 74% University of Minnesota Crookston 3.21 78% University of Missouri Kansas City 3.36 63% University of Nebraska at Kearney 3.47 85% University of North Carolina at Pembroke 3.40 74% University of Pittsburgh at Bradford 3.22 58% University of South Carolina Beaufort 3.39 63% University of Tennessee at Chattanooga 3.48 79% University of Texas at Brownsville 3.09 87% University of Washington Tacoma 3.23 83% University of Wisconsin Milwaukee 3.10 73% A name-brand school = a little bling for your resume. // Do You Want a Name-Brand School? If you would still like to go to a high-profile school but don’t see yourself transferring, state colleges are your best bet. Check out these accessible state college systems with fairly low GPA requirements on all of their campuses: California State University Connecticut State University University of Hawaii Massachusetts State University University of Nevada The CUNY system in NYC The Oregon University system (not to be confused with the University of Oregon) University of Rhode Island // I'll just point my protractor at a random point on this globe and go to college there! List of Colleges With Low GPAs by State If you have an idea of where you want to end up geographically speaking, then you're in luck. Here is a comprehensive list of colleges sorted by state. For each state, the schools are listed alphabetically and are accompanied by their average GPAs for admitted applicants. Alabama Alabama State University 2.80 Auburn University at Montgomery 3.30 Faulkner University 3.26 Jacksonville State University 3.34 Oakwood University 2.99 Southeastern Bible College 3.34 Tuskegee University 3.10 University of North Alabama 3.40 Alaska University of Alaska Fairbanks 3.21 University of Alaska Southeast 2.94 Arizona Prescott College 3.17 Arkansas Arkansas Tech University 3.19 Henderson State University 3.21 Southern Arkansas University 3.26 University of Arkansas at Little Rock 3.21 University of Central Arkansas 3.36 University of the Ozarks 3.23 // California American Jewish University 3.11 California Baptist University 3.32 California College of the Arts 3.27 California State University Bakersfield 3.20 California State University Chico 3.27 California State University Dominguez Hills 3.13 California State University East Bay 3.10 California State University Fresno 3.07 California State University Los Angeles 3.21 California State University Monterey Bay 3.32 California State University Northridge 3.18 California State University Sacramento 3.27 California State University San Bernardino 3.21 California State University San Marcos 3.27 California State University Stanislaus 3.31 Fresno Pacific University 3.30 Holy Names University 3.16 Humboldt State University 3.26 La Sierra University 3.39 Menlo College 3.30 Notre Dame de Namur University 3.20 Otis College of Art and Design 3.17 Pacific Union College 3.23 San Francisco Art Institute 3.22 San Francisco State University 3.23 Sonoma State University 3.24 Vanguard University of Southern California 3.21 Woodbury University 3.34 Colorado Adams State College 3.11 Colorado Mesa University 3.10 Fort Lewis College 3.25 Metropolitan State University of Denver 2.90 University of Colorado Colorado Springs 3.37 University of Northern Colorado 3.23 Western State Colorado University 2.87 Connecticut Albertus Magnus College 2.60 Central Connecticut State University 3.00 Eastern Connecticut State University 3.08 Lyme Academy College of Fine Arts 3.22 Sacred Heart University 3.42 Southern Connecticut State University 2.90 University of Bridgeport 2.93 University of Saint Joseph 3.24 Western Connecticut State University 2.97 Delaware Catholic University of America 3.38 Delaware State University 3.11 Goldey-Beacom College 2.90 Wesley College 2.71 Florida Barry University 3.14 Beacon College 2.87 Bethune-Cookman University 2.96 Clearwater Christian College 3.32 Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University 3.36 Johnson Wales University 3.06 Lynn University 3.07 Ringling College of Art and Design 3.27 Rollins College 3.33 Trinity College of Florida 3.17 University of Tampa 3.40 Webber International University 2.83 Georgia Albany State University 2.92 Armstrong Atlantic State University 3.24 Brewton-Parker College 3.04 Clark Atlanta University 3.00 Clayton State University 3.05 Columbus State University 3.12 Dalton State College 3.10 Georgia Gwinnett College 2.78 Georgia Southern University 3.29 Georgia Southwestern State University 3.26 Kennesaw State University 3.25 Life University 3.15 Morehouse College 3.11 Paine College 2.95 Point University 3.15 Reinhardt University 3.11 Savannah State University 2.77 Shorter University 3.35 Southern Polytechnic State University 3.28 Valdosta State University 3.20 University of West Georgia 3.15 Hawaii Chaminade University of Honolulu 3.41 University of Hawaii at Hilo 3.36 Idaho Idaho State University 3.23 Lewis-Clark State College 3.10 Illinois Augustana College 3.29 Blackburn College 3.28 Columbia College Chicago 3.26 Concordia University Chicago 2.98 Eastern Illinois University 3.08 Elmhurst College 3.38 Eureka College 3.20 Judson University 3.39 Kendall College 2.82 Lincoln Christian University 2.80 MacMurray College 3.00 Monmouth College 3.30 North Park University 3.14 Northeastern Illinois University 2.80 Northern Illinois University 3.15 Robert Morris University 3.48 Rockford University 3.18 Roosevelt University 3.16 Shimer College 2.99 Southern Illinois University Carbondale 3.09 University of Illinois at Chicago 3.25 Western Illinois University 3.20 // Indiana Calumet College of St. Joseph 2.63 Holy Cross College 3.20 Indiana Institute of Technology 2.93 Indiana State University 3.07 Indiana University East 3.17 Indiana University Kokomo 3.14 Indiana University Northwest 2.96 Indiana University- Purdue University Fort Wayne 3.20 Indiana University- Purdue University Indianapolis 3.39 Indiana University South Bend 3.09 Indiana University Southeast 3.12 Oakland City University 3.15 Purdue University Calumet 3.13 Purdue University North Central 3.04 St. Joseph's College 3.19 Saint Mary-of-the-Woods College 3.23 University of Southern Indiana 3.27 Iowa Briar Cliff University 3.27 Emmaus Bible College 3.18 Graceland University 3.22 Grand View University 3.23 Iowa Wesleyan College 3.02 Maharishi University of Management 3.14 St. Ambrose University 3.26 University of Dubuque 2.95 Upper Iowa University 3.19 Waldorf College 3.00 Kansas Bethany College 2.85 Emporia State University 3.32 Fort Hays State University 3.37 Friends University 3.29 Pittsburg State University 3.30 Sterling College 3.10 Tabor College 3.33 University of St. Mary 3.31 Kentucky Campbellsville University 3.35 Eastern Kentucky University 3.29 Georgetown College 3.37 Kentucky Christian University 3.16 Kentucky Mountain Bible College 3.39 Kentucky State University 2.78 Kentucky Wesleyan College 3.30 Lindsey Wilson College 3.27 Midway College 3.19 Northern Kentucky University 3.34 Thomas More College 3.26 University of the Cumberlands 3.44 University of Pikeville 3.06 Western Kentucky University 3.27 // Louisiana Dillard University 2.78 Grambling State University 2.72 Louisiana College 3.17 Louisiana State University Shreveport 3.29 Nicholls State University 3.22 Northwestern State University of Louisiana 3.24 Southeastern Louisiana University 3.19 University of Louisiana at Lafayette 3.30 University of New Orleans 3.14 Maine Husson University 3.30 University of Maine 3.27 University of Maine at Farmington 2.97 University of Maine at Fort Kent 3.00 University of New England 3.30 University of Southern Maine 2.96 Maryland Frostburg State University 3.18 Goucher College 3.15 Morgan State University 3.00 Stevenson University 3.40 University of Baltimore 2.89 University of Maryland Eastern Shore 2.80 Massachusetts American International College 2.80 Anna Maria College 2.78 Assumption College 3.38 Bay Path College 3.21 Becker College 3.08 Bridgewater State University 3.14 Curry College 2.80 Eastern Nazarene College 3.00 Endicott College 3.27 Fitchburg State University 3.10 Framingham State University 3.08 Hellenic College Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology 3.40 Lasell College 2.96 Lesley University 3.31 Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts 3.10 Massachusetts Maritime Academy 3.14 Mount Ida College 2.60 Newbury College 2.45 Nichols College 2.80 Regis College 3.06 Salem State University 3.13 Wentworth Institute of Technology 3.10 Western New England University 3.38 Westfield State University 3.09 Wheelock College 2.88 Worcester State University 3.23 Michigan Central Michigan University 3.37 College for Creative Studies 3.19 Concordia University Ann Arbor 3.10 Eastern Michigan University 3.30 Kuyper College 3.26 Lake Superior State University 3.26 Madonna University 3.30 Marygrove College 2.67 Northern Michigan University 3.16 Northwood University 3.16 Siena Heights University 3.20 University of Michigan- Flint 3.29 Wayne State University 3.30 Western Michigan University 3.34 // Minnesota Bemidji State University 3.11 Bethany Lutheran College 3.39 Concordia University Saint Paul 3.13 Minneapolis College of Art and Design 3.25 North Central University 3.33 St. Cloud State University 3.12 University of Minnesota, Crookston 3.21 Winona State University 3.33 Mississippi Alcorn State University 2.98 Belhaven University 3.30 Delta State University 3.10 Jackson State University 3.03 Mississippi State University 3.32 Mississippi Valley State University 2.91 Rust College 2.34 University of Southern Mississippi 3.27 Missouri Avila University 3.34 Culver-Stockton College 3.12 Harris-Stowe State University 2.69 Kansas City Art Institute 3.30 Lincoln University 2.63 Lindenwood University 3.21 Missouri Southern State University 3.30 Missouri Western State University 3.32 St. Louis Christian College 3.00 Southeast Missouri State University 3.39 Stephens College 3.27 University of Central Missouri 3.35 University of Missouri- Kansas City 3.36 Montana Montana State University 3.36 Montana State University- Billings 3.14 Rocky Mountain College 3.35 University of Great Falls 3.28 University of Montana Western 3.07 Want to build the best possible college application with a low GPA? We can help. PrepScholar Admissions is the world's best admissions consulting service. We combine world-class admissions counselors with our data-driven, proprietary admissions strategies. We've overseen thousands of students get into their top choice schools, from state colleges to the Ivy League. We know what kinds of students colleges want to admit. We want to get you admitted to your dream schools. Learn more about PrepScholar Admissions to maximize your chance of getting in. Nebraska Wayne State College 3.20 Nevada Sierra Nevada College 3.08 University of Nevada, Las Vegas 3.28 New Hampshire Colby Sawyer College 3.21 New England College 2.59 Plymouth State University 2.96 Rivier University 3.19 Saint Anselm College 3.28 Southern New Hampshire University 3.06 New Jersey Bloomfield College 2.68 Fairleigh Dickinson University- College at Florham 3.07 Fairleigh Dickinson University- Metropolitan Campus 3.08 Felician College 3.05 Kean University 3.10 Montclair State University 3.20 Ramapo College of New Jersey 3.26 Rider University 3.28 Saint Peter's University 3.15 William Paterson University 3.08 New Mexico Eastern New Mexico University 3.19 New Mexico Highlands University 2.95 University of New Mexico 3.38 // New York Alfred University 3.03 Cazenovia College 3.20 College of Mount St. Vincent 3.12 Culinary Institute of America 3.16 CUNY College of Staten Island 3.06 CUNY Hunter College 3.20 CUNY John Jay College of Criminal Justice 2.84 Dominican College 2.96 Elmira College 3.28 Farmingdale State College 3.24 Hartwick College 3.16 Hilbert College 3.18 Hobart and William Smith Colleges 3.43 Iona College 2.96 Keuka College 3.10 Long Island University Brooklyn 2.98 Long Island University Post 3.11 Manhattanville College 3.10 Marist College 3.30 Mercy College 3.00 Molloy College 3.00 Mount St. Mary College 3.20 Nyack College 2.81 Pace University 3.26 School of Visual Arts 3.29 St. Bonaventure University 3.40 St. Joseph's College- Brooklyn Campus 3.20 SUNY College at Brockport 2.98 SUNY Buffalo State 3.15 SUNY College at Old Westbury 3.10 SUNY Plattsburgh 3.20 SUNY Potsdam 3.29 SUNY at Purchase (Purchase College) 3.10 Utica College 3.09 North Carolina Barton College 3.18 Belmont Abbey College 3.16 Brevard College 3.07 Chowan University 2.69 Fayetteville State University 3.20 Guilford College 3.19 Johnson C. Smith University 2.78 Lees-McRae College 3.29 Mars Hill University 3.24 Meredith College 3.35 Methodist University 3.28 Mid-Atlantic Christian University 2.91 Montreat College 3.07 North Carolina AT State University 2.48 North Carolina Central University 3.20 Saint Augustine's University 2.37 Shaw University 2.45 University of North Carolina at Pembroke 3.40 William Peace University 3.22 Winston-Salem State University 3.01 North Dakota Jamestown College 3.46 Mayville State University 2.99 Minot State University 3.36 Valley City State University 3.18 Ohio Ashland University 3.44 Bluffton University 3.16 Bowling Green State University 3.30 Central State University 2.50 Cincinnati Christian University 3.14 Cleveland State University 3.29 College of Mount St. Joseph 3.35 Columbus College of Art and Design 3.15 Defiance College 3.22 Heidelberg University 3.28 Kent State University at Kent 3.36 Lourdes University 3.17 Malone University 3.33 Muskingum University 3.26 Tiffin University 3.07 University of Akron 3.16 University of Mount Union 3.44 University of Rio Grande 3.06 University of Toledo 3.32 Urbana University 3.00 Wilmington College 3.20 Wright State University 3.26 Youngstown State University 3.13 Oklahoma Cameron University 3.14 East Central University 3.40 Northeastern State University 3.37 Northwestern Oklahoma State University 3.28 St. Gregory's University 3.29 Southeastern Oklahoma State University 3.31 University of Central Oklahoma 3.29 Oregon Eastern Oregon University 3.29 Southern Oregon University 3.31 Warner Pacific College 3.17 Western Oregon University 3.24 Pennsylvania Albright College 3.40 Alvernia University 3.34 Baptist Bible College and Seminary 3.31 Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania 3.27 Cabrini College 3.06 Cairn University 3.24 California University of Pennsylvania 3.10 Cedar Crest College 3.17 Chestnut Hill College 3.13 Cheyney University of Pennsylvania 2.37 Clarion University of Pennsylvania 3.21 Edinboro University of Pennsylvania 3.18 Gwynedd-Mercy College 3.22 Holy Family University 3.09 Immaculata University 3.26 Kutztown University of Pennsylvania 3.20 La Roche College 3.30 La Salle University 3.35 Lock Haven University 3.30 Mansfield University of Pennsylvania 3.33 Misericordia University 3.35 Morris College 2.50 Mount Aloysius College 3.20 Muhlenberg College 3.30 Neumann University 3.04 Penn State Abington 3.11 Penn State Altoona 3.05 Penn State Berks 3.06 Penn State Erie, The Behrend College 3.30 Penn State Harrisburg 3.14 Penn State Lehigh Valley 3.03 Penn State Schuylkill 2.90 Point Park University 3.22 Rosemont College 3.40 Shippensburg University of Pennsylvania 3.20 Susquehanna University 3.46 Thiel College 3.10 University of Pittsburgh Bradford 3.22 Washington Jefferson College 3.39 Rhode Island Bryant University 3.42 Roger Williams University 3.34 Salve Regina University 3.29 University of Rhode Island 3.46 South Carolina Claflin University 3.28 Erskine College and Seminary 3.31 Limestone College 3.24 South Carolina State University 2.79 University of South Carolina Beaufort 3.39 Voorhees College 2.00 // South Dakota Dakota State University 3.10 Northern State University 3.25 South Dakota State University 3.37 Tennessee Austin Peay State University 3.20 Cumberland University 3.30 East Tennessee State University 3.40 Fisk University 3.10 Johnson University 3.06 LeMoyne-Owen College 2.50 Lane College 2.42 Memphis College of Art 3.14 Tennessee State University 2.82 Tennessee Wesleyan College 3.42 Trevecca Nazarene University 3.39 Tusculum College 3.13 University of Memphis 3.42 Watkins College of Art, Design and Film 3.00 Texas Arlington Baptist College 2.88 Concordia University Texas 3.30 East Texas Baptist University 3.38 Huston Tillotson University 2.79 Paul Quinn College 2.60 Prairie View AM University 3.03 Southwestern Adventist University 3.20 Sul Ross State University 3.17 Texas AM University- Kingsville 3.35 Texas Southern University 2.84 Texas Wesleyan University 3.40 Texas Woman's University 3.08 Wayland Baptist University 3.28 Utah Dixie State College 3.22 Neumont University 3.20 Weber State University 3.29 Vermont Castleton State College 3.00 Champlain College 3.20 Green Mountain College 3.04 Marlboro College 3.23 Norwich University 3.07 Southern Vermont College 2.50 Vermont Technical College 3.02 Virginia Averett University 3.17 Bluefield College 3.29 Ferrum College 2.88 Hampton University 3.22 Lynchburg College 3.41 Mary Baldwin College 3.43 Marymount University 3.24 Norfolk State University 2.90 Old Dominion University 3.28 Radford University 3.20 Virginia State University 2.90 Virginia Union University 2.71 Virginia Wesleyan College 3.28 Washington Central Washington University 3.14 Eastern Washington University 3.21 Evergreen State College 3.04 University of Washington Bothell 3.28 University of Washington Tacoma 3.23 Washington State University 3.31 West Virginia Alderson-Broaddus College 3.20 Bethany College 2.85 Concord University 3.31 Davis and Elkins College 2.90 Fairmont State University 3.29 Ohio Valley University 2.85 Shepherd University 3.31 West Liberty University 3.35 West Virginia State University 3.08 West Virginia University Institute of Technology 3.35 Wisconsin Cardinal Stritch University 3.22 Carroll University 3.30 Carthage College 3.24 Edgewood College 3.40 Lakeland College 3.00 Milwaukee Institute of Art Design 3.07 Mount Mary University 3.12 Northland College 3.40 Silver Lake College of the Holy Family 2.73 University of Wisconsin- Milwaukee 3.10 University of Wisconsin- Oshkosh 3.30 University of Wisconsin- Parkside 3.03 University of Wisconsin- Stout 3.30 University of Wisconsin- Superior 3.12 University of Wisconsin- Whitewater 3.29 // The Final Word: Colleges With Low GPA Requirements As you can see, a low GPA- usually one around 3.0 or lower- doesn't have to disqualify you from some great colleges. In fact, many schools with low GPA requirements are popular, well-known state universities. By contrast, if you're a fan of smaller colleges, there are plenty of those, too, you can consider. In addition, no matter where you are in the US, more than likely there's a school with low GPA requirements in or near the area you live (except Wyoming- sorry, guys!). Some states in the list above have far more schools than others; this is likely a result of population differences. Finally, remember that even if your GPA is lower than what your school expects, you can increase your chance of acceptance by getting a high SAT/ACT score and submitting a great application! What’s Next? What's a good GPA? A bad GPA?Here's a complete guide. // Want to see colleges that are even easier to get into? Take a look at our list of schools that admit almost everyone. You know your GPA, but do you know your target test scores? Figure out what your target SAT or target ACT score should be for the colleges you're interested in. Ready to learn more about the application process? Check out this handy infographic that lays it all out in detail.