Recently, meaning today at lunch, I found out that one of my friends who is incredibly intelligent, missing only one question on the SAT, was turned down for a scholarship based mainly on scholastic merit, but also on character and involvement in the community. When we asked him why he thought he got turned down he said it was because of his lack of service to the community. After further questions elicited he told us that he didn't feel the need to do or record any service that he had done because then it would not be service, because it was required.
So here is my question: is service still service when it is required? Many school districts have considered adding a certain amount of hours of service to the graduation requirements. The pro arguments range from "you gain people skills from it" to "it prepares people for their criminal lives." The con argument is, of course, that it's no longer service to the community if it is required.
The first argument is quite obvious--when you're doing service you are most often doing it for other people--be it cleaning up a playground or cleaning out animal pens at the pound. So therefore you are forced to actually interact with them, something that some people can do better at than others. The second argument however is not as obvious, and more comical than anything. It suggests that many teenagers will end up as criminals in their adult years and will end up doing community service. What's interesting here is that it is required. So again the question...
If community service is required either by schools or in order to get scholarships when does it make the switch from service to the community to community service? Those who currently do service often do it because they want to or see the need for it to be done. If everyone has to do it, however, many students won't have that same passion for it (only seeing it as a menial task that has to be done) and not as much will get accomplished. What do you think...
