The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
0 Points

Current school cirriculum. full resolution in round 1

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/19/2016 Category: Society
Updated: 4 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 210 times Debate No: 91544
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)




R1: Acceptance
R2: Main arguments
R3: Counter argument
R4: rebuttals and closing statements
Cirriculum: the aggregate of courses of study given in a school, college, university

It has been a bit so I thought I could do a topic that would keep me from going rusty

My stance is that the current schooling programs around the world put too much emphasis on topics that will not entirely benefit them in adult hood. Several schools can prevent kids from graduating if they fail an art class, which is not a skill everyone would use in life.

Apply in comments.


Greeting to my opponent I will be representing the other side in this debate.
It is my first debate and I am looking forward to this, because it seems like quality topic.

Good luck and hope we have fun!
Debate Round No. 1


To start, schooling is to prepare kids and young adults for adult hood. Teaching them practical skills in which they will use a lot in their lives. My argument is that what is in the current schooling curriculum is mainly unnecessary. This will admittedly be somewhat short as there aren"t too many points to address.

The school system in many places put an emphasis on classes that would likely not help people in the adult world. For example, there are many schools where students can be prevented from graduating should they fail art. Art is a skill that will most likely not be touched upon by most people once they become adults. There are also many schools that do the same for classes such as music as well. Even though there are careers that use these skills, most people admittedly won"t go into these careers. Thus not needing such emphasis on these classes.

I"m not saying these classes should be removed entirely. My solution would be to make them have less of an affect on students using those skills are much lower than courses such as math and English
As I said, this is somewhat short as there aren"t many points to address. I await my opponent"s response.


To start I would like to define what subjects are most often mandatory in high school course set [1]:
"Though the United States has not established a mandatory high school course set, the most common grouping includes the following [3]:

" English " literature, humanities
" Mathematics " algebra, geometry, pre-calculus/trigonometry
" Science " biology, chemistry, physics
" Social Studies " history, government/economics
" Physical Education "

Anyone can clearly see how English literature or similar can be really useful towards having general knowledge and being literate, and can help one express themselves easier. Furthermore, mathematics is used in a huge variety of professions like engineering, chemistry and astronomy [2]. Science in general is helping students understand basic concepts around us such human anatomy, basic physics concepts like gravity, etc. Moreover, social studies can help us have better understand of history, geography and economy, which is essential for functioning in today"s world. Finally, Physical Education can help student develop interest in sports and stay physically healthy. This shows the importance of mandatory subjects in education system.

Furthermore, today"s curriculum is developed in a way that is suitable for children to learn, based on Piaget"s stages of learning [3]. This is the reason children don"t learn hard mathematics at age of 7, but only later. Moreover, it is focused on helping children develop abstract thinking about some ideas such as democracy, freedom, etc.

Finally, the curriculum is changing all the time as it has become a dynamic process due to the constant changes in our society. "Curriculum development is defined as planned, a purposeful, progressive, and systematic process to create positive improvements in the educational system." [4] This shows how curriculum keeps changing in order to be up to date with needs and priorities of people and society as a whole.

3. Piaget, J., & Cook, M. T. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children. New York, NY: International University Press.
Debate Round No. 2


Counter arguments.

Con"s main focus in their main argument was that the currents school curriculum covered exactly what children needed in schooling. I will not argue against this point as it can coexist with my stance.
Schools first and foremost purpose is to prepare kids and young adults for adult hood, something we can agree on. So part of preparing children for this would be to teach children practical skills they will use in jobs and everyday life. Mathematics comes into play in many jobs and basic math skills every day. Language arts/English is pretty easy to see how we would use it in our lives. Basic grammar for speech and complex grammar for jobs that require it. Science for other jobs that may require basic knowledge of things like biology or chemistry. Grade gets higher then classes get far more advanced. Eventually you get to the point where college classes specialize in specific subjects to prepare students the exact job they desire. What seems to be a flaw is mainly present in middle and high schools.

These grade levels tend to have classes out side of the main subjects that I and my opponent agree on, and normally students are forced to take some of these classes. I have no qualms about students being forced into taking them, but what happens after. Many schools can hold students back should they not do well in these classes, even though these skills are honestly not used as much as the other core classes. Art and music for example are very specific skills that people will only need should they choose to become an artist or musician. So children who are unsure or who know they will not be going down these career paths should not be held back should they not do well in them.

Let me use the Carlisle area school district for example. It was an American school district I temporarily went to while I was visiting the U.S.

The Carlisle area school district (CASD for short) works on a 4 point grading system. A student has to get 4 points in ALL classes in order to pass. A=4 B=3 C=2 D=1 F=0. Should a student fall below 50% in ANY of there grades, there points will be rendered null and be considered to be held back should they have gotten four points. This system works fine until children come into the classes that are of discussion. Should a child not be skilled on classes such as art, music, or what ever extra classes they have? They can be held back regardless of how well they did in core classes.

I await my opponents response to my main argument.


BlackAnarchyRose forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3


Opponent forfeited round 3
Vote con.


BlackAnarchyRose forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by WhineyMagiciann5 5 months ago
@Blackanarchyrose I would prefer if you did not use wiki. it's not going to take away the validity of your current and future arguments, it's just that wiki contributors list the original sources near the end of the page. I would prefer if you could link the original source as the original source tends to be a bit more in-depth than an overview like wiki.
No votes have been placed for this debate.