The Instigator
stanford96
Pro (for)
Losing
2 Points
The Contender
I-am-a-panda
Con (against)
Winning
18 Points

Mandatory art/music education in high-school is good!!

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 4 votes the winner is...
I-am-a-panda
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/5/2010 Category: Arts
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 10,616 times Debate No: 13071
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (4)

 

stanford96

Pro

I believe that having mandatory art or music education in high school is good. I am Pro on this issue. Thank you.
I-am-a-panda

Con

I thank my opponent for this debate. First, some definitions:

High School: In the United States a high school is an upper secondary school which educates children from grade nine through grade twelve, in other words, from the age of 15 to 17 or 18. [1]

Mandatory: Authoritatively ordered; obligatory; compulsory [2]

Good: healthful; beneficial [3]

In this debate Pro has to prove two things:

1) That Art\ Music education is beneficial, or "good", for a student.
2) That it should be mandatory for all students.

Failure to prove both of these means the resolution has not been affirmed. Indeed, I shall now show why Art\ Music shouldn't be compulsory in high school.

== As a Mandatory Subject ==

Students should be free while in school to choose subjects which they enjoy and should not be forced to take any subjects by force. If the students does not desire to be learning that subjects it ll hinder their overall education. As discussed here, "Many learning theorists believe learning is most profound, satisfying, and thorough when students engage in it for intrinsic reasons. " [4]

It's logical that a student would be far more interested in learning a subject of their choice than one forced upon them. To do otherwise would be detrimental to their education, as well as beg a misuse of their time while in school. The aim of a schools are to teach students, as per the definition of school, "A school is an institution designed for the teaching of students (or "pupils") under the supervision of teachers." [5]. If schools do not teach a student as deficiently as possible than it is contradictory to the idea of a school.

== Mandatory Education ==

Indeed, there is no reason why high school education should be compulsory at all. If a student opts to not do high school that is completley their choice. They will have to bear the consequences of not completing high school, which effects them and only them. There is no necessity to send some to learn with the threat of force, as this would mean student is in a school in which he does not want to learn, becoming a problem for their teacher and their fellow students.

I await my opponents response.

[1] = http://en.wikipedia.org...
[2] = http://dictionary.reference.com...
[3] = http://dictionary.reference.com...
[4] = http://www.publicschoolrenewal.org...
[5] = http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 1
stanford96

Pro

I thank my opponent for continuing on this debate. Good luck to both of us!

(C1) My opponent argues that it is best that students pursue subjects which they are interested in. The opposition must then answer the problematic question: "Do students, whose brains have not even fully developed yet, know what is best for their education?" A scrutiny of an average teenager's attributes would lead one to respond with a firm shake of the head.
Why? Leaving teenagers - who are undoubtedly in a state of growth marked by a headstrong, brash personality - to decide what is best for them in their path to adulthood is a foolhardy thing to do. They are emotionally and physically stressed - it is manifest that they are unsuited to make decisions of such significance.

(C2) Now, music is confirmed to facilitate brain growth (augmentation in concentration, intelligence, self-control, etc.), an essential factor for these high-school students. In fact, it has been proven that music is a key factor that can raise grades, test scores, SAT scores, etc. It is also very universal and encompasses multifarious genres to satisfy the mercurial interests of students - jazz, classical, rock, music theory, etc. It is also a great way for students to release their endorphins while extirpating stress they have gained, whether from homework or social life. There are, as of now, hundreds of psychiatrists who promote "music therapy" - a form of healing using music.

These are two contentions which I shall lay out in this round. I eagerly wait my adversary's response.

Sources:
http://www.childrensmusicworkshop.com...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://stress.about.com...
I-am-a-panda

Con

I thank my opponent for her response.

--- Response to C1 ---

"Why? Leaving teenagers - who are undoubtedly in a state of growth marked by a headstrong, brash personality - to decide what is best for them in their path to adulthood is a foolhardy thing to do. They are emotionally and physically stressed - it is manifest that they are unsuited to make decisions of such significance."

--> And choosing for them is a better option? Indeed, for someone to make such a decision for someone else, they would have to prove it would be best for every student in their path to adulthood. Indeed, thee si evidence to suggest even 14 year olds are capable of making decisions:

"By and large an average teen, given clear information and sufficient time to think about it, acts in their own best interest reasonably well." [1]

Clearly, if teenagers can do this, they are capable of choosing what they wish to study in school based on their own interests.

-- Response to C2 ---

"Now, music is confirmed to facilitate brain growth (augmentation in concentration, intelligence, self-control, etc.), an essential factor for these high-school students. In fact, it has been proven that music is a key factor that can raise grades, test scores, SAT scores, etc. It is also very universal and encompasses multifarious genres to satisfy the mercurial interests of students - jazz, classical, rock, music theory, etc. It is also a great way for students to release their endorphins while extirpating stress they have gained, whether from homework or social life. There are, as of now, hundreds of psychiatrists who promote "music therapy" - a form of healing using music."

--> Firstly, if music is beneficial to the student, they should partake in it after school or in their own time, not during school hours which could be better used studying. School is for learning, not releasing stress.

As for brain growth, none of my opponents sources reference brain growth, except one which mentions it "continues for many years after birth". We're talking about 15 year olds, not 5 year olds. Further mention of language processing is unnecessary for the vast Majority of 15 year olds.

And if students need music therapy, they should be going to a psychiatrist.

Thus far my opponent has not affirmed how music education is beneficial to every student, nor why it should be mandatory.

I await her response.

[1] = http://www.cafety.org...
Debate Round No. 2
stanford96

Pro

stanford96 forfeited this round.
I-am-a-panda

Con

It is quite unfortunate my opponent has forfeited the last round of this debate. As a brief conclusion:

- There is no reason for the government to make Music or Art education mandatory in high schools.
- Students are able and best off choosing their own subjects to learn.
- Benefits of music are not applicable to schooling.

I thank my opponent again for this debate.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Micahklaz 5 years ago
Micahklaz
I just wanted to thank both of you for this debate. I will be debating the pro position later today, and I found this very helpful!
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by TheParadox 6 years ago
TheParadox
stanford96I-am-a-pandaTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:24 
Vote Placed by JBlake 6 years ago
JBlake
stanford96I-am-a-pandaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Vote Placed by J.Kenyon 6 years ago
J.Kenyon
stanford96I-am-a-pandaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by I-am-a-panda 6 years ago
I-am-a-panda
stanford96I-am-a-pandaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04