Removal of Common Core
Debate Rounds (3)
I will be arguing for the removal of Common Core and the detrimental effects it has on public school education in America.
Common Core: "a set of high-quality academic standards in mathematics and English language arts/literacy (ELA). These learning goals outline what a student should know and be able to do at the end of each grade."
Removal: the action of taking away or abolishing something unwanted.]
1. The first round is for acceptance.
2. A forfeit or concession is not allowed.
3. No semantics or trolling.
4. All arguments must be visible inside this debate. Sources may be posted in an outside link.
5. Debate resolution, definitions, rules, and structure cannot be changed without asking in the comments before you post your round 1 argument. Debate resolution, definitions, rules, and structure cannot be changed in the middle of the debate.Voters, in the case of the breaking of any of these rules by either debater, all seven points in voting should be given to the other person.
Round 1: Acceptance
Round 2: Presenting all arguments (no rebuttals by con)
Round 3: Refutation of opponent's arguments (no new arguments)
To begin with, I would like to clarify what I will be arguing for this debate. I will be defending the statement, "Common Core should be removed from the public education system."
I will continue by providing reasons that concur with this statement.
1) Common Core does not provide a challenging curriculum. As a result, Common Core is damaging students in the United States rather than benefiting them.
-Contrary to popular belief, Common Core standards are not internationally benchmarked. According to Dr. James Milgram, a Common Core validation committee board member, Common Core actually puts students at least two years behind international expectations.
2) Common Core does not allow students to work at their own pace.
-For example, a student who is more academically advanced than his/her peers is not able to learn more. This results in boredom and a strong disinterest in school. And vice versa - a student who is falling behind in school or finds it difficult to keep up with the pace of the class is required to "learn" the same information. Often, this results in poor grades as well as poor comprehension and retention of information.
Once again, I thank Con for accepting this debate. Best of luck to him!
Contention 1: Critical thinking
Education is going through a critical and innovative step moving from memorization to critical thinking. Common Core standards. Common Core is playing an important role in that step in making that change. New Common Core standards are setting basic standards of thinking that need to be reached. (1)
While far from perfect, Common Core is good because it ensures standards that MUST be reached. Without such a system there is no way to ensure that students learn even the are minimum. Without Common Core we don't have a way to ensure that even the bad teachers and bad schools reach the level of thinking that must be taught.
Contention 2: A better education system
Now let me clear up something about Common Core and it's goals. Historically Common Core was created for a few reasons. One of the reasons is stated in the name, to create common national standards that creates common ground to understand to the education system. One of the reasons this was so critical was not having common standards gave room for manipulation of reality to deceive. For example, someone in one state/area could have the standards lowered to have the area appear to have a better education.
Take this example.
School A has more educated/smart students than school B
School A has very high standards and about 70% of students meet/exceed those standards.
School B sets very low standards to make their school appear better, about 85% of students meet/exceed standards.
This was an issue that was fairly common and was a large part of the reason Common Core was formed. (2)
Without having those common standards we cannot accurately understand where we are succeeding and where we are failing dooming efforts to improve education.
Another reason that Common Core is here to improve education is it is the first step in improving national standards of education (2). Allow me to explain, in order to form high standards we first need to establish common standards. That's another part of why Common Core was created.
It's like the first step to creating high national standards. The idea is to start with relatively low standards and work it up to higher standards. For example, in Florida Common Core was recently altered to make higher standards for calculus.
By removing Common Core you will set efforts to improve education back years.
Contention 3: What's the alternative?
Without Common Core we have no agreed upon standards or structured education. Common Core is there to give students basic core knowledge that they need to advance their education and succeed in the market. If you take away Common Core what do you replace that system with.
1. Do not know if what replaces Common Core will be an improvement.
2. Will temporarily/permanently lose the common ground that educators have to work with.
What most of the critics of Common Core do is simply point out it's flaws or issues and say it should be abolished, yet most of them get stumped when you ask them what we should have instead of Common Core.
The system isn't perfect, but it's the best we have. Instead of ditching a good idea we should perfect it and turn a good but flawed system into a system as perfect as we are capable as making it.
1. http://www.huffingtonpost.com..., Accessed 7-6-15
Novice56 forfeited this round.
"Common Core does not provide a challenging curriculum"
In it's common form the goal isn't to provide a challenging curriculum. It's to create a minimum of core knowledge that students need to advance their education and succeed in the market. If the classroom has a well fit teacher and good students then the class can exceed the standards and learn more than the minimum.
Common Core isn't limiting, yet instead it sets a minimum of what has to be taught
"Contrary to popular belief, Common Core standards are not internationally benchmarked."
Yet, without Common Core we are even further behind. The expectations aren't high in the status quo, but the plan is to use Common Core as a starting point where in the future the minimum will be drastically raised.
"Common Core does not allow students to work at their own pace"
1. Classrooms with Common Core are no more guilty of this than classrooms without Common Core.
2. As stated before Common Core just sets the bare minimum, in a good classroom those standards can be exceeded and the teacher can expand on the education.
3. We live in an age with practically unlimited knowledge easily accessible at our very fingertips. If a student is motivated enough to learn more than he has to in the classroom the resources are right in front of him. There are free, college level textbooks to learn from on the internet, there are free online classes you can take.
Some examples are
The list goes on. All of which you can use to expand your mind and knowledge with no limiting factors. Common Core does not limit nor prevent this. It's up to the student to determine how much they want to learn
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.