Should RIDE create a plan to encourage greater economic education integration in our schools ?
Debate Rounds (4)
Claim 1: When the government gets involved, bad things happen.
Ride should not create a plan because they should learn from the mistake they make in the past. In the 60"s when Judge Garrity had made a plan in Boston it did not turn out good. When they bussed the black students they were attacked by the white students. This created a bigger problem than it already was.
Claim 2: Parents should be allowed to make decisions about where to send their kids.
The community can make a plan on their own they don"t need anyone to step in. Desegregation does not fix the so-called gap between blacks and whites. In the past 20 years schools have been becoming more segregated even with more diversity. Moving kids to different school like pieces on a game board violates their 14th amendment.
Claim 3: We are already doing things to improve education for individual schools in RI.
The main focus was improving the individual schools and not the students. They used magnet schools, charter schools, vouchers and the "No Child Left Behind" plan. These plans force teachers to take responsibility for educating poor and minority students.
Evidence: Charter schools have always sounded "cost-efficient" in a free market kind a way. Many Rhode Island communities have learned the hard way that opening up multiple redundant school systems has significant transition costs. PPSD"S Nathan Bishop and Nathaniel Greene (both 12% ELL) outscored all Providence based charter middle schools in PARCC ELA/Literacy.
Claim 2: All students should be mixed economically just like they were mixed racially by the courts in the past.
Evidence: In 1964, state education officials created a special committee, called the Kiernan Commissions to discover the impact that racial imbalance had in schools. The Kiernan Commissions found that racial imbalance is harm to both the black and white students. Massachusetts lawmakers took into consideration the Kiernan Commission"s suggestions and passed the Racial Imbalance Act. The Racial Imbalance Act required many districts, like Boston, to desegregate schools. Then in 1965, it became an issue when the white parents were upset that the black students were going to the "desegregated" schools. Therefore, a year later, the METCO program began to bus students in Boston to suburban schools.
Claim 3: There are benefits to everyone when rich and poor kids are mixed.
Evidence: Education reform is about trying to make high-poverty schools work. Low income students in Montgomery County performed better when they attended affluent elementary schools instead of ones with higher concentrations of poverty. After seven years, children in lower-poverty schools performed 8 percentage points higher on standardized tests than the children who are attending higher-poverty schools.
Question #2: Why is the cost important if the money is going towards educating students which is a priority everywhere and a right to all ?
Question #3: What happens to the rich kids when they mix with the poor kids in school ?
2)Why can"t both the community and the government come together to make a plan?
3)Why was improving schools more important than the students when the students are representing the schools?
#2: Not every community is the same so the government and the different communities coming together wouldn't make a difference for the plan they for the schools because not every community will come to the same agreement.
#3: Some students are going to poor schools but teachers aren't giving them what they need to learn or enough motivation.
2)Money to schools is a right to all, but some schools get more money and have better education opportunities and also have higher graduation rates. Although money is a big factor to education, what happens to the money that is left when the particular school has used the amount that they "need." For schools that get little and need the money and a higher graduation rate, why don"t they get the money they deserve as for the schools that get more than enough?
3)The "rich" kids are no different than the "poor" kids. "Rich" and "Poor" are nothing but labels for people of higher and lower poverty. When the rich and poor kids are mixed, they benefit people who need the education. They stay in the same environment, they get the same education, but the only the difference is that the "poor" kids are benefiting from the opportunities that "only" the "rich" kids use to have.
#2: Claim #2 is not true because parents should choose what school they want the child to attend. Forcing the students to mix violates their rights. In the past when the students were mixed it made problems worse than what they were before. It created violence because not everyone agreed with the ruling.
#3: The evidence for claim #3 is not accurate because the study doesn"t show what happens to the rich kids when the poor kids attend the school. They could leave the schools or start problems with each other.
2)Not every community will come to an agreement with the government. I can understand why the parents may not agree with the government in some cases where it involves their children. Although the parents do have rights to make decisions for their children, the government comes into this situation because unlike the parent seeing just their child, the government sees all of the kids in the community therefore, one parent"s opinion will probably not make much of a difference when more than one child is involved.
3)Claim number three does not provide enough evidence to support that poor kids do not get enough motivation from their teachers. How would you know the amount of motivation that the students get from going to a low poverty school? A child does not fail because one person out of millions does not motivate them. The student can be motivated by their parents, by a current situation, or it even depends on the student itself.
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.