The United States public education system needs to be reformed
Debate Rounds (5)
1)You may include as many sources as you want, or no sources if you wish.
2)All source citation types and sources will be accepted.
3)The winner will be decided by an "Open Voting" style taking place over the course of a month after the debate is completed.
4)Failure to post an argument in 48 hours will not result in automatic disqualification although voters are encouraged to vote for a debater who does in fact post an valid argument for each and every round.
I personally believe that the United States public education system needs a drastic reform if the United States wishes to be a world power in the 21st century and beyond.
My proposed changes would include:
* The expanded availability of practical use classes. (Business/Personal Finance, Technology, Practical Sciences, Current Affairs, Future Affairs, etc.)
* In order to provide these classes the schools must scale back (although not completely eliminate) today's popular regulation classes (English, Foreign language, Health/ Fitness ,etc.)
* Technology shall be more widespread. (Computers & Tablets in the classroom environment)
* In order for today's children to solve the problems of tomorrow, the skills needed to solve the problems of tomorrow must be taught today.
The order and purpose of the five debate rounds are as following:
1) Challenge & Acceptance
2) Why or why not certain classes should be taught/scaled back.
3) Pro and Con views on expanding the use of technology in the classroom.
4) Why or why not are these "classes of tomorrow" are important to children.
5) Final arguments and thoughts on why voters should "vote pro" or "vote con".
To whomever my con challenger is I wish them best of luck and I hope this will be a quite spectacular debate.
I believe that certain classes can offer more practical and "hands on solutions" to the current ones. For example geometry Is a class that can be replaced with a better, more practical alternative class such as CAD. CAD stands for Computer Aided Design and the class uses a computer software program which allows the "architect/ engineer" to construct buildings and engineer transportation methods.
This class offers students who wish to become architects or engineer a real world experience. I have personally used CAD software and I can say that many things that I learned in my high school geometry classes were brilliantly incorporated into this software. Architecture and Engineering is a very popular career path and provides many opportunities.
As you can see architecture and engineering are very important and prestigious career paths for young people. Why teach a class that the students will need to adjust for later in college and their job, when it is much more efficient teach directly with the software used by professionals on the job?
Haven't you heard of all the millennials who come into the workforce without "formal" training. The article below states six options employer can access when training young employees. Point #3 states the many millennials have a college degree but they also have a lack of formal training, that could have been more quickly and efficiently acquired in a number of high school courses.
I realize that your views on this obviously differ from mine, but I don't believe that anyone can logically argue that young, untrained college graduates entering the workforce for skilled jobs like this is not a problem.
I also believe that this would financially benefit both the employer and the employee as the employer saves money by not mandating a training course, and the money that the employer saves goes towards employee's bonuses and pay checks.
In conclusion in this round I have argued for my opinion that more practical and "hands on" classes can offer realistic and interesting alternative to the "core classes", and I have shown you a few of the many problems caused by the lack of enforcement of practical classes in high school. I wish you best of luck this round!
http://rop.bcoe.org...), I found interesting information on the website, but I have you a few questions about it that I could not find an answer to in neither the website you linked nor in the context of your argument for round two.
1) It seems as this program is only available in California, if I am incorrect could you please provide a link which describes program opportunities in other states? ( Or You could find similar organizations for a few states other than California.)
2) I've always known that programs like this have existed, but as you have stated in the opening round, "Programs such as facebook, instagram, and twitter, have created a instant satisfaction society that deems anything that is hard as boring." My question is if today's youth is "hooked" on these social networking sites than how will they discover and engage in these programs if they are not presented directly to them? You could argue that their parents should attempt to engage their children in these "out of school" programs, but the problem is that most parents ignore/know nothing of these programs, so if the parents and the schools are unwilling to persuade the children into these activities, then who will? Because I'm certain that most children do not attempt to discover programs like this themselves.
3) Also, another flaw that I have taken note of is that today's student generation has become notoriously famous for their busy schedules, filled with sports practices, sports game, "free time", and relaxation time, so attending these classes wether it be in person or online is quite impractical for most of the students of today.
I have also found that your statement "The job that Public Schooling is listed to do, which is to prepare high school graduates for either careers straight out of high school, or as a stepping stone for College is something that it has completed very well." in some ways this statement is contradicting to your argument as most high schools do not provide classes that prepare high school graduates that join the workforce immediately, but they rather assume that a student of the class will go on to college, which is in almost all cases, false.
Now on to the official debate of round #3, which is my proposal of expanding the use of today's technology in the classroom and preparing students to acquire the skills of tomorrow, today. I strongly believe that in today's working environment, as well as tomorrow's working environment, the ability to not only understand but also to have the ability to master technology is crucial for any student that wishes to pursue a career incorporating information technology into the position's everyday tasks.
The link that I have posted above claims that according to The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics "information technology will add more than 785,000 new jobs from 2008 to 2018."
Think about, if 785,000 IT jobs will be added by 2018 think about how many IT will be added by 2030, or even 2060!
If we are not successful in training over 785,000 student's for these job's than another country such as China, Finland, or Japan will.
I wish you best of luck this round!
The link that I have posted above provides a list of the ten best job sectors for middle class workers. This article rank's the technology sector the second best only to the medical field for middle class jobs.
It states that "The average salary for a systems engineer is $87,100, that career field is expected to grow 45% over the next 10 years. "
This link above provides information on the eleven major IT career's, and if you click on them you can see that all eleven careers have very fast growth rates compared to the national average for all careers.
Therefore I believe that in order to overcome the challenges of tomorrow student's must be taught the skill's of tomorrow today.
If we were to widely incorporate into the public school system some of the practical classes that I have previously described, than a education needed for an exceptional job may not require college degrees.
One of the largest problem among the battle of wealth inequality in The United States of America is that many exceptionally intelligent children whose families are near the bottom of the wealth pyramid do not have sufficient funding to attend college even with the availability of scholarships. If we were to incorporate these college courses into a high school curriculum poorer children will have the ability to gain these valuable skills. It would also allow children to showcase their intellectual ability to understand these "real world" and college application. If a poorer child is exceptional at engineering but does not have to opportunity to showcase or discover his or her skills, then how will he ever attain the college education needed to further advance those engineering skills.
Also, I did not state that public school should replace higher learning institutions, I simply said that these practical classes would prepare students for a higher education, such as the major one that you stated in your argument, college.
In conclusion, I believe that practical use classes should be more widespread in the public school system, technology is playing a greater role in today's and tomorrow's society, and that in order for today's children to solve the problems of tomorrow, the skills needed to solve the problems of tomorrow must be taught today.
I believe that this was a very amusing debate and that you were a very intellectual opponent. I wish you the best of luck in the voting period.
jlc0033 forfeited this round.
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.