The Instigator
Jaemk9
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
SJM
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

There must be a school/education reform

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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: 6/23/2016 Category: Education
Updated: 8 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 281 times Debate No: 93028
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

Jaemk9

Pro

Do you think the education system should be reformed? If not, be my guest.
SJM

Con

Must- used to say that something is required by a rule or law

http://www.merriam-webster.com...
Debate Round No. 1
Jaemk9

Pro

Here is why it must be changed:

The typical school system teaches subjects such as math, science, history and english possibly depending on where you are. The reason I say must is because when looking at the necessities academically needed for life, one would not find those things taught in the school system. It must be changed because it does not properly prepare people for life. The system we are using currently is outdated because with our modern technology we can simply google these things. The system we use now is outdated. One will not use certain levels of math taught in school on a day to day basis, nor will one need to know what is an adjective in a sentence in relations to the noun or the subject. A change in system is strictly necessary. The school system we have now ill prepares us for life which is why it must be changed.

http://plpnetwork.com...
http://www.suunews.com...
SJM

Con

My opponent says that he/her must have said must, because school doesn't encompass the academic necessities of life, but the problem with this is that there are no such things as academic necessities. No one needs to learn to live, people can live without it. Something that is an actual necessity is, for example food/drink. You can't possibly live without sustenance. My opponent says it doesn't properly prepare someone for life, meaning without the academies they are going to live improperly, thus they can live without it. This basically refutes pro's whole case, but I will go even further. A system isn't outdated simply because you can just google it, which is not true. People need people who can teach them exactly what they need to know, and teachers are supposedly skilled in knowing what the students needs to know next. You can't just google, "what am I missing from this that I need to learn?" Also you can't assume that google is more effective than a teacher. Also pro says that it's outdated because we won't use math in a day to day basis, but my opponent fails to realize they teach you that stuff for future jobs. Even though it's true you may not go into certain jobs, these classes teaches you about each subject so you can easily pick which field you want to go into. These classes give you an insight into fields.
Debate Round No. 2
Jaemk9

Pro

While schools may teach some things that are taught on a day to day basis, the majority of maths and sciences will not be used depending on the job you have. If schools are not needed to live and we only need sustenance to live, then it is as though schools are wasting time. Instead of wasting time in the current education system we must think about the things that could possibly be if school was different. Think of all the possibilities if students studied applicable things that they wanted to learn. Often students know what they want to study. We should not look at what the system is like right now, but rather look at the possibilities there are if there was something different. If the teachers know so well what we will need in the future, why are they teaching geometry and physics. While some may use this if they are going to be engineers or. Con says that "these classes give you insight into fields". Would you not agree with me that if one realize or understands fully that a field is not for him/her, they should move on to something else that they love or that they excel at. In every other situation in life this would be considered a waste of time. Why is this any different?
SJM

Con

My opponent starts off by saying that most likely won"t need math and sciences for depending on the job you have, but that"s essentially my point. Someone doesn"t know for certain what job they are going to have, so schools make it so you have a different taste of each. And then if you go study in college something regarding math or sciences, you already know the basics. That is what schools is suppose to provide you with, and it does. And I would even argue English is important no matter what job you have. Pro then says that : If schools are not needed to live and we only need sustenance to live, then it is as though schools are wasting time." Which is basically saying, if you aren"t doing something you need to do, then you"re wasting your time. This is an absurd point, since my opponent is still proposing that we change the school system, to where we still have school. Therefore it is also being a waste of time.

Secondly, my opponent states :"Think of all the possibilities if students studied applicable things that they wanted to learn", but my opponent doesn"t provide specific things to change. Someone can"t just say, think about what would happen if we changed this system for the better, without saying what is the better. Not only that, but my opponent assumes that there is a system where everyone would like the classes and not one person would dislike the classes available. But there will be people who hate the system no matter what classes. And my opponent can"t practically have a system where every topic created is able to be teached.

Pro states, "Would you not agree with me that if one realize or understands fully that a field is not for him/her", but I"m making the point that not only does not everybody know, but no one can be 100% certain about anything. I thought I was 100% certain that I wanted to do something with computers, but then I didn"t feel like studying computers after taking some classes which gave me insight into better fields I want to study in.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Ragnar 8 months ago
Ragnar
You have confused Must with Should.
No votes have been placed for this debate.