The Instigator
CosmoJarvis
Con (against)
The Contender
ajisthetruth
Pro (for)

Will Betsy DeVos be a good Secretary of Education

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
ajisthetruth has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/10/2017 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 411 times Debate No: 99803
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (0)

 

CosmoJarvis

Con

Betsy DeVos was recently recognized as the United States' Secretary of Education. However, tensions and controversy are shrouding her victory.

Con will argue that she will be detrimental to education, while pro will advocate her ad her plans as the Secretary of State.

Rules:
1) Use proper grammar and sentence structure. Please look over your arguments before posting them to make sure that you didn't accidentally make a grammatical mistake or use malapropism.
2) Do not troll or use insults as your argument.
3) Support quantitative and qualitative data with valid sources.


Rounds:
R1: Acceptance

R2: Main Arguments
R3: Rebuttals (No new arguments)
Debate Round No. 1
CosmoJarvis

Con

Outline:
I. Introduction

II. DeVos' Career, and her Impact on Education
III. Sources


I. Introduction

Betsy DeVos was recently recognized as the United States' Secretary of Education. However, many people, both Democrats and Republicans alike, see her victory as a loss for education in America.

I will be arguing that Betsy DeVos and her planned policies will hurt American education.

II. DeVos' Career, and her Impact on Education

Previously, Betsy DeVos was a firm advocate of Charter Schools in Michigan for decades. She wanted to privatize public education by creating programs and pass laws that would divert public funds to pay for private school tuition in the form of vouchers and similar programs. Objectively, she wanted to expand privatized education by using public funds to fund these schools, and eliminate the common core system and other government policies and rules to prevent government intervention entirely (S1). Many believe that she wanted to eliminate government intervention and set up Charter Schools to bring "God" back to the schools; to remove things such as the theory of evolution, and other scientific theories which contradict the Bible so that children can be brainwashed to believe in Christianity.

However, many concerned parents and politicians are fleeting to the idea that Charter Schools and privatized education will be a great improvement, believing that it will be a step-up from public schooling. Unfortunately, Charter Schools are anything but an improvement. For example, Charter Schools in Detroit left children undereducated and unprepared for high-school and college education. Damien Rivera was a boy who attended a Charter School in Detroit. He got all A's, but when he tried to pursue his dream of being an engineer by going to a science program at the University of Michigan, he struggled to keep up with the students from Detroit Public Schools. In fact, Damien Rivera lacked even the most basic knowledge of subjects such as biology, that he didn't even known that the human body was made of cells (S2). This, to me, is appalling. I knew that fact when I was in elementary school.

Personally, I find that government regulations in education are vital to improve education and hold educators up to certain standards in order to provide students with the tools they'll need for college education or to pursue a successful career after graduating highschool. However, privatized schools and Charter Schools oppose all government intervention. Without government regulations, schools will be free to do as they wish; to provide students with a lacking education without any consequences. These schools are not established to provide students with an alternative education to benefit them, but to instead profit off of tuitions and government money. People such as the PA Cyber Charter founder, Nicholas Trombetta, profitted tremendously off of Charter Schools, stealing approximately one million dollars. Another examples is the Ubrban Pathways Charter School of Pittsburg, which was allegedly tyring to spend Pensnsylvania taxpayer money to build a school in Ohio (S3).

DeVos' plans of expanding Charter Schools in America as the Secretary of Education will be detrimental to education nationwide. Private organizations and corperations should have no right to control our schooling system and to rid America's children of their education so that these cash cows can make money and indoctrinate them with religion.

III. Sources
S1) https://www.washingtonpost.com...
S2) https://www.nytimes.com...
S3) https://www.washingtonpost.com...
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by CosmoJarvis 1 year ago
CosmoJarvis
I'm sorry for the short, rushed argument. I am fairly busy at the moment, but I did not want to put this off and save it for later only to forget about this debate. I will make sure to put more time and effort into the rebuttals.
Posted by lua 1 year ago
lua
"My parents were around back then damn do you need to drink some bleach cuz you are stupid i swear to god."
Aj, this is you defending the claim that you wrote the section about Reagan.
Posted by ajisthetruth 1 year ago
ajisthetruth
One i didn't because i gave them credit for their work
Posted by CosmoJarvis 1 year ago
CosmoJarvis
Aj, please don't plagiarize another article, like you did with the Donald Trump debate. And I'd prefer if you don't whine and call me a b*tch for calling you out like last time, alright?
Posted by CosmoJarvis 1 year ago
CosmoJarvis
I revised the title.
Posted by FaustianJustice 1 year ago
FaustianJustice
This is impossible for either party to win, Con would be arguing against a position she was appointed for, while Pro would be arguing speculative policy about a post appointment that hasn't occurred (per the rules of the debate).
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.