removing service learning hours from high school as graduation requirement
Debate Rounds (3)
Let's dissect the PRO's thinking.
The obvious assumption of the PRO is this: Students drop out of the school because of the service learning hour requirement. However, if you look at data, this is not the case.
According to the Orlando Sentinel, the top four reasons students drop out are:
1. Classes were not interesting (47 percent)
2. Missed too many days and could not catch up (43 percent)
3. Spent time with people who were not interested in school (42 percent)
4. Had too much freedom and not enough rules in my life (38 percent) (1)
You probably noticed, but none of these included "service learning hours". In fact, Service Learning hours could help students graduate by:
1) Making school interesting (counters reason 1). They allow students to spend time on a project they are personally involved in and care about. There is nothing like passion to keep determination.
2) Spend time with motivated people (counters reason 3). By spending time with people who care about something and are motivated to see it though, students could, ideally, pick up some of that and change their attitude towards school.
3) Structure (counters reason 4). One reason students drop out is a lack of structure in their life. But volunteering on a fixed so-many-hours-a-week basis allows for a schedule outside of school--it gives them normalcy. This is especially true for students from dysfunctional homes.
In conclusion, the PRO opening argument is invalid and, in fact Service Learning hours could help prevent dropouts.
Contention 2: School isn't about School
PRO said this: "Some refuse to even get the hours due believing that unwilling serving the community for free is some how suppose to help them in school..."
Agreed. But what PRO is missing is that the point of Service Learning Hours and school--both--isn't to help them in school.
It's to help them in life.
Serving the community and helping others is not only beneficial to the community and others (which is essential), but it also helps students in life. The PRO's standpoint ("who in there right mind would willing to do free manual labor") is not only extremely selfish but detrimental to society. Under PRO's system, schools would build people who can "do good in school" but are unable to apply it to real life or be active participators in society.
(As a side note, what other people have said the point of service learning hours is irrelevant. What CON says the point is, is.)
kingofme forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Defro 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||7|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeited
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.