BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
The United States public education system needs to be reformed

Con, you pointed out that "the job openings that you have listed all require formal schooling once High School is over. " This is correct but there are a few things that you have failed to consider. 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.
The United States public education system needs to be reformed

Although I believe the statistics that you have listed are eye opening, the job openings that you have listed all require formal schooling once High School is over. The reform you are asking for is one on the reform of higher education rather then that of high school, yet the debate is over whether our PUBLIC School Systems need reform, which is something that I have failed to be convinced of yet. Although you and I both agree that jobs in the technological sector will become very important what you fail to make clear in your argument is why you think Public Schools should be reformed to do that, when they were not created for that purpose. Again I state to you that for even middle management positions this particular job sector schooling after high school is mandatory, which makes a reform of high schools to fit this growing sector obsolete, unless there is a radical change in the requirements on employees in that sector. Thanks.
The United States public education system needs to be reformed

In your argument you state "Yet I must point out to you that the majority of the students in school are not Bill Gates, or Steve Jobs", I see what you mean by this sentence, although I feel as we've had a miscommunication error as I did not state that we need to be training students to become the next Steve Jobs or Bill Gates. All that my proposal's of integrating modern technologies into the learning environment is stating is that we need to be training students for future jobs. As my source in the previous round shows the employment of computer and information systems managers is expected to grow between 18 to 26 percent for all occupations through the year 2014. The worker's who will fill this 18 to 26 percent gap are not named Bill Gates, or Steve Jobs for that matter. (http://www.moneycrashers.com...) 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. " (http://www.bls.gov...) 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.
The United States public education system needs to be reformed

I must say that I completely agree with you on IT Jobs. Not only is technology becoming a growing part of our society but of the worlds, and I will be the first to say that I am disappointed that what most of the leading innovators in America in that sector have learned about those types of technological advances have been outside of school. Yet I must point out to you that the majority of the students in school are not Bill Gates, or Steve Jobs. What this type of reform inside of the school system would accomplish would be to change what the majority of students feel, and to subject the majority to unnecessary change at the request of a small minority. Although I believe small side courses which can be sought out should be made available to those more technically inclined I also believe that the views you have stated represent a small fraction of our total population, and more importantly of those who are seeking education for employment. If reform is necessary I would support if and only if it represented the views of the School System as a whole. Being a product of this 'flawed' system I can tell you that I feel as if I am just as smart as those in Europe, Asia, and every other continent and that the same, if not more opportunities have been made to available to me once I began seeking just as in any other country. I believe that what has changed from Country to Country is how willing the students inside of each are to seek out these opportunities. Although I understand your hesitation in allowing the current school system to continue especially with the predictions that 785,000 new jobs might not be able to be filled, I argue that where the jobs go so will the enthusiasm for seeking out training in those areas as well. As you have already stated you knew for sometime that programs like the one I listed are available, and you proved my point what is missing is not the availability of these programs in the system, but rather the determination to seek them and use them by our students.
The United States public education system needs to be reformed

Many of the students today have become so diluted in their approach to school they fail to realize many of the hands-on classes you have suggested really do exist. In my argument I state for you the ROP program in my hometown. Not only does this ROP program offer working, and work-like experience but also specializes in giving students the resources they need to excel later in life. Also both examples that you have listed require further schooling past the Public School options such as High School. When we get into College obviously we must re-learn and acquire new skills for the designated major we have chosen. What High School is meant for is not to teach us everything we must know in order to become an engineer, but rather a generalized basic concepts that we can use as a launching pad of sorts once we decide whether or not we are going to pursue higher education. 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. Electives such as Consumer Math teach us how to balance a checkbook, and programs such as ROP teach skills in certain areas that do not demand a college degree such as Construction, Welding, and Food Care. Although there are some points correct in your argument I believe you have a misconception on what is available to our students, and what our students actually use to their advantage. Although I believe we need a change it is not in our system yet our work ethic. Sources: http://rop.bcoe.org...
The United States public education system needs to be reformed

jlc0033, before we I begin my argument let me say thank for accepting my debate, although I'm glad that and I both agree that the United States public education must be reformed I don't quite agree with why your proposals should be chosen over mine. But nevertheless on to the second round. 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. (. http://www.autodesk.com...). 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. (. http://www.bls.gov...) 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. (. http://www.entrepreneur.com... #) 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.
The United States public education system needs to be reformed

The modern influx of Social diseases such as ADHD, and Dyslexia have swayed our judgments of both school, and childhood disciplinary actions as a whole. We have come to regard our school system as outdated, and overwhelming but in actuality it is merely the generation after generation decline in both the responsibility and attentiveness of our youth. Programs such as facebook, instagram, and twitter, have created a instant satisfaction society that deems anything that is hard as boring. Much of the issue in our school systems has been the dumbing down of material in order to keep up with small attention spans that we have created. What needs reform is no longer our education system, but our children and the way we raise them. Must we look back to the 1950's and see that with our education system which has been doomed to fail by many experts that they thrived and were ranked #1 in the world in terms of Education? The collapse of our Educational System is something I agree must be fixed I disagree and will argue that it is not our system merely the self indulging, small attention spans we have sprouted in our youth
The United States public education system needs to be reformed

Debate Rules & Regulations 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.
The United States Should Intensify Economic Sanctions On North Korea

I would like to begin saying that , this debate will consist of three rounds, 1. Your Case 2. Rebuttals 3. Closing Statement Here are the definitions of today's debate (ALL from merriamwebster.com) Should: used in auxiliary function to express what is probable or expected. Intensify:to become intense or more intensive : grow stronger or more acute. Sanctions: an action that is taken or an order that is given to force a country to obey international laws by limiting or stopping trade with that country, by not allowing economic aid for that country, etc. With that I will negate the following resolution: The United States Should Lift Economic Sanctions On North Korea. Contention 1: War Threats We all remember the two years of North Korea's constant threats to attack the US. These were mainly nuclear threats as NK believes to be the worlds' strongest nuclear power and wishes to conquer the world, basically. But due to North Korea's growing nuclear program as it spends more than 40% of their GDP on their military. And due to the fact that their nuclear program is getting stronger, heavy economic sanctions must be placed on this country, as they are a menace to the world. If we are to intensify these sanctions on N. Korea, we could see a decline in their growing program. It poses a threat to not only the US but to the whole world, we need to intensify these sanctions to help the world. Regardless of the sanctions in place, we need this to happen, as N. Korea is spending more money and putting their military before their people. Plus, North Korea has constantly shot off missiles towards Japan, a great ally of ours. These acts of aggression and threats to the world must not go unpunished. http://www.bmj.com... http://www.washingtontimes.com... Contention 2: Back In Time This is a basic history lesson, back in the early 50s, N. Korea went to war with the US and S. Korea, after their defeat, heavy economic sanctions are now put in place. You must pay for your actions, even if it has been decades into the future. North Korea is constantly threatening the world, like said in my first contention, and must ultimately pay for what this oppressive country has done. Many would argue that enough is enough, but is it really enough? Do we really want to place billions of lives in jeopardy because we made the mistake of not intensifying sanctions? Think about this voters as this will be my main concept in this debate. Contention 3: Politics Just like Russia and Crimea, the international community has put many sanctions on Russia for an action that could have not gone unpunished. And Russia has continued to decline political talks and has been revoked from the G8. North Korea has left the 6 Party Talks and has yet again, focused on their military instead of helping its people and cutting down on their military. We have to intensify these sanctions in order to pull NK into the diplomatic realm, have safer world, and even save their people.
Smoking Should be allowed During school

Let's start off with some answers. .. 1) My opponent grants that seniors would be the only people allowed to smoke, and says this doesn't matter because smoking is going to happen anyways. Schools are federal buildings (or at least state buildings). This means they get their funding from the government. They can't endorse smoking, they can't allow it; if they do, their funding gets cut. No funding, no school. No school, no place to debate about whether smoking should be allowed. However ineffective the system is at stopping teen smokers, completely allowing it isn't feasible and isn't realistic. 2) My opponent grants my point of increased availability, and dismisses it as "another debate for another time". However, it's completely relevant. My case needs to be looked at holistically, each point links into another. Increasing availability increases the deaths and monetary loss I mentioned at the end of R1. 3) The hypocrisy of school is where we start to see some clash. These programs can't get rid of it because there are people who don't care. Apathy is a very destructive habit. Couple this with nicotine and it's easy to see why 443,000 people die every year and $167 billion is lost. .. 4) Once again my opponent dismisses one of my points. My opponent claims that it's perfectly fine for schools to advocate smoking. I'd like to press for an explanation, and at the same time offer my explanation. Nicotine is a very addictive drug. Those who are going to smoke it/chew it are going to do so regardless of the law. Those who are deterred by the law aren't going to because. .. they're deterred by the law. (Circular logic is great, isn't it? :D ) The earlier someone gets ahold of the drug, the more likely someone is to use it. The more people who use it forces those statistics to skyrocket! Lots more people die, lots more money is wasted (look at it nation-wide). 5) My opponent once again dismisses my point on the number of people who die from tobacco and says that those who smoke know it's horrible for them. You have to remember that nicotine is an addictive drug. Maybe they want to quit but can't (look at all the quit smoking gum. .. ). Besides, do we really want to see these horrible statistics climb? 6) My opponent completely drops my point on the economy. .. To refute my opponent's case: * On designated places to smoke: Indoors causes second-hand smoke, outdoors is still a endorsement of smoking and causes all the negative effects outlined in R1 and defended above * On the stresses of school: There are better ways of stress control, and if 7 hours a day is enough to stress someone out, they probably shouldn't look to drugs to help them. .. For these reasons you can NEGATE.
Smoking Should be allowed During school

1. My opponent states that smoking is illegal. He is right if you are under the age of 18 you cannot smoke. So technically seniors would be the only ones. This is still smoking during school. It is going to happen anyways so why would you try to stop it. 2. Having cigarettes would increase availability. Even so this is another debate for another time. 3. We have these progams so why couldnt they get rid of it? There is plenty of hypocritical things going on in school. Teachers tell kids not to bring their problems to school, yet teachers do. Teachers tell students dont use your phone in class, yet teachers do. There is plent more of these. I am not implicating that you smoke during class! How is smoking during lunch or class breaks destroying education? 4. Once again this is not really a big deal. Even the cigarette company puts that smoking is bad and warnings on the boxes, yet people still do it. They could have a sign saying smoking is bad and let kids do it. 5. Most people who smoke know its horrible for them yet they still smoke. NOW I WILL BRING UP SOME OF MY POINTS There could be places for people to smoke. Restaurants have designated areas for a reason, why cant schools? These places could consist of snoking rooms, outside places and things like this. It would only be hurting the smokers. School is a very stressful place. I know sometimes myself, i feel like having a cigarette because of all the work. This could be a easy way out instead of starting fights, and getting mad at teachers. I will add on to these points in the next round. I have to go do some stuff sorry.
Smoking Should be allowed During school

I would like to start off by taking a moment and thanking my opponent for instigating this debate. That said, I'll go ahead and make a case... 1) Smoking is illegal The legal age to smoke is 18. This means that only seniors, a select group of seniors, would be legal to smoke at school. I understand that smoking takes place anyway, but a school can't condone smoking. 2) Having cigarettes on campus increases availability This pretty much speaks for itself. When aforementioned seniors have cigarettes on them, and are free to smoke them on campus, this only allows the freshmen, sophomores, juniors, and the under-age seniors more access to cigarettes. As a school, their job is to ensure each student is safe and productive. By allowing cigarettes on campus, the school is indirectly condoning the use of nicotine, which violates the law. 3) Allowing cigarettes on campus is hypocritical. Several school programs (D.A.R.E. for example) advocate against cigarettes. Health classes warn of the dangers of smoking, and now a school is going to say "Okay, you can smoke."? This is wrong and hypocritical, and teaches children to disregard everything the school does. This destroys the value of an education, and leads to a semi-anarchist government within the school. 4) Allowance encourages advocacy If a school allows smoking, it sends the signal that smoking is an okay activity, which, referring to the health programs (such as D.A.R.E. again) we know it's not. Cigarettes are the only legal drug that has been banned from advertising on TV. 5) Cigarettes cause harm to smokers and bystanders in the vicinity. Smoking kills about 443,000 Americans annually. [1] This is certainly a trend we don't need to encourage (see point 4) Secondhand smoke kills 50,000 Americans annually. [2] Again, a trend that doesn't need to be encouraged. I know this only applies to indoor smoking, but it wasn't clarified where smoking will be allowed during school. 6) Smoking hurts the economy $88 billion is spent on cigarettes every year [3] but smoking costs $167 billion annually due to losses in health care and productivity (people available to do work) [4]. Certainly not a good thing looking at the current economic scenario. Also, [5] is a cool page to look at, rather sad really. It shows how much people could save if they quit smoking and invested in CD's... I'm not sure, but I think cigarettes cost more than the $2.50 per pack they assume. Either way, the numbers are there... enjoy I'm going to open the floor to my opponent now. I can clarify anything in comments if need be. I'll refute/ extend case in the second round if need be. Once again thanks to my opponent for instigating this debate, and I wish him luck as well. --SOURCES-- [1] http://www.cdc.gov... [2] http://www.lungusa.org... [3] http://www.cdc.gov... [4] http://usgovinfo.about.com... [5] http://www.chemheritage.org...