The American School System is Broken and Detrimental

Btw, how do you do bolds and italics? Counter-rebuttals FYI, I've cut out some of your posts so I can fit my rebuttals in here while still retaining your quotes. I put down the original quote, responded to it, and then removed part of it. "Oversimplification" Argument QUOTE: "Pro makes a blatant oversimplified view of society. He contested that physical science and maths are useless, and asserted that not everyone will appreciate science as different individuals have different interest." REBUTTAL: I am not asserting that they are TOTALLY useless, I am asserting that they are *useless to certain parties, and despite that, they are still taught past the extent that they need to be taught.* Science, chemistry, math, engineering, etc, are some of the most useful fields in the regards of technology, electrical stuff, and science. HOWEVER, by FORCING many of those subjects to be taught, the Schools are ignoring the fact that not EVERYONE is going to go into a job with those fields. We should have a *GENERAL* understanding of the world around us, but not to the extent of understanding how to do equations that "make our brains hurt" as some people like to say. QUOTE: "An Appreciation is required, Science is meant to ease overall life styles, it comprises everything around us. It is more sensible for us to learn all of it at general assessment. What you're saying is that we should ignore everything..." REBUTTAL: That's not what I'm saying; like I said, WE DO NEED TO HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE WORLD, *BUT NOT PAST A CERTAIN EXTENT*. Not to the extent of tiny details that will likely NEVER come up again. QUOTE: "In addition to that, Knowledge is power. It acts as a draw bridge for everyone to pursue their own interest. Through this system, people may express what they like and dislike. Not everything has to come up to our liking..." REBUTTAL: Once again, what I said before. The school system pushes the knowledge past a necessary extent. The school system should give us knowledge that EVERYONE in the US needs to know, and then let us build knowledge that can work to a certain set of careers, rather than teaching us all information which a large portion thereof will be forgotten. You're right that not everything has to come up to our liking, because a lot of people don't like school at all, and they don't realize how useful some of it us. (Once again, SOME; not all.) QUOTE: "Furthermore, The youth are unsure of what to choose. They can't just leave an empty field and choose a career. This primae Facie Case is just blind and holds no substantive merit. They ought to live and learn to arrive..." REBUTTAL: I'm talking more about High School, and if I wanted to get more specific, Junior and Senior years of High School. High School is *around the time that people are deciding what they want to do.* I'm talking about WHEN we reach that point. We won't just "leave an empty field." We obtain a general field of knowledge, NOT PUSHED TO AN UNNECESSARILY ADVANCED POINT LIKE IT IS NOW (which is my big problem with the School System), and THEN choose where to work from. Once again, past a certain extent of knowledge, there's a lot we're going to forget and not use. "Your argument of pay is irrelevant, if society revolves around meritocracy, what does it matter anyway. You work hard, you'll succeed according to your respective efforts. Education is about meritocracy, and in that, the system succeeds. " REBUTTAL: Never heard the word meritocary before, but I'll use the Oxford definition, which is "Government or the holding of power by people selected according to merit." Isn't the whole purpose of going to school is that we can build off of that knowledge and get a college degree, or perhaps even stop at High School, and *have the proper merits to get a job and support ourselves*? Isn't that why school is a LEGAL requirement? QUOTE: "Pro's self interpreted everything by looking at his argument. Your argument is like a sponge, full of holes due to its subjective nature. You've also conceded half of your premise. Pro asserts 'don't get me wrong; we need good grammar/communication skills, math for money purposes, and an accurate understanding of science for health reasons as teens' You've essentially acknowledged my position. Health is part of Biology which makes it an essential component of physical science. It has multiple uses, such as information on Sickle cell anemia (4.http://en.wikipedia.org......), sex linkage. How does this benefit us? We may assess sex linkage characteristics, what can be brought down to our children... These are general knowledge, it is needed for us to survive in this world. Plus, Pro..." REBUTTAL: YES! You've hit the nail on the head! THAT KIND OF KNOWLEDGE IS the knowledge EVERYONE needs to know; my primary concern is cutting out information that WE DON'T NEED to know UNLESS we are curious or want some sort of career knowledge in that direction. Health, a BASIC to MODERATE understanding of our world, advanced grammar/communication, MODERATE mathematics, and a MODERATE understanding of various sciences. I didn't CONCEDE my point, I re-stated *again* that those things are useless *PAST A CERTAIN EXTENT.* I don't know what outrageous claims you're talking about. I admit, communicating my point was a little difficult the first time, so you may have misinterpreted what I said or something. I know NUMEROUS people who have NEVER read a book for pleasure purposes since being in college who've also forgotten MASSIVE amounts of info they learned in High School. Yet, they're getting paychecks of $500-$2k two or four times a month. QUOTE: "In addition to that, Pro's argument of quadratic formulas and history is weak. History is there to teach us a lesson, a lesson which we all need to learn before casting our votes. If history was to be discarded we wouldn't know the devastative effects of assuming the laws of nature into society, take the 3rd Reich for example. We need it more than you think, especially at the time when politicians appeal to our emotion.... History is then useful and in no way implies that the education is broken. Again, my opponent is very subjective in his claim. He claim that maths are useless because it is ACCORDING to him. We need maths..." REBUTTAL: My history argument was a little badly presented, and for that, I'm sorry. LOL. Anyway, we don't always need to know CERTAIN parts of history to get what's going on, we just need a GENERAL UNDERSTANDING of many of those stories. A lot of it is just details. "In what year did so and so get re-elected for the 3rd time?" "Who was the ump-teenth president of the United States?" etc. Because it is ACCORDING TO ME! EXACTLY! You understand what my point is! We need information that will be useful TO ALL OF US, *AND THEN* give EACH AND EVERY ONE OF US SPECIFIC TOOLS for a general field. *All of us* need SOME math; NOT say, advanced geometry, or what equation makes Pi. (Though, I am personally a fan of Pi. :P) QUOTE: "Rebuttal: Tumblr post Selective bias. The person is perceiving what he or she wants to perceive. The person is shifting the goal post, as he/she is arguing out of hand. This is about the system..." REBUTTAL: That was slightly off topic, but it was to emphasize that sometimes, school DOES leave out a lot of good things and adds trivial details. That's what I meant by that Tumblr post. I believe it could be partially a selective bias, but it still holds the merit that sometimes, we are fed irrelevant details, and not given practical skills. QUOTE: "Diversity isn't an option. We need quality teachers to cater to those needs. You are actually dwindling down professors to the status of normal 'teachers'. This is not possible. The pay..." REBUTTAL: Right, I get what you're saying. What I'm saying is that you shouldn't necessarily be required to take ALL of those classes because, once again, past a certain extent... you know what I'm gonna say now, LOL. QUOTE: "We are struck by world poverty and the US has about 16% living in poverty(6. http://en.wikipedia.org......).Education is fixed on meritocracy..." REBUTTAL: Right, it should be on 'meritocracy' as you said, and that's why a lot of education systems in places like third-world countries fail, is due to the lack of that. I get what you mean about standardization now, and thanks for elaborating on it, I agree partially. I don't think it would require SPECIALIZED teachers, actually, I think all the teachers teaching in the US right now could keep their jobs. What I'm saying is we'd *cut out POTENTIALLY useless info/details* and fill it with more practical kinds of things. You know, they could have more freedom in the class that they choose while *STILL requiring a minimum amount of knowledge in each field.* Let me focus specifically on this: "The youth can work its own way in time, they cannot arrive at a conclusion so early in their life." Again I'm talking about MID-TO-LATE HIGH SCHOOL; by this time, we ARE deciding what we want to go to college for, and considering what skills we have that qualify as job or practical making-a-living skills. Sherlock video furthered what I said about "filling our heads with all kinds of rubbish." Primarily focus on that, not the universe part. I think we should know a fair amount about the universe... QUOTE: "Defense: The US Education Spending..." REBUTTAL: I don't know where *specifically* money is being spent in the regards of education. The only thing I really implied with that argument was that spending lots of money doesn't mean anything good will happen. That's all I meant, more or less. Money does not always equal quality. QUOTE: "Defense: Standardized tests help raise standards." Again, I actually agree with you now, partially. Thanks for elaborating on your point. GOOD LUCK NEXT ROUND BRAH! >:3 I'ma kick you bu-I MEANNNN have a good formal debate, you know? LOL