Formal education (K-12) ought to be compulsory in the United States

Thanks to my opponent for posting the debate. :) PRO CASE 1. The state has an obligation to provide all citizens with the tools necessary to cultivate a satisfactory life. a. Education is necessary to survival. The trends of the U.S. job market are clear: specialization reigns supreme. "Menial" labor is not nearly as prevalent as it used to be. One must have at least a high school diploma, if not a college degree, to even begin to seek gainful employment. In fact, those few Americans who can find jobs without a diploma make around $400.00 per week. Those with college degrees can expect $1000.00 per week. Furthermore, those without diplomas "enjoy" an unemployment rate 6% higher than college graduates [1]. The types of employment most commonly offered to non-diploma holders all statistically pay under a given area's living wage [2]. Education is not optional for a US citizen to be successful. b. The state has both a contractual obligation to & a vested interest in educating its citizens. Consider social contract theory, which is arguably the fundamental basis of our Constitution and much of our auxiliary political ideology. If we can establish that education is necessary for each citizen to have, then the state must provide that education. Truancy and other educational laws seek to ensure that all citizens are offered facilities and faculty to provide such an education. At that point, students with diplomas will be able to seek employment or a college degree, as I stated in my subpoint A (in fact, high school graduates are now far more likely than past decades to seek that college degree [1]). Since the key to a successful state is successful citizens (as this puts less strain on socialistic programs like welfare and directly contributes to overall economic health and stability), the state has a clear interest in helping as many citizens as possible to well-paying, stable employment. c. Compulsion is the only way to ensure that all children have equal access to education. Without things like truancy laws, the poorest and most underserved students in the nation would be the ones to suffer without an education. Certainly, parents have the right to remove their child from public school for homeschooling or alternative educational environments. However, the concept of compulsion has always included such opt-outs. Making education non-compulsory, therefore, will only hurt those students who the state currently assists in making it to school. This enables those underserved students access to the education necessary to quit their sphere of poverty or abuse. Furthermore, educational research clearly links institutional structure and its safety to the success of at-risk students [5]. 2. Education is a valuable and fundamental part of any culture. a. Education reform is giving rise to valid curricula and instructional methods via the standards movement. Over the past decade or so, educational researchers have come to the overwhelming consensus that building unified goals, keeping in mind the most important parts of education, is the best way to ensure that all schools in the nation are being held accountable for student learning [3]. Though this movement is still comparatively young, it has already led to educational standards in all 50 states that are based on the most current educational philosophy. Oregon represents a perfect example of the standards movement in action. OAKS state tests in each subject area are revisited every year, as are the educational standards. Tests are adaptive, and consistently attempt to avoid the biases that standardized tests are often accused of containing. As an administrator of the OAKS exams in two different subject areas and a teacher who is required to employ Oregon's CIM educational standards [4] in her curriculum, I feel confident in vouching for their educational integrity. b. Public education is far more than just curricula. On the surface, education looks like the content standards I outlined above; it looks like science, math, English, social studies, etc. However, rarely are cognitive thinking skills, life skills, and social skills discussed as additional benefits. However, these are essential to positive citizenship in our representative democracy. Citizens must be self-sufficient, able to interact with a highly diverse society, and prepared to actively participate in their own governance. A public education is the most successful way to accomplish these goals. [1] http://www.bls.gov... [2] http://www.livingwage.geog.psu.edu... [3] http://www.sonoma.edu... [4] http://web1.ode.state.or.us... [5] http://www.focusas.com... CON CASE C1: 1. This entire argument tends to be based on, as my opponent points out, warrantless assertions. Even on an individual level, I object to the notion that my classes are like this. 2. The problems he is describing are never linked specifically to "CE." In fact, a number of nations that are out-competing the US in education all have CE, and none of those nations exhibit the same harms. He establishes no causation. 3. Cross-apply my 2A. The education system is poised for a change, and the educational theory of the past few years specifically and universally advocates a constructive teaching model, which is specifically student-centered. Nearly all future educators in the nation and any teacher that has graduated in the last 5 years knows and uses the constructive model. C2: 1. Cross-apply my 2A. In the link I provide, you can find hundreds of educational standards for the state of Oregon alone that specifically require all teachers in that state to impart cognitive thinking skills to their students through curriculum. 2. If parents want to homeschool their children, then a compulsory model won't stop them from doing so. The US has this infrastructure in place right now. 3. Cross-apply my 2B. Though I would argue that general knowledge of the world is absolutely necessary in order to enrich cognitive development, school isn't just about the subjects taught. Those subjects are only a gateway. 4. Cross-apply my 1C. Mandatory school attendance laws are the only reason the state is obligated to give underserved children an education at all. C3: 1. Going to high school does not stop a student from getting a job and gaining this experience. 2. Becoming part of the workforce without a diploma is nearly impossible, and if one does, he or she will not be able to survive, most likely. Cross-apply my 1A and all the data. Unless my opponent can also claim to change the entire structure of the American workforce, he's S.O.L. 3. Cross-apply my 1C. These underserved students, without the structure of CE, are most likely not going to have an education, since they don't have parents to guide them and/or resources at their disposal for education. These are provided right now by the sta