The school system is in need of reform. Big time.

What I'm seeing here in the pro support arguments of their debate is there is an issue with the way schools encourage students to participate in what they call mandatory, in what doesn't help students to grow the way they want to, or the way they should, and that certain choices in a course should be omitted while others should be given at an earlier age and be expanded upon as such giving more meaning to an educational perspective and not so much the perspective to which the course calls, a requirement. Yes, good points, but let me counter this with a further study into the system. for years, many people at the top of the officials board of community directors across Canada and America have stated not everyone has to like what they've been taught. well I counter that proposal because the very basis of education is to teach things that people are going to have to be encouraged or even want to like for their own comfort of survival as they personally state they are interested in said subjects. further more, I'd like to point out that, in and with regards to persons said feelings, they should be focusing on the end result to therefore achieve and receive the knowledge required to get there if that is what they agree to do when they are ready to accept it fully and as such, bring about the first stage towards their educational needs. Now here is where it gets very interesting. All the school system is worth is money, marks and virtual acceptance and all parents do is focus on the symptoms of what that shows as an investment and nothing more regardless of how they are expressed by teachers whose the workers of such a system. I agree with the pro supporter of this argument it is not only wrong it is immoral. the whole grade system proves it by both definition and terminology, specifically relating to systematic responses to pass a virtual system of business, and nothing more. However, to counter the support of the pro in this case, I con with my argument as follows. directly speaking, schools have to start with something and that something needs to be taught not in grade classes, but based on age. the younger you are, the more necessary it is to fill you with things you can personally experience and relate to. Language, communication, writing, all of this you learn in kindergarten more or less. I have outlined here the basic tools on how I think schools should be run. Students should be accepted in an educational institution and research facility for the purpose of growth and life skills. It should only last between preferably the ages of 5 until 10. Once passed that, it should go in to more personal areas of study, covering specifically through the ages of puberty and beyond, what specific strengths and weaknesses each student has with a group of trainers that focus on another level of expertees. Regular work hours should only be considered 4 hours a day with a break in between and days off when the student or the teacher would like them. Personal one on one counciling would ensure the functionality of generations to come will be efficient, smooth and without much cause for concern. No more having to pick your kid up from the office every time he or she doesn't agree with something. Focus on every aspect the student has to offer within them and instead of trying to prey upon their potential at what worth they could value in society, try to focus on their actual desire to be in service or respond to a call within something they see. Show them different things, let them experience what they wish to but don't press them to a tea unless they want to know everything about a particular subject. The more the better, what is practical, weed out the history and give the facts, if you want to learn 20 subjects, you should be able to without having to worry about deadlines, consequences or homework. Most importantly, you should be able to cover a different topic one at a time in about a week span so that you can remember what you experienced in hopes it may stick with you or leave you as you start to make the first changes in your life and if you ask for it, only if you ask for it, you will be tested on how practical you've learned each skill but it wouldn't be a training exercise so much as it would be a lesson of how serious you take something and if you fail, there is no right or wrong just as if you pass, because numbers mean nothing in the end, and that is all that really counts. Unfortunately, schools today would have you believe if you try your best, try harder, enforce a challenge and get graded on how well you can keep it together no matter if you like it or not. It is barbaric and stupid quite frankly, and to be honest, I am more pro than con to the changes needed to make success a life skill, not a promise of worth or value since nothing else is there to say otherwise, that is complete arrogance and it is meant with such a lack of empathy you wonder why psychopaths exist in the world today? Life lesson for you, do the math and remember that kids these days need to fill their brain with experience at young ages to be at their most potential in life, something they throw their interest in and maybe, just maybe, we can come to some sort of a turning point in our society and how we deal with, sorry, how we approach new developments without the need to challenge dominance bred in to us so harshly abandoning our own gifts in exchange for something we are being taught how to numb out of our recognition or instinct. This is why I con for the challenge, because schools as we know it can't be further not at fault than its meaning, it is the people who run it that shape our future.