The Australian education system should united and be the same level as the Nsw education system

Quoting: “My resolution is as follows which i am changing or the last time- Australia should have a national education system which would be equivalent to the current NSW education system” With this, pro has admitted to changing the resolution for the topic of the debate (in the very last round! ). He therefore implies that the resolution that I followed was correct the entire time and that HE was the one mistaken. “I have chosen The NSW education system because it is harder than all the other Australian education systems but not too hard as i would like the students to cope to a harder education in minimum possible time” Pro is putting for a VERY BIASED unsupported opinion. He thinks that that any education system other than the NSW’s education system is too hard. But, how can he conclude that the education system of NSW is not too hard for those with an “easier” education system? Pro thinks that the education system of NSW isn’t too hard. Why wouldn’t the education system of South Korea not be too hard for the Australian system? [1] I think it is possible for the students of Australia to imitate the students of South Korea. If the Korean students are able to cope, there is nothing to say that we Australian students can’t follow. The only barrier that stops us is the TIME TO ADAPT. “Profit- As Australia has one education system then there would not be a point for one education system per state- The people that lose their job will be trained to the new system and then will replace the old teachers” Pro takes it for granted that it will be a good idea that all the education systems in Australia imitated that of NSW. He firstly stated that NSW has the “hardest” education system in Australia and later wasn’t sure. Now, in R5, he puts the statement forth as a fact that NSW the best education system. He has not provided any sources and therefore has no way to prove his statement. I have, in R2, questioned Pro about his claim as to whether NSW really does have the best education system. He has not successfully proven his claim. “Loss- Training for the new education system but that will be paid from the money of the education departments which are suspended” I’d ask Pro to be more aware of the Australian news before he bothers to try to suggest such a ridiculous claim. I request that Pro have a look at some of my sources [2] [3] [4]. Australia does not have enough money to train thousands of teachers in Australia to change the entire education system to one! Citizens in Australia are losing their jobs because of our nation’s $40b overspent! “My case has boiled down to 3 main pointsIf the current education system stays- Gifted and Talented Students from other states will suffer- HSC students will suffer- Students from all states except NSW students will suffer” Response: Pro’s claim about the GAT from other states suffering is a biased opinion with no logical reason. Pro doesn’t seem to grasp what GAT means. If someone is “Gifted”, as well as “Talented”, clearly they will easily cope with a new education system that is “harder” and will soon be GAT within that education system. “HSC students will suffer”. Pro has only given a VERY brief overview of this claim in R2. He claims that the HSC scores will increase and decrease depending on the state they are travelling to. I find it unreasonable that any students preparing for the HSC will move across states when they should be at home preparing for the tests that will influence their future job opportunities! Once again, a biased opinion based on UNSOUND logic. His third point is more or less the same as his first. Both based on a biased opinion without any sound logic. “My opponent has started his debate with a contradicting resolution which supports both sides. I have proven that in round 4 and Con has not rebutted against that claim meaning he agrees. ” I’m sorry Pro, but when I put forth my resolution as “The Australian education should remain the same”. I was saying that the education should not be changed. Thus, the same applies with “The Australian education should remain the same and have a variety of styles with education”. Pro doesn’t seem to grasp my idea. The education should not be changed, meaning there will still be a variety of education within the nation. This means the education system should not be the same as NSW. “Con's Argument has boiled down to 2 main points” My argument has boiled down to 2 main points? It is still following one resolution! Conclusion: The education within the whole of Australia should remain the same, meaning the education should not be changed. Resources: . http://www.guardian.co.uk... . http://www.budget.gov.au... . http://www.budget.gov.au... . http://www.theaustralian.com.au... My PoV (Point of View) There is no better vote than CON because Con receives the point of S&G for obvious reasons Con receives the point for conduct because he kept a civilised tongue, did not forfeit any rounds and was clear with his resolution. Con receives the point for resources because Pro didn’t put forth any sources AT ALL. Convincing arguments? Most of Pro’s arguments were based on biased opinions and INCORRECT facts. Con, on the other hand, has provided arguments based on opinions that are supported by sources.