THBT dialect language classes should be taught in all schools in dialect provinces.

Before I begin side opposition"s constructive arguments, we would like to point out some flaws and offer some rebuttals in response to the proposition"s arguments. Firstly, our opponent did not clearly define what a "dialect language class" actually teaches to students. We would like to define it as classes focused on communicating fluently between those who speak the dialect (i. e. listening and speaking the dialect. ) Now their first substantive was that citizens of a certain province right to learn the dialect of one"s homeland. We believe that this is argument is implying the assumption that currently, citizens do not have the right to learn the dialect of their homeland, which is not the status quo in most countries. In most countries, there must be education/tutorial centers that provide education on such a widely known dialect as defined by side proposition, meaning that minorities who are not familiar with the dialect can go to these centers without wasting time on teaching those who are already familiar with the language. Their second substantive was about how students will see how valuable it is to learn a language. However, they have not told us why this point is actually beneficial to the student in either long or short term. Even if proposition is correct in principal, they did not explain how such a dialect class would guarantee most of the students to develop such an enthusiasm for learning languages (especially those who aren"t, as pointed out by the other side). Now I would like to elaborate on my arguments and substantives. Firstly, side opposition has been thinking in a utopian world where most students can learn effectively and that there will be no flaws in both the principal and feasibility aspect in implementing such an education policy. While we agree that certain people who want/need to communicate with citizen"s that speak a certain dialect, we believe that making such a lesson compulsory to those that are already fluent is a complete waste of resources and manpower. Instead of implementing lessons compulsory to all students, we propose to conduct optional extra curricular activities in schools (with a somewhat average amount of students that lack knowledge/fluency of a dialect, not all schools) for students who are interested in learning how to speak the dialect. Side proposition seems to be focused on some language deterioration problems such as Cornish in the United Kingdom. However, that is only an isolated example. In many countries, there are so much a variety of dialects; do they have such an education policy? No. Are their languages dying? No. Moreover, our opponents have not proved (i. e. by using successful examples) how such a policy will work and effectively tackled a similar problem. This proves that such issues are not relevant to today"s topic and today"s motion cannot and will not solve such problems. Elaborating more on this point, if side proposition, is concerned about these parties whose language is dying, then this policy should be implemented in those countries only (even if it is practical), conducting lessons in dialect regions that are not in danger of losing the dialect culture/language is wasting student"s time, resources and manpower (qualified teachers). Now let"s look on the practicality of setting such a motion. While side proposition have not explained clearly how and what would be taught exactly in a dialect language class, they have also raised a blind eye to students with different language/cultural backgrounds. Especially in international schools, where students may come from all around the world, some may be extremely fluent in the dialect, while others cannot even understand the basics. Giving these students assessments/tests in the subject would be unfair. Also, with such a tight schedule (especially for high form students which need to face examinations), it would be almost impossible for schools to insert such a lesson, and if they could, would there be enough time to teach all the details of such a dialect? (some dialects are much more difficult than others, e. g. Cantonese). Implementing this policy in ALL schools would mean all schools in the world must have qualified teachers to teach the certain dialects (which is a lot of people), where they could be better off at tutorial centers teaching those who really need to learn the language. The major practicality issues we have to consider simply outweigh the minimal need for such a policy. So what has our side told you? We have rebutted successfully on their substantives, while expanding on how it is illogical in one perspective and elaborating on how it is impractical in another aspect. According to the above-mentioned reasons, we are proud to oppose today"s motion. I would like to invite side proposition to begin the second round of this debate.