High School should be terminated and replaced with an alternative.

Observation: Since my opponent mainly wants help or someone to point out flaws in his system that's all I will do in this round. Later I will promote current high school more and how it can be changed here and there to resolve some issues.His first statementI believe that the High school system should be terminated and replaced with an alternative- my alternative. The system begins when a student first enters school. Grades 1-8 will be taught with the Classical method, meaning that rather than having separate "subjects", students will learn from different classic pieces of literature. Learning will be incorporated together and used accordingly. For instance, a student in 7th grade might read a historical fiction book about the founding of America. They would also learn the history behind the founding of America, and write an essay about a relevant topic. Lessons in math and science can be pulled from the literature. Obsevation: You are only replacing highschool as the resolution suggest so I am wondering if i should address this or not however i will just becuase i see how this would help transition into the highschool alternative. My response: Is this middle school proposaleven needed/ can it work?Classical books are extremely hard to read, also i feel like this plays in with what we are doing too curriculum anyway, increasing standards. The current system in place is already making school harder. http://www.theguardian.com...; More reading is already being pushed without an alternative system, I mean can't we simply buy more classical books and push them on middle age kids? This suggestion isn't inherently unique at all to your plan. Also another flaw in your alternative for middle schoolers is that you suggest we can learn math and science from literature and that type of argument will require some support. I basicually would like more support on how we an acquire math and scince knowledge from books rather then practice and application as it is done now in middle schools. Also the pass rate in middle school is high so my other question is would getting kids to read on math and scince rather then work on worksheets and practice it every day by solving problems lower the passing rate?Next I don't see why different subjects can't be kept, not only do different subjects help kids know the components of each but it helps kids figure out what they are good at. I would like a bit more information on how you plan on manifesting a centralized learning system without any divisions and more importantly why this is needed.Next part of your statement "Learning in this way is also more accelerated, so the material covered in grades 1-8 would also cover some of what high school used to cover. Not all of it, though."Response: I compete on a debate team and whenever someone proposes soemthing on a event that requires some sort of policy or bill or whatever to be proposed the best ones are specific and let you know what they suggest. I feel like if you are proposing any sort of policy or alternative to national education you need to at least be more specific in important areas. Now I am not saying be specific everywhere there's only a certian amount of characters but what i mean is show what parts of highschool or what classes or subjects will be covered in middle school. My opponent states: "The four years that students would have been spending in high school would instead be spent in internships in whatever career they are interested in. Some students may choose to enter the military or skip ahead to a trade school. Those wishing to attend a four year college, however, would be required to participate in four years of internships at any company."My response: This would only increase the preponderance of kids going into collage without knowing what they want to do. The problem is a lot of kids including myself don't know what they want to be in 9th grade or when the are only 13-14 years old. Also again you don't elaborate on why we need to do this. Why do we need to eliminate high school in order to provide the alternative to go to trade school or skip to military, can't we simply just add this option to the school system as it is? Also according too according to http://mentalhealthdaily.com...... the brain is fully developed at the age of 20 so I wonder is it good to have 13-14 year olds making career choices? Another thing your proposal doesn't address is athletes, I mean without high school what alternative will you provide for basketball players and football players to prepare for collage sports? Will you have to establish a sort of 13-18 year old league and if so can we afford it?You then make this statement "I guarantee there would be less switching of majors." But then my question is will there be a lot of switches or internships, and if they are restricted to an internship for a company will they be coerced into something they end up not liking.Clarification: Isn't this simply continuing the "habit loop" of changing but replacing the routine?For example the typical Cue in changing a major is that you realize you don't like what you are doing. The routine is you change your major and then the reward is either you find what you want to do or you continue doing this.With your alternative it will be something like this. Cue= I don't like what I am doing. routine= You are changing to a new internship rather then a new major. The result/reward is the same either you find a internship you like an you have to start over.. or you drop out again and continue the process. I feel like you aren't fixing the switching issue you are simply having kids go through this issue earlier in there lives. Also as a kid you lack the ability to make choices because the cortex of your brain is still being developed but also kids will no consider the same things to look to as teens. When you are a kid you don't realize it's not only important to look to the "fun" occupation but also the one with the most opportunities. Kids will not go to something like this http://www.payscale.com... like someone who's older and more knowledgeable will.Conclusion: It appears the switching issue will actually increase since kids will lack the ability to make the proper choices. I just feel like there still isn't a need for your alternative at least in this area. Next you can't guarantee people not switching majors since the collage system will still be in place. "After this four year internship, a student would then go to the college of their choice." I just feel like a guarantee needs some crazy analytics. Question for you: Why have kids going 4 years without school to start it up 4 years later? Next for subjects like Math will teens have to spend more years in collage to take courses like algerbra or algerbra 2 or geometry or enlgis etc. that could have been completed in highschool? Sure they will not have to take these courses but lets say a teen wants to go into the popular STEM area (which will happen) will they have to spend more time in school and more money for not having highschool? Core classes would be removedResponse: this I agree with 100% but my question is again one I have been restating over and over, why is your alternative a necessity to resolve this issue? Since "core classes" are simply classes required to be taken why can't we simply just not require kids to take those classes while keeping the same system? I just feel like this doesn't help promote your alternative or address the resolution. Lastly you claim education is dumbed down but isn't the recent "national curriculum" that's being established literarily increasing standards? Isn't it getting even harder to get into IV league universities like Harvard or Princeton? In conclusion, the major flaw overall is the need of this alternative.