Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
computer_screen

Education

Recommended Posts

Yes, there is a DDW Sorted GED Aff, which has to do with the military and education

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I was thinking of maybe running a case dealing with Post-high school edu for those in poverty. Does anybody think could be effective or do u think it will easily fall?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a Pell grants aff by JDI, a higher education aff by SCFI, and there is a class action aff however I cannot remember who put it out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it will be run much as a straight up aff--but WNDI put out inter district busing (they overturn a court case--it was a college case from 3 years ago on the Supreme Court topic). Its more to solve racism than education, however.

 

You can certainly claim diversity key to the economy. Lots of businesses making those types of arguments.

 

The SCFI Aff is Free Higher Ed:

The United States federal government should provide free access to higher education to all persons living in poverty in the United States

 

Its based on papers on http://www.freehighered.org (I think it claims hege and competitiveness as advantages--specific to India and China)

actually more specifically.....I think this

 

Sharon Szymanski, DJDI staff writer, 2002, Free For All: Free Tuition at All Public Colleges and Universities for Students Who Meet Admissions Standards, A Debs-Jones-Douglass Institute Working Paper,

http://freehighered.org/h_paper.pdf

Edited by nathan_debate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think it will be run much as a straight up aff--but WNDI put out inter district busing (they overturn a court case--it was a college case from 3 years ago on the Supreme Court topic). Its more to solve racism than education, however.

 

You can certainly claim diversity key to the economy. Lots of businesses making those types of arguments.

 

The SCFI Aff is Free Higher Ed:

The United States federal government should provide free access to higher education to all persons living in poverty in the United States

 

Its based on papers on http://www.freehighered.org (I think it claims hege and competitiveness as advantages--specific to India and China)

actually more specifically.....I think this

 

Sharon Szymanski, DJDI staff writer, 2002, Free For All: Free Tuition at All Public Colleges and Universities for Students Who Meet Admissions Standards, A Debs-Jones-Douglass Institute Working Paper,

http://freehighered.org/h_paper.pdf

 

new trier is reading head start at the greenhill round robin. check wiki -- cites are up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is the head start outline from the high school caselist wiki

 

Two interesting strategic notes: headstart key to military readiness

 

Also, its clear they are trying to pre-empt capitalism bad/de-dev style arguments (lots of growth good cards). Seems like a smart idea given that teams are going that route (cap K) so often. I'm curious how they leverage that advantage in non-cap K debates....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This article from the New Trier Head Start affirmative seems to favor the Perry Preschool model as opposed to Head Start...

 

 

Heckman, 2k – Professor of Economics at the University of Chicago and , (James, “Policies to Foster Human Capital http://harrisschool.uchicago.edu/About/publications/working-papers/pdf/wp_00_28.pdf, 2000)

 

Note: I don't know if these are specific to the type of head start the affirmative advocates.

 

I'm not sure how their specific model can solve for bad hiring, bad management, or the problems described below.

 

(the article I believe lists more Perry Good, Head start bad....but I'm not sure)

 

IV. Early Childhood Investments

Recent studies of early childhood investments have shown remarkable success and indicate that the early years are important for early learning and can be enriched through external channels. Early childhood interventions of high quality have lasting effects. Disadvantaged subnormal IQ children

randomly assigned to the Perry Preschool program were administered intensive treatment at ages 4-5.

Treatment was then discontinued and the persons were followed over their life cycle. These people are now about 35 years old. Evidence on them indicates that those enrolled in the program have higher earnings and lower levels of criminal behavior in their late 20s than do comparable children

randomized out of the program. Reported cost-benefit ratios for the program are substantial. Measured through age 27, the program returns $5.70 for every dollar spent. When returns are projected for the remainder of the lives of program participants, the return on the dollar rises to

$8.70. As with the Job Corps, a substantial fraction (65%) of the return to the program has been attributed to reductions in crime. (Schweinhart, Barnes and Weikart, 1993). The Syracuse Preschool

program provided family development support for disadvantaged children from prenatal care through

age five. Reductions in problems with probation and criminal offenses ten years later were as large

as 70% among children randomly assigned to the program. Girls who participated in the program

also showed greater school achievement (Lally, Mangione, and Honig, 1988). Studies of early intervention programs have found short-term increases in test scores, less grade retention, and higher high school graduation rates among enrolled children. Of those studies that examine pre-delinquent

or criminal behavior, most have found lower rates of deviant behavior among program participants. See Table 6 for a summary of the effects of selected early intervention programs on student test

scores, schooling, earnings, and delinquency and Tables 7A and 7B for a summary of the Perry

Preschool findings.

Evidence on the more universal Head Start program is less clear, but the program is quite

heterogeneous and is much less well funded than the Perry preschool program. Currie and Thomas

(1995) found short-term gains in test scores for all participating children; however, most of those

gains decayed quickly for African-American children. They conclude that either differences in local

program administration or in subsequent schooling quality are at the root of the differences between

the outcomes for black and white children. Ramey et. al note (1998) that the schools attended by the

Perry preschool children were of substantially higher quality than those attended by the typical Head

Start child. Thus, the failure to maintain the initial positive stimulus of Head Start may account for

the decline in its impact over time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is another piece of evidence comparing Head Start to the Perry model from their aff author.

 

Heckman, 2k – Professor of Economics at the University of Chicago and , (James, “Policies to Foster Human Capital http://harrisschool.uchicago.edu/Abo...f/wp_00_28.pdf, 2000)

 

The weaknesses of Head Start can be attributed to its shorter period of intervention, lower intensity, and less qualified staff than is typical of more enriched programs (Zigler, 1994). With Head Start, as with most other things in life, you get what you pay for. For example, children enrolled in the Perry Preschool program received high quality full-time preschool services for 1-2 years (most received two years), and their parents benefited from weekly home visits by their children’s teachers.

The intervention affected both children and the parents. Parents improve their education and labor force activity and reduce their participation in welfare. The successful enriched programs like Perry Preschool foster long term improvements in the home environment which carry over to the child long after the program has terminated. Head Start offers a much lower quality (and lower paid) staff, part-time classes for children, and limited parental involvement. The program terminates without any substantial intervention into or improvement in the home environments of the

disadvantaged children. Improvements in Head Start, proponents argue, are likely to produce effects closer to those observed in more successful small-scale programs. Given the potential for success (as exhibited by the Perry Preschool experiment), more studies of the long- term impacts of various

types of small-scale and broad-based early intervention programs are certainly warranted.

Provocative calculations recently published by John Donohue and Peter Siegelman (1998) indicate that if enriched early intervention programs were targeted toward high risk disadvantaged minority male youth, the substantial costs of these enriched programs evident in Table 6 would be

more than repaid by the expected savings in incarceration costs alone.

 

An important lesson to draw from the Perry Preschool program, and, indeed the entire literature on successful early interventions, is that it is the social skills and motivation of the child that are 25 more easily altered - not IQ. These social and emotional skills affect performance in school and in

the workplace. As academics, we have our own bias toward believing that cognitive skills are of fundamental importance to success in life. Because of this, the relatively low malleability of IQs after early ages has led many to proclaim a variety of early interventions to be ineffective.

Yet the evidence from the Perry Preschool program and the evidence in Table 6 reveals that these programs are highly effective in reducing criminal activity, promoting social skills and integrating disadvantaged people into the mainstream society. The greatest benefits of these programs are on socialization and not IQ. Social skills and motivation have large payoffs in the labor market so these programs have the potential for a large payoff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's their readiness internal link. Pretty impressive--based on 40 years of research. I could have underlined much more at the beginning...

 

(does link to otherization Ks via crime, but decreases net # on welfare)

 

Dr. Dunn in 2009 (Dr. Michael A. Dunn is a retired Army brigadier general and a clinical professor of medicine and biomedical informatics at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Michael A. Dunn: A matter of national security Pennsylvania should invest in pre-kindergarten education Tuesday, June 23, 2009 Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09174/979157-109.stm#ixzz0QpT2AXTv)

 

In today's dangerous world, America needs a strong military to keep our country safe and to preserve freedom for the next generation. Currently, our military is strong and ready to respond, and our service members are smart, capable and healthy.

 

Our men and women in uniform operate the most sophisticated technology in the world. They are charged with demanding tasks and complex missions that require intelligence, diligence and grit. They have to determine who is friend and who is foe in live combat situations.

 

So consider this startling statistic: The Pentagon is reporting that 75 percent of young Americans between the ages of 17 and 24 are unable to enlist in the U.S. military.

 

How is this possible? Because they are either physically unfit, failed to finish high school or have a criminal background.

 

A limited pool of qualified recruits will erode our national security and could even diminish the readiness of guard units right here in Pennsylvania.

 

Those of us who have served as military leaders know our country needs to act today to ensure our military readiness for tomorrow's world. The most important long-term investment we can make for an effective fighting force is in the health and education of the American people. Early education is a tested strategy proven to help more Americans achieve personal and career success.

 

Over 40 years, researchers followed the progress of two groups of children -- one attended a high-quality Michigan preschool, the other did not. The at-risk children who attended the early-education program were 44 percent more likely to finish high school. The children who did not participate in the preschool program were also five times more likely to be repeat offenders by age 27 than their peers.

 

The contrasts could not be more clear. Children who attend early-education programs are more likely to be employed and pursue higher education. Those who lack early learning experiences are more likely to become dependent on welfare.

 

Early education is key to providing young learners with a foundation for many options in adulthood, including a career in the military should they choose to pursue one.

 

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09174/979157-109.stm#ixzz0QpT2AXTv

Edited by nathan_debate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

any have an answer-im looking for the NCLB aff from NU- the link you guys gave me doesnt have the 1AC-is there an initial aff file not just 2ac stuff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...