I previously posted about how to write a 1AC. To help, I thought I’d provide an example of one of my favorite cases… it won me several tournaments in college.
Because American Public High schools could better meet the needs of individual students with the flexibility offered by single-gender education, I support the resolution: The United States should substantially reform public secondary (9-12) school education.
This is a comparative advantage case, where I will present the goal of the status quo and a plan to better meet it. That goal is:
Increased flexibility for School Districts to provide the best education possible
Department of Education, “Department to Provide More Educational Options for Parents,” Press Release from the Department of Education, March 3, 2004
“Our goal is to give parents and school districts more choices.”
This goal is not fully actualized because of the Inherent barrier of the SQ: Single-sex classes are prohibited
“Single-sex Classes and Schools: Guidelines on Title IX Requirements,” in the Federal Register, May 8, 2002 (Vol. 67, no. 89)
“Our current Title IX regulations generally prohibit single-sex classes or activities. The regulations in 34 CFR 106.34 state—‘A recipient shall not provide any course or otherwise carry out any of its education program or activity separately on the basis of sex.’”
Though single-sex classes are prohibited, a loophole in Title IX exempts admissions, allowing single-sex public schools, creating an inconsistent policy. To rectify this inconsistency, and give schools more flexibility to implement the most effective methods to suit their needs, I propose that
Congress pass the proposal of the Office of Civil Rights and Secretary of the Dept. of Education: 34 CFR 106.34 shall be reformed to provide for optional single-sex classes in public secondary schools. State and local education services will oversee all single-sex classes within federal guidelines. No additional federal funding will be used
Under our plan: Optional single-sex classes are allowed, but discrimination regulations remain in place
“Proposed Rules,” from the Office of Civil Rights at the Dept. of Ed, published by the Federal Register, March 9, 2004, (Vol. 69, no. 46) http://www.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/proprule/2004-1/030904a.pdf
“The proposed amendments do not require single-sex schools or classes but provide additional flexibility to offer them, and they require that recipients continue to ensure that their policies and practices do not result in discrimination on the basis of sex.”
Single-sex classes give Secondary public schools greater opportunity to improve in these three comparative advantages:
A. Single-sex classrooms actually help to break down gender stereotypes
Dr. Leonard Sax, PhD, Executive Director of The National Association for Single-Sex Public Education, writing site contact for the NASSPE home page, accessed January 17, 2005 http://www.singlesexschools.org/
“…the best evidence now suggests that coeducational settings actually reinforce gender stereotypes, whereas single-sex classrooms break down gender stereotypes. Girls in single-sex educational settings are more likely to take classes in math, science, and information technology. Boys in single-sex schools are more likely to pursue interests in art, music, drama, and foreign languages. Both girls and boys have more freedom to explore their own interests and abilities in single-gender classrooms.”
B. Single-sex classes eliminate distractions, making education the sole focus
Emily Richmond, Las Vegas Sun, “Single-sex classes give scores a boost: Single-sex classes are popular with students,” March 04, 2004
“”With single-sex classes, education becomes the sole focus,” Whitney Ransome [co-executive director of the National Association of Girls’ Schools] said. “Girls are not jockeying for attention with the boys and they’re not demurring or holding back because of fears of how they’ll be perceived.” For Cheyenne freshman Cynthia Delgado, the reasons behind her jump from a failing grade in eighth grade English to her current A average are obvious. “I pay attention more to class and I don’t talk to my friends,” Delgado said. “School is a lot easier now.””
But of course there is more than anecdotal evidence. Numerous studies support the conclusion that single-sex classes focus on education for both girls and boys
Barbara Watterston, Cambridge University, “Practices and Policies on Single Sex Classes within Co-educational Schools,” December 2001
“A number of studies have shown that teachers thought that the establishment of SS [Single Sex] classes in CE [Co-Educational] schools was positive (Kruse 1992; DEET 1993b). Research into SS schooling (Milligan and Thomson 1992; Regan 1993) indicates the major advantage offered is the quality of the learning experience for girls, rather than the enhancement of academic learning (Marsh et al 1989; DEET 1992a; DEET 1992b). Boys in SS classes were less distracted and more willing to contribute during lessons and to take risks answering questions (Sukhnandan et al 2000).”
Distractions may be limited by single-sex classes, but on the whole, what happens academically to schools that try this option? A recent study shows that
C. single-gender classes increase educational performance of many students
SARAH CASSIDY, EDUCATION CORRESPONDENT for The Independent (London), “POLITICS: SINGLE-SEX CLASSES BENEFIT MIXED SCHOOLS,” November 17, 2004
“MIXED SCHOOLS should teach boys and girls separately for some of the day, David Miliband, the School Standards minister said yesterday. Mr Miliband described as “startling” the findings of a four-year study by Cambridge University, which found a marked improvement in results at a mixed school that switched to teaching boys and girls in separate classes.”
Miranda Miller, “Segregate and Educate,” Australia Nightly News, February 1, 2005
“Australian statistics show high school results for boys and girls in single-sex environments were 15 to 22 per cent higher than their co-ed counterparts.”
Finally, E…back home in the states, According to the National Association for Single-Sex Public Education, there are 11 public high schools illegally offering single-sex classes. One of these is “South Plantation High School, in Broward County [Florida], [which] began offering eleven single-sex classes in the 2002-2003 school year. Teacher Donna Capparelli reports that her experience has been “wonderful.”Participating students showed a 300% rise (that’s three hundred percent) in their FCAT reading scores.” [NASSPE, “Single-Sex Classrooms,” accessed January 17, 2005, http://www.singlesexschools.org/schools-classrooms.htm] [FCAC = Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test]
In the end, education has been enhanced in virtually every country or school, public or private, that has included this option.
LINDA TRIMBLE, writing as quoted in the Daytona Beach News Journal, “Value of single-sex classes still debated,” on February 15, 2005, just ten (or eleven) days ago, Educator Michael Gurian says, “Single-gender classrooms are an innovation that ought to be available to any school district that wants them.”
Uphold the innovation that can only come through increased flexibility. It’s what America needs.
1. Notice how the theme is constantly heard throughout. (Flexibility)
2. Notice the case structure. It’s a form of comparative advantage called “goals criterion”, where you show the goal of the status quo and argue that you can meet it better. The power here is that the negative team is slightly strapped, since we are supporting the goal of what they’re supposed to be defending.
3. See if you can identify which stock issues are proven where… feel free to comment if you want feedback on a guess.