my one minute essay

Q: Should Federal Government play a larger role in education?

Essay:

Education is very important not only to individual citizens, but also to the entire country as well. It is an agency or a tool of the government to achieve the aims or goals of a nation. It is an inherent right of a child to have a proper education for him to be equipped with the necessary knowledge and skills for a better life, in so doing, he would be a catalyst for nation building.

In the Philippines, we have witnessed the consequences of what poor education has produced in our society. It is a sad reality, that the government could have done so much to uplift the quality of education in our country, and yet our educational system has remained to be substandard, through lack of budget appropriation or mismanagement of funds, it remains to be a controversy.

Thus, it can be concluded that education cannot improve and stand by itself and that it needs all the support and resources it can get from the government. Human Resources, being the most important of all resources in a country should be given the topmost priority by any government. After all, it is the people of a nation that brings a nation towards its desired goal.

By:

MARE VAE FERNANDEZ-REYES

The 3rd Presidential Debate

THE THIRD AND LAST PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE OF CY 2008

The 3rd and Last Presidential Debate of CY 2008 is the first presidential debate I have watched from start to finish. I admired the manner that Bob Schieffer of CBS News is moderating such. The two debaters, Senators Barack Obama and John McCain had both delivered their pieces impressively. The subject of the debate is Domestic Policy.

The Commission on Presidential Debates sponsors the one and a half hour debate. The debate is divided into nine (9) segments. A question is made at the beginning of each segment and both parties are given two (2) minutes to answer the question. Discussions are made after and the debaters are encouraged to ask questions to the other party, if the other party will not ask questions then the moderator will ask a question.

Here are the questions that were asked, to wit:
1. Why is your economic plan better than your opponent?
2. How would you cut spending?
3. Can you balance the budget in four years?
4. are you willing to say face-to face, what your campaigns have said about your opponent?
5. Why would the country be better off if your running mate becomes president?
6. How much can US reduce dependence on foreign oil?
7. Do you favor controlling Health Care costs over expanding coverage?
8. Could you nominate a Supreme Court Justice who differs with your view on Roe v Wade?
9. Does poor performance in school pose a threat to National Security?
10. Should federal government play a larger role in education?

While watching the debate, I find it hard to believe that a country like the United States of America has almost the same national issues and concerns as we have here in the Philippines. Maybe the only big difference is the fact that their budget deficit is in dollars and in the Philippines, it is in pesos.

The two candidates agree on most issues that need to be given attention, like the need to have good education and health insurance to all Americans, the need to decrease the US dependence on foreign oil, and the concept on helping “Joe the Plumber”. What they do not agree, is on how these issues and concerns can be best solved and/or addressed.

Their need to make available good yet affordable education to the middle and low- income citizens of their country is exactly the same problem we have in our country. Federal governments/national governments and local government units play a very important role in molding the education system in a country and ultimately the future of the country itself.

Both candidates agree that they are spending beyond their means and that they should be cutting down on the expenses made. This particular issue is prevalent in the Philippine government. It is vivid to the public’s eyes how our public officials spend our taxes. Like their going to foreign lands, bringing with them millions of taxpayers money, for contingency funds? Sometimes, it made me think that these officials deliberately make the education system in our country poor, for them to get away with their loot.

The way that Obama and McCain conduct their campaigns using negative attacks against each other, is the same scenario that we have in our country. There are even times that the candidate himself doesn’t have the full knowledge of the ads that were used to promote his campaign. Although all candidates agree that the campaign should be based on policies and plot form of government, still character plays a vital role in the campaign and most often, it can make or break a candidate.

Through out the debate it is evident that John McCain is more emotional than Barack Obama is. The former’s facial expressions and manner of speech was betraying him while the latter is more composed and concise. Both have brilliant minds. Democrat or Republican, it doesn’t really matter as long as their loyalty is to their country and not to their political affiliations.

Over-all, I would say, that the debate meets the academic standards for arguments. It is apparent in the rules that were given at the beginning of the debate itself and such rules were properly observed and maintained by both the debaters and the moderator.

argumentation/oregon-oxford debate

ARGUMENTATION

- is generally defined as “the art of influencing others, through the medium of reasoned discourse, to believe or act as we wish them to believe or act. It is the process of influencing the belief or behavior of a hearer or reader, through spoken or written speech, by supplying him with reasons and stirring his feelings.

- Is of fundamental importance to human relationships. It is an art that one creates belief. It is the belief of a person that determines his attitude towards men, institution and principles.

The subject of an argumentation is what we referred as PROPOSITION.

Forms of proposition:

1. in a club

2. in a parliamentary body

3. in a municipal council

4. in a court of law

Characteristics of propositions good for debate

1. it must be in a form of an assertion

2. it must express only one of the judgment

3. must be susceptible to only one interpretation

4. must be unprejudiced

5. should avoid abstractions and generalizations

6. must be concise and simple

7. must be debatable

8. must be so worded that the burden of proof must be on affirmative side

9. must be interesting

OREGON – OXFORD DEBATE

The Oregon – Oxford debate is a traditional debate format used in elementary, high schools and colleges all over the country.

There are two (2) sides in this format: the Affirmative and the Negative. The Affirmative proves the validity of the issue or topic called the PROPOSITION while the Negative disproves it. Each team has two speakers and one scribe. A debate moderator enforces the rules to ensure the debate’s smooth conduct.

Each speaker delivers one constructive speech, one Rebuttal-Summation speech and gets to cross-examine his opponent.

This is the format of choice for topics requiring more than superficial research, this format involves the use of specific information in the form of evidence to support arguments. During interpellation, the debate takes the appearance of a courtroom trial where the advocate is subjected by his opponent to a series of questions with the aim of exposing fallacious arguments and clarifying issues.

Propositions is the topic or issue under the consideration which the debater must establish or overthrow according to his side. Propositions are classified under (1) policy or (2) fact. Proposition of policy deals with the question “Why should this be done?”. Propositions of fact deal with the question “Is this true?”

Phrasing the Proposition:

The Proposition…

- should be debatable;

- be stated in the affirmative;

- concise and simple;

- must state the proposed policy and not defend the status quo;

- should embody only one act of judgment or central idea and

- must not be too wordy and must be impartial

Objectives of Interpellation:

1. To clarify points in the opposing team’s position
2. To expose factual errors or unscrupulous assertions by the opposition
3. To obtain damaging admissions from the opposing team themselves
4. To set up arguments for the use in the subsequent speeches by the speaker or his teammates.