The Phi Eta Sigma Honor Society last night held a debate between representatives from the College Republicans and the University Democrats entitled "Education in America: A Political Perspective." The debate pitted the two student political organizations against one another in a series of prepared questions on educational political topics.
Phi Eta Sigma Vice President Joshua Wu moderated the debate, which drew a crowd of about two dozen attendees.
Wu opened the debate on the question of school vouchers' effectiveness in society and improving the educational system.
"Educational attainment is directly tied to economic status," former University Democrats President Ian Amelkin said. "The voucher program takes money away from poor families and helps lower-middle class families."
Amelkin said the Republican Party is willing to give up on the public education system.
College Republicans Chair Ali Ahmad argued that the school voucher system and President Bush's "No Child Left Behind" act forces public schools to be held accountable, punishing bad teachers and inefficient administrators.
"Education needs to be held accountable as other goods that the average American consumer puts out money for every year," Ahmad said.
The topic of discussion then moved toward Title IX legislation and the divide in technology access for students between wealthy and poor communities.
College Republicans member Gary Wooldridge said fixing the divide by increasing governmental funding is "ludicrous." Wooldridge said the District of Columbia spends nearly twice as much as Virginia counties per pupil and has an inferior school system.
"There is no correlation between the amount of money spent on education and the outcome of that money," he said.
Amelkin responded that he was bothered by the use of such statistics, citing what he described as gross economic differences in Virginia's counties.
Abstinence education was also discussed during the debate.
University Democrats President Allyson Gold noted that some people start having sexual intercourse at a young age in some communities and that other forms of pregnancy and disease prevention methods should be taught. Ahmad countered by questioning the rationality of young people and stressing abstinence education as a way of "bolstering the nation's moral fibers."
The debate ended with closing remarks in which the College Republicans cited privatization of many facets of public education as a viable solution to educational problems. The University Democrats emphasized an obligation by the wealthy to pay for programs from which they do not directly benefit.
Second-year College student Adam VonDeusen, who claimed to have no affiliation with either political party, said he was impressed with the debate.
"I think they both did a good job representing what their parties stand for," VonDeusen said. "You could have had higher party officials here and they would say the same things."
First-year College student Kristen Meletti, a self-professed independent, said she was also pleased with the debate.
"The statistics they brought in show that they really researched," Meletti said. "It wasn't just their personal opinions"
Read More
U.Va. Faculty Senate overwhelmingly adopts a no confidence vote in Board of Visitors
By Xander Tilock | Yesterday"The Faculty Senate expresses no confidence in the Board of Visitors for not protecting the University and its president from outside interference," the resolution read.
Faculty Senate Executives hear from Rector Sheridan and Vice Rector Wilkinson
By Xander Tilock and Grace Traxler | 2 days agoRectors were in attendance for part of Wednesday’s emergency meeting and were asked about the interim president selection process.
Student leaders weigh the future of self-governance after Ryan's departure
By Brendon Bordwine | 3 days agoThe University has a historical tradition of student self-governance, which allows students to take part in decision-making processes.
