Debate kit Grade 12 Social Studies & Civics

Should Stridham Ratepayers Fund a Water Workforce Academy?

A grade 12 debate kit on a fictional state's plan to train water operators through a monthly surcharge on every water bill, with sourced evidence for both sides.

Objectives

  1. Students will build a case for or against a statewide training surcharge using cited evidence.
  2. Students will explain how a flat per-account charge falls differently on households at different incomes.
  3. Students will rebut the opposing case by answering its strongest point directly.

Vocabulary

Apprenticeship
A way to learn a skilled job by working alongside experienced workers while getting paid. Water utilities use apprenticeships to train new operators and technicians.

Also: surcharge, regressive, certification, retention

Teacher overview

This kit runs as a two-team policy debate with timed constructives, cross-examination, rebuttals, and a panel of student judges scoring from the rubric. The resolution is genuinely contested because both sides accept the same underlying facts about retirements and vacancies and disagree about who should pay to fix them and whether training is the binding constraint at all. One misconception is worth correcting before students prepare: many assume operating a treatment plant requires an engineering degree, when the common path is a high school diploma, on-the-job training, and a state license earned by exam, with license classes tied to plant size and experience. Certificate programs and four-year and graduate degrees also lead into the sector, and the debate is stronger when students treat all of those routes as legitimate.

Rubric

Criterion Emerging Developing Proficient Advanced
Evidence use and sourcing Claims are asserted with no evidence, or sources are not named. Evidence appears but sources are named loosely and figures are used imprecisely. Each major claim carries evidence with its source named, and fictional evidence is identified as such. Evidence is selected for the work it does in the argument, and the speaker explains what a figure does and does not show.
Clash and rebuttal The team restates its own case and never answers the other side. The team answers minor points but leaves the opposing case's strongest argument standing. The team answers the opposing case's strongest argument directly and explains why its own response holds. The team turns an opposing argument to its own advantage or narrows the disagreement to a stated point of fact or value.
Analysis of who pays Cost is discussed only as a total, with no attention to who bears it. The team notes that households pay but does not distinguish among them. The team explains how a flat per-account charge falls differently on households at different incomes. The team compares at least two funding mechanisms and defends its choice against the distributional objection to it.
Organization and delivery Speeches are hard to follow and run over or well under time. Structure is present but signposting is weak and time management is uneven. Speeches are signposted, within time, and audible, and cross-examination questions are purposeful. Speeches build on each other across the round, and cross-examination sets up arguments the rebuttal then uses.

Differentiation

Support

Assign these students to the ballot-writing audience or to cross-examination, and give them three prepared questions they may ask as written. Provide a one-page evidence summary with each point reduced to a claim sentence and its source, so the preparation task is selection rather than extraction.

Extension

Ask students to write a third position that neither team argued, such as funding the academy from the state general fund or from a fee paid by hiring utilities, and to defend it against the two strongest objections raised in the round.

ELL supports

Pre-teach "surcharge," "regressive," "retention," and "certification" with a short example of each, including a bill showing a flat charge added to two households with different incomes. Provide speech frames such as "Our first argument is ___, and the evidence is ___" and "They argue ___, but that does not hold because ___."

Extensions

Have students find their own state's operator certification requirements on the state environmental agency's website and write one paragraph comparing them with the pathway the fictional academy would provide. A second option is to invite an operator or a training coordinator to answer student questions about how they entered the field, after which students revise the strongest point on the side they did not argue.