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
- Students will build a case for or against a statewide training surcharge using cited evidence.
- Students will explain how a flat per-account charge falls differently on households at different incomes.
- 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.
Resolution & Background
Resolution. Resolved: The fictional state of Stridham should fund a statewide water workforce academy through a monthly surcharge on every water and sewer account in the state.
Background. Stridham is a fictional state with 620 community water systems, most of them small. In a fictional state survey last year, 41 percent of those systems reported at least one licensed operator position open longer than six months. The fictional Merrindale Water District, which serves about 900 people, has one licensed operator who plans to retire in two years and no one in line to replace him.
The proposed academy would run a paid pre-apprenticeship, pay exam fees, and place trainees with host utilities for supervised experience. The bill in front of the fictional legislature would fund it with a surcharge of $0.75 a month on each of the state's 1.1 million water and sewer accounts, which would raise about $9,900,000 a year. Systems would not be required to send anyone, and graduates would not be required to stay.
Nationally, the pressures behind the bill are documented. About 10,000 openings a year are projected from 2025 to 2035 for water and wastewater operators specifically, all of them from replacing workers who retire or move to other occupations. Roughly one-third of the water workforce becomes retirement-eligible within the next decade, and in 2016 only about 10 percent of water workers were 24 or younger, compared with 12.5 percent of all U.S. workers. At the same time, household water bills have been climbing faster than inflation.
Roles. Two teams of three debate. Three students judge and score from the rubric, one moderates and keeps time, and the rest of the class writes ballots with reasons. Format: a four-minute constructive from each team, three minutes of cross-examination each way, two minutes of preparation time per team, a three-minute rebuttal each, and a two-minute closing each. The affirmative speaks first and last.
Evidence File
Case for the surcharge
- The vacancies are concentrated where systems are smallest. In the fictional Stridham survey, 41 percent of the state's 620 systems reported a licensed operator position open more than six months, and the fictional Merrindale district's single operator retires in two years. Source: fictional state survey written for this kit.
- The national pipeline problem is documented and specific to this occupation. About 10,000 openings a year are projected from 2025 to 2035 for water and wastewater treatment plant and system operators, all of them from replacing workers who retire or move to other occupations, since total employment is projected to decline 6 percent rather than grow. Source: BLS Occupational Outlook Handbook.
- The age structure explains why the vacancies keep coming. Roughly one-third of the water workforce becomes retirement-eligible within the next decade, and in 2016 only about 10 percent of water workers were 24 or younger, compared with 12.5 percent of all U.S. workers. Source: EPA Water Infrastructure Sector Workforce page and Brookings, Renewing the Water Workforce (2018).
- Training is a fixed cost that a small system cannot carry alone. Licensure requires exam preparation plus supervised experience, and license classes are tied to plant size, so a system with two employees cannot run its own program. A shared academy spreads that cost across the state. Source: BLS Occupational Outlook Handbook and state certification program requirements.
- The surcharge is small per household and falls on the people who receive the service. At $0.75 a month, the charge is under $10 a year per account in this fictional proposal, and every account depends on someone holding the license that keeps the system operating legally. Source: the fictional bill's fiscal note.
- The path this academy opens does not require a four-year degree. Operators earned a median $60,020 in May 2025, with the highest-paid 10 percent earning more than $91,060, entering through a high school diploma, on-the-job training, and a state license. Certificate and degree routes remain open alongside it. Source: BLS Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics.
- Systems without a licensed operator do not save money; they hire contract operators at short notice or face enforcement, and both cost ratepayers. Source: fictional testimony from the Stridham rural systems association.
Case against the surcharge
- Water bills are already outpacing inflation. Combined US water and sewer bills rose about 24 percent from 2019 to 2024 and about 5.1 percent in 2025. A new statewide charge, however small, is added to a bill that keeps climbing. Source: Bluefield Research and industry rate surveys.
- A flat per-account charge is regressive. Every household pays the same $0.75 in this fictional proposal regardless of income, and a widely used rule of thumb, built by adding two EPA benchmarks, treats combined water and sewer costs above roughly 4.5 percent of household income as a high burden. EPA's 2024 affordability assessment used both that line and a lower 3 percent line. Source: EPA Water Affordability Needs Assessment and EPA affordability benchmarks.
- Employers capture most of the benefit, so employers should carry more of the cost. A payroll assessment on utilities, or a placement fee paid by the hiring system, would match who pays to who gains better than a household charge does. Source: fictional testimony from a Stridham ratepayer advocacy group.
- The state already funds operator training. Community colleges and existing apprenticeship programs run courses now, and a new academy would compete with them for the same instructors and the same students. Source: fictional testimony from the Stridham community college association.
- Retention may be the binding constraint rather than training. The wage range in this occupation is wide, from under $39,110 for the lowest-paid tenth of operators to over $91,060 for the highest-paid tenth, so graduates can move to larger systems or to industrial employers. If they do, Stridham ratepayers will have trained other employers' workforces. Source: BLS Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics.
- One statewide curriculum fits systems unevenly. A small rural district often needs distribution, pump, and maintenance skills more than plant chemistry, and a centralized academy tends to teach toward the larger plants. Source: fictional testimony from the Stridham small systems council.
- The same money has other uses that address small systems more directly. About $9,900,000 a year could instead fund consolidation grants or subsidize loans for systems that cannot afford treatment upgrades. Source: fictional analysis by the Stridham legislative fiscal office.
From Water for Schools (waterforschools.org). This material is in the public domain (CC0) and may be copied, edited, and shared freely.
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.