STEM Negative Hegemony 1NC Harms Answers: Defensive arguments: The main defensive argument we’re making here is that more students are earning STEM certification in status quo, thus the plan is not a necessity. Another defensive argument to make is that American hegemony is sustainable now we’re – a strong world leader. Offense arguments: Terrorism Turn - seeking to maintain U.S. Hegemony leads to increased terrorism. Major terrorist attacks cause military conflicts, which then go nuclear. We also make the argument that hegemony doesn’t deter terrorism it incites it. – Global Warming 1NC Harms Answers: Defensive arguments: Action is being taken now to solve climate change, meaning the Plan isn’t necessary to solve. STEM education can’t possibly do enough to the effects of climate change. We are beyond the tipping point for C02 emissions: this means that climate change is runaway and the plan can’t ever solve. Their global warming Impacts are over exaggerated and not based on peer-reviewed science. Solvency 1NC Answers: Defensive arguments: NGSS standards will be rolled back once the Plan is passed - some states will unilaterally circumvent the standards NGSS standards are overrated and don’t actually address resource disparities are the real problem, according to the Finn and Porter-Magee evidence Another argument you can make on the Solvency debate is that there aren’t enough qualified teachers who can teach the NGSS curriculum, according to the Kobler evidence.
STEM Negative Hegemony 1NC Harms Answers: Defensive arguments: The main defensive argument we’re making here is that more students are earning STEM certification in status quo, thus the plan is not a necessity. Another defensive argument to make is that American hegemony is sustainable now – we’re a strong world leader. Offense arguments: Terrorism Turn - seeking to maintain U.S. Hegemony leads to increased terrorism. Major terrorist attacks cause military conflicts, which then go nuclear. We also make the argument that hegemony doesn’t deter terrorism – it incites it. Global Warming 1NC Harms Answers: Defensive arguments: Action is being taken now to solve climate change, meaning the Plan isn’t necessary to solve. STEM education can’t possibly do enough to the effects of climate change. We are beyond the tipping point for C02 emissions: this means that climate change is runaway and the plan can’t ever solve. Their global warming Impacts are over exaggerated and not based on peer-reviewed science. Solvency 1NC Answers: Defensive arguments: NGSS standards will be rolled back once the Plan is passed - some states will unilaterally circumvent the standards NGSS standards are overrated and don’t actually address resource disparities are the real problem, according to the Finn and Porter-Magee evidence Another argument you can make on the Solvency debate is that there aren’t enough qualified teachers who can teach the NGSS curriculum, according to the Kobler evidence.
2017-18-Core-Files-Summaries.docx