Secondly, from the perspective of personality shaping, college students do more harm than good. Under the premise that college students' psychological quality is not mature enough and their judgment ability is weak, they are easy to blindly enter the society, and are easily influenced by bad social habits and wrong consciousness, resulting in distorted psychology and wrong outlook on life values, which seriously hinders the shaping of college students' personality.
Finally, the rights and interests of college students at work can not be effectively guaranteed. At present, the law is not perfect, the cost of safeguarding rights is high, college students' awareness of safeguarding rights is weak, and the law enforcement is insufficient. After the rights and interests of college students are infringed, they can usually only "bite their teeth and swallow their blood".
The second criterion, that is, from a social macro perspective, college students' part-time jobs are not conducive to the optimal allocation of social labor resources. College students are a special social group, and their task at this stage is to accumulate knowledge in order to make better contributions to society in the future. If college students are allowed to engage in those basic jobs during this period, it is obviously a waste of human resources, and it is inevitable to lose big because of small. I believe that the opposing defense friend will not be willing to give up the opportunity to become a famous lawyer and an excellent judge in the future and can't wait to be an ordinary labor force with low price and high quality! Therefore, college students' part-time jobs are not conducive to the benign and sustainable development of the whole society.
To sum up, under the premise of effective choice, starting from the two standards of individual and society, it is fully proved that the disadvantages of college students' part-time job outweigh the advantages! Questioning food and clothing is not a necessary condition for talking about morality.
As long as you catch it
1. Grasping "college students" in the debate is extensive and cannot be overthrown by the other side with several successful examples.
2. "Part-time job" does not mean work-study program, nor does it mean social practice required by the school. Most of them are spontaneous, lack of organizational behavior, and involve security and other drawbacks.
3. Think about the purpose of college students' part-time jobs, which are basically forced by life or self-cultivation in order to get in touch with society. Considering the advantages and disadvantages from the possible results of these goals, the conclusion that "the disadvantages outweigh the advantages" is drawn.
This is the whole essence. The following are the "dross" that may be used.
1, college students can accumulate experience by working.
I don't think you have to go out to work and accumulate experience, do you? We can also get it at school, and the school also provides us with a platform for social practice: work-study program, going to the countryside, young volunteers association, graduation practice, factory production practice, quality development training and so on. Through these, we can accumulate experience and have a higher safety factor, which is helpful for our future work.
2. When college students go out to work, they can get in touch with society earlier and integrate into society.
I think the other debater made a mistake? What is the use of nine-year compulsory education in your country? You can go out to work after graduating from primary school, so that you can get in touch with society earlier and integrate into society.
3. However, if two college students with the same education apply, the employer will give priority to candidates with work experience!
You don't have to go out to work to accumulate experience. You can also participate in social practice activities organized by the school and join the Young Volunteers Association, which can accumulate quite a lot of experience! Besides, the work experience mentioned by the other debater is nothing more than washing dishes and handing out leaflets. What else could it be? Our main job is nothing more than coaching promoters or serving and washing dishes in restaurants and small restaurants. Doing such a job is definitely not in line with our major. In this kind of work, our knowledge can't be brought into full play, which is also the main reason why I don't work. Besides, why do we college students have to work? Why do we have to work to exercise ourselves? Our school is such a big school, with various societies, such as student union, youth support club, various internships, college students' quality development training and so on. Through these, you can also exercise at school, and the safety factor is absolutely high. I think it is most important to give full play to some of our abilities in school, because there is plenty of time after exercise. When you graduate, it's time for you to exercise all your life. I think you don't learn something now and want to exercise in society in the future, but you don't have the capital to exercise!
4. The university is a university because of its particularity; There are certain restrictions on the improvement of college students' ability; The commonness of society is only a supplement to universities. After all, everyone will eventually go out into society. I know more now, so I will take fewer detours when I come out later.
Yes, we will enter the society after graduation, but I want to make it clear to each other that everything is objective, the law cannot be changed, and everything should be gradual. If we don't do well in school, how can we ensure that we can do well in society? Besides, you don't have to go out to work to accumulate experience. The experience that can be gained from part-time jobs can also be gained by schools. The school also provides us with many practical platforms through which we can accumulate experience.
Society is bigger than university, so many things can't be learned in university!
Yes, society is bigger than college. The greater the society, the greater the danger and the greater the uncontrollable. However, college students' self-discipline ability is not very strong, and some temptations are irresistible. It is inevitable that some things should not happen. If it does happen, who will be responsible? Certainly no one is responsible, so how to protect the rights and interests of college students? Has Founder ever thought about such a problem? If you want to do something, you must consider its feasibility in advance. On the positive side, it underestimates the adverse consequences of the work and cannot fully demonstrate its own views.
6. Now the society needs comprehensive talents, so it is necessary to take a part-time job in the university and exercise yourself in the society!
Indeed, the competition in modern society is fierce, and comprehensive talents is needed. But this kind of talent is based on professional knowledge, which is great and can be widely involved in talents with various practical abilities. Rather than the so-called "comprehensive talents" with "practical ability" but no theoretical knowledge. How can you become a qualified talent if you don't even master your own professional knowledge? Of course, we can't take a completely negative attitude towards those part-time students. Maybe their starting point is good, but good intentions may not lead to good results!
First of all, I hope it is useful to you: the debate topic is "college students do more harm than good", not "should college students take part-time jobs"; Don't be biased in your argument, or you will be passive in future debates. The premise of this argument is that college students' part-time jobs have advantages and disadvantages. You just need to prove that the disadvantages outweigh the advantages. If possible, you'd better set a standard for this comparison, which will make your argument more powerful and perfect. Personally, I think it is the first priority for college students to learn basic professional knowledge at school, which is the basis for their future entrepreneurship and work. Therefore, if doing other things will have a negative impact on this first task, it can be considered that cheating is more beneficial than harmful.
There are all the arguments put forward by the above guy, especially the sentence "You can still play after work, but there will be no more opportunities to be influenced by culture", and I agree with you very much. But the passage given later can be used for reference and cannot be directly used as a statement. Never say that "college students shouldn't take part-time jobs" or "it's bad for college students to take part-time jobs", which is untenable.
And "in fact, there is nothing wrong with part-time job itself. The key is our attitude and way of doing things. ..... "This paragraph, run directly to the other camp, this kind of words must not be said on the court. Different people have different attitudes and ways of doing things. How can it be said that it is the disadvantage of part-time job itself? Doing part-time jobs in this major is also doing part-time jobs. This part-time job is "why not?" Then what are we arguing about? We all agree with the positive view.
Debate is not a matter for one person, but for the debate team. We can find information together, discuss it together, establish arguments repeatedly, refute and overthrow them repeatedly, and then establish more perfect arguments, so as to be comfortable in the debate field. Argumentation is the center of the whole debate and is very important.
Finally, I wish you success!