Final answer:
To argue against the motion that the modern education system is superior, one could address the inefficacy of a 'one size fits all' approach and the societal debate around the goals of education. Considering both liberal-classical and vocational-technical curricula reflects the complexity of gearing education towards societal participation and workforce readiness. Opposing one's stance in preparation can aid in creating compelling counterarguments.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question revolves around the comparison between the modern system of education and the pre-traditional, or historical, models of education. To argue against the motion that the modern system of education is superior, one might consider points such as the potential oversimplification of a 'one size fits all' approach, which does not account for the unique needs and abilities of all students.
Furthermore, the debate about what should be prioritized in education, from a liberal-classical curriculum to a vocational-technical curriculum, is a reflection of the broader societal goals of schooling. Current educational systems strive to both equip individuals to participate thoughtfully in society and to provide practical training for workforce needs. Discussions at state events about topics like religion can also touch upon educational matters, indicating how intertwined schooling is with broader community values.
In preparing arguments for a debate, it might also be insightful to adopt a stance that opposes your original position and brainstorm counterarguments. This strategy helps in developing a well-rounded perspective and understanding the multifaceted nature of the education system, whether it be modern or pre-traditional.