Question: Is Assigning Homework Advantageous?

Should homework be assigned? The answer is no, as children should have the opportunity to engage in social activities, participate in sports, or spend quality time with their family instead of being burdened with homework.

Although YouTube may have helpful videos pertaining to the subject a student is looking for, as my opponent has stated, YouTube also may be considered a distraction to students as many students have favorite channels on YouTube, and they may be quickly sidetracked. I know this because of a distinct increase of 13-18 year-olds watching YouTube.

You may say that students should have after school jobs right, well as being a student in high school in modern day society, the schooling is getting harder and harder, we have a lot of homework, and usually most of the time the age for a job is not for 15 years or younger so most students can't get a job. Now there is the homework task, it is hard to have homework form the teachers in school, but add to that about 1/3 of the students are in either AP or Honors classes, the homework would be so much harder. So trying to juggle a job and all the homework would have each of the students up very late and may have a chance to fail each of the classes. The students like me should finish high school first then get a part time job so we can pay for college.

I will go about this by first introducing my case, then attacking my opponents all in this round. My opponent didn’t say yes or no to my format, so I will just follow his format as best as possible. My Case:Contention 1: Price. Research shows that most parents who homeschool their children spend less than $600 whereas public school parents spend an average of $10,000 per year. It is also shown that even though less money is spent, each homeschooled child outperforms the average public school student by about 30 percentile points. Contention 2: More Time to Pursue Interests. As soon as school is over, the children can immediately go to whatever they want. There is no traveling to get home and waste a lot of time. One can dance, or learn music. They don’t have to wait to get home, put away all their stuff because it is right there. Contention 3: No Bullies. At most schools, there are bullies. But in homeschool, the teacher almost always is watching the kids. And even if there is more than one kid, if anyone is being bullied, the teacher/instructor will easily find out. The kids don’t have to endure the teasing that happens in a normal school. Contention 4: Curriculum. When children are homeschooled, the teacher gets to choose the curriculum. Most times the curriculum is higher than most normal schools. And they tend to have a higher GPA, which as most of you know, is very important when applying to colleges. Contention 5: Attention. Children who attend public school lose attention in class because of their peers. They are either passing notes or talking. But in homeschooling, there are few children. It is better because the teacher will easily know if the child is zoning out, and the teacher can work better with the student because he/she doesn’t have to pay attention to how many ever students a normal school teacher has (depends on elementary, middle, or high). I urge you to check out this link below on the stats of homeschool vs. public school. It shows that students who are homeschooled do better generally. . http://www.home-school.com...My Opponent’s Case:Contention 1 - When children are homeschooled, they are not inside the house 24/7. They do leave the house. They can make friends by going to the park, mall, or even through their parent’s friends children. Just because they are homeschooled does not mean they are cooped up in the house all the time. Contention 2 - Usually, when a child is homeschooled, their “school” environment is separate from their playing area. I have a friend who is homeschooled, she played upstairs and her “school” was downstairs away from everything. They may be tempted as all kids are, but if they try anything, there is a less chance of them getting away with it. Contention 3 - When kids are homeschooled, they are given the opportunity to grow and learn in the real world, rather than isolating them in the artificial world. This means that as they are growing up, they learn a great deal through observation and practical experience. Homeschoolers are more involved in their communities and do many other activities. They also go on field trips more often which introduce them to the real world day by day. Contention 4 - I see your point for the two children, but both parents don’t have to drop out of work to take care of this. One is sufficient enough. As I said, my friend’s mom assigns a task to the oldest, and then after she has started her task, she goes on to the youngest. Then she alternates back and forth until their school day is finished. Contention 5 - Homeschooling also has clubs. Just not in that wording. They do helping around the community, they can learn instruments, singing, whatever they want. They are not limited just because they go to school at a different place. Contention 6 - Actually, if you checked out my link above, it is the homeschooled kids who have the better scores and the better averages. The graduation rate of a homeschooled child is 66.7% whereas a normal schooled child is 57.5%. There is a big difference in those two numbers. Judge/Viewer, I urge you to vote Con/Homeschooling is better. Thank You.

as a student myself I have disagree with my opponent due to the fact that I have ask many educated individuals on what reason was service learning hours has been in any from useful? their so-called educated answer was that students just have to do it so they can graduate. Me personality I believe that's a load of BS. I agree that the info my opponent presented is indeed true but a percent of students are still in school because of not having all of their service learning hours. Some refuse to even get the hours due believing that unwilling serving the community for free is some how suppose to help them in school which makes since because who in there right mind would willing to do free manual labor. True I am speaking for my personal experience and the actions of others but service learning hours has NEVER not one bit was need. Last year 3,030,000 students dropped out of school and 8,300 a day. In 2013 the dropout rate was 7.9 but only decreasing by .2 every year. http://www.statisticbrain.com...

On the subject of grading this debate: There is a difference between a competition and education, and between score and grade. A grade pertains to ones performance in an academic endeavor, but a score pertains to the rating of someone in a competition, like a debate. Saying that people voting on a debate is giving us a grade, is like saying that a soccer game is graded. One indication of this is that anyone who votes can give certain categories to one person and other categories in favor of another, and is not giving an objective rating to each person individually. Rebuttal to point #1: Instant gratification isn’t a good thing. People do better in life if they can work towards a more concrete, important goal further down the road [1. ] This goal can be to learn enough to pursue a career they are interested in, or to learn something interesting about the world. Grades detract from ones ability to think this way because they force people to do less difficult activities. This whole argument plays right into a lot of the contentions that I brought up because all of your ideas focus on the idea that any motivation is as good as any other motivation and that as long as a student is motivated, you are doing something right. The whole point of my fourth contention is to show that extrinsic motivation is detrimental to important intrinsic motivation, as well as bringing a host of other problems with it. In the case you mention with the student Bobby, there are a few things that you don’t account for. Firstly it doesn’t account for the fact that Bobby, instead of being motivated to get the grade, is motivated to get the PS3. This makes things even worse, now getting the A doesn’t give Billy a sense of accomplishment, getting a PS3 does. So now the motivation to succeed in any intellectual way is completely gone. Secondly, this means that Bobby is more likely to forget what he learned, as my earlier study shows. And thirdly Bobby doesn’t do the more difficult problems and doesn’t take intellectual risks because he is only interested in getting the grade. This also means that Bobby doesn’t do more work than is necessary for things that he is interested in because it could harm his A. You state that “Even if this motivates students to learn indirectly they are learning. ” But they aren’t retaining what they are learning, and aren’t learning in a meaningful way, aren’t striving to know more. Grades (along with rote memorization and standardized curriculums and testing) are what Carl Sagan meant when he said “Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. ” Kids file knowledge away as ‘learned’ instead of ‘interesting and useful’ and ask questions like ‘will we need to know this for the test’ instead of, can we learn more about that. Rebuttal to point #2: I see two problems in this contention. Firstly, this contention is irrelevant. This debate is about whether or not education is benefited, not whether educators are helped to make decisions. Even if you accept that as a valid argument, once again we as a society are putting ease and comfort above education. The other main problem I see with this argument is that the whole idea of needing an objective way of determining between students results in the detraction from the overall quality of the students. It is like a college cutting off a child’s hand and then using how well they can withstand pain. The students who are best at handling get to go to college, but all the students are worse for it because they don’t have a hand. If in setting up a standard on which to choose people, you make everybody worse, it isn’t a good standard. Colleges can look at narratives and work more on the basis of interviews. As fare as your one campus switched argument, the fact that one campus switched doesn’t mean that they were right, or that all non-grading campuses should follow. Hampshire College does not employ grades, and MIT doesn’t grade for freshman year to reduce stress, and foster student’s interest in the subject matter. Rebuttal to point #3: Once again, grades reduce to the least common denominator. You may be able to show students that they aren’t learning well slightly more effectively, but it comes at the cost that on average, all your students will score worse on the quiz, and forget more of the material. Additionally students can tell from their professor’s comments whether or not they understand material, but in this case are motivated to fix what they did wrong because they are interested in the subject, and not merely trying to get a grade. Rebuttal to point #4: Firstly, I don’t see how grades remove a bias. Teachers that are more likely to say that a student they like is better than a student they dislike are also more likely to give a better grade on an essay to a student they like than to one they dislike. Additionally, students who are learning for a grade are less likely to talk because they feel they are constantly being matched up to their classmates and to some arbitrary objective standard, and are therefore more afraid of making mistakes. If class participation is being graded, then students worry about their comments level of complexity, when adding what they have to say to a conversation is the first step to getting their ideas tested and coming up with more complex ones. I personally talk with friends about things that I am not quite sure about, and may seem somewhat absurd, to use them as a sounding board. I have a more interesting, developed, objective standard because I have taken the time to voice my opinions in setting where I don’t feel threatened. As a result of this, I am more confident about stating my ideas in class; I am not worried about a grade, but about having an interesting conversation. In this way, taking away grades gives students spontaneity, creativity and collaboration, all of which are essential. Narratives are just as biased as grades, but they tell more. In conclusion, I would like to state two things. Firstly my opponent’s second third and fourth arguments all rest on the idea that students, teachers colleges and/or parents need a way of discerning whether or not a student is learning, and that the only way to do this is to grade them. Not only have I already stated that there are other alternatives that allow for this, but I have also showed a myriad of ways in which the practice of grading is detriment to students. Unless my opponent can show that these other forms of judgment pose the same detriments to Education, he looses these three points. This follows from the fact that, when comparing my alternative, which doesn’t have any detriments to its name (and is in fact more indicative than just assigning a student a number or letter) and my opponent’s, which does; it is a fairly clear choice in favor of my alternative. Secondly, my opponents first argument is erroneous in that it rests on ideas that I have already disproven, namely that all motivation is equal, and that none is detrimental. If my opponent can not directly show that his form of motivation (grades) do not cause the harms that I have laid out he looses this contention as well. This covers all of my opponent’s contentions. To ensure that students are, on average, more creative, intrigued and intrinsically motivated, and to increase their retention of knowledge, their ambition and their inquisitiveness, I urge a pro ballot, thank you. [1] . https://www.apa.org...

Social skills- You can still learn social skills by talking with neighbors, hanging out at a mall or park etc. Summer isn't a hiding time, now is it? Bullying- Well it could have went the other way around for you, you may have became a bully or allowed yourself to be run over. And this is used as an excuse by our teachers for not taking adequate action against bullying. 'deal with it yourself' sometimes doesn't work out. Talking- So, if teachers stop us from talking in class, then the time talking with friends is reduced. I would have met my people somewhere else rather than school. Homework organization- You may be lucky then. Our subject teachers give time for homework according to the time needed only for 'its completion', and so if we get more assignments that day from other classes its humanly impossible not to skip one of them. I can't give myself 45 minutes, I have to make do with 10, for I return at home 4-30 pm and sleep at 9, so I have approximately 4 hours, out of which I need to do other things like eat, change, debate on this site(lol), play football etc. which reduces my study time. 'also, the curriculum for school are made to be easy to understand, easy to comprehend and made so its at your grades average level, none of the work is forced into you, every subject can be fun if you apply yourself.' No, every child has a different level of intelligence, and also a different level of interest. I think that interest is like pouring 1 liter of water into 10 glasses. Sure, some may have 1.5 capacity and more want to learn, but I think that for each subject you are a bit more interested in, give a bit more effort you reduce the effort you will put in another subject. All of the work is forced upon us, we really can't choose subjects yet, and its impossible to be wizard at all subjects unless in primary. How can you be sure the curriculum is made keeping in mind the average ability when no student's opinion is taken upon it?? ' if you don't like a certain subject you can just not take it on your chosen subjects in year nine and after. as for the "homework plague", again spreading your workload helps a lot in giving you time to enjoy. I told you, most subject teachers don't co-ordinate with each other when giving homework, and thus we get overburdened. As for choosing subjects in year nine, I saw that our form was rigged( it required us to choose at least 13 subjects) and we are already studying only 17 subjects. I certainly dislike more than 4 subjects, what shall I do?

Studies have proved that teenagers get the least amount of sleep out of all people. With this being said starting school at a later time would allow teenagers to sleep a little more and be well rested for the day ahead of them. Most high school students on average have 3.5 hours of homework waiting for them when they get home. Also add in that most high school students have jobs and other responsibilities to deal with. With the time being set back an hour I feel that everyone would benefit from this, not just the students themselves.

Thank you I'msmarterthanyou98 for accepting my challenge, thank you all who are following this, I will now present my opening case. Contention 1: Grades create stress. The ides that grades engender create stress in two ways. Firstly, grades are effectively a way of linearly comparing a group of people, by comparing their work to a fixed external standard. In doing this, one creates a sense for students of having to measure up to those around them, creating stress. This is a major impact because stress decreases from performance. Few students perform well under stress and most perform poorly. [1] One can see this from a purely psychological and reasonable standpoint in that it causes extraneous thought. When one is stressed, one worries about a failed outcome while preparing for or attempting to achieve a successful one, detracting from ones ability to solve the problem at hand. If one is not measured against an external standard, thought about the outcome goes away. Not only can stress be shown to be detrimental from a psychological standpoint, it is also shown to be detrimental Neurologically. Conditions in which an individual is overstressed lead to activate the fight of flight response, pumping adrenaline into your system. Small amounts of adrenaline keep you focused but large quantities begin to shut down all but the parts of your brain necessary for survival. When constantly living under high stress, one sees everything as a threat, and has trouble focusing on things like schoolwork. Contention 2: Grades discourage students from looking at meaningful feedback, and discourage teachers from giving it. Even if a narrative (or some other form of meaningful feedback) is given, students don’t pay attention to it, and it is often written as a justification of a grade. It is essential in correcting ones mistakes to place a premium on feedback that tells a student what they can do better, and not feedback that tells them where they fit with respect to others. If this is so obvious, one might ask why students don’t just look past the grade? The answer is that grading becomes a lifestyle. Students are taught that they must work hard to get a good grade, and must get a good grade to get into the next level of education because educational specialists believe that all forms of motivation are the same. This overemphasis on and often threat on arbitrary placement and sorting, means that students are taught from a young age that grades are what they are and what they judge themselves by, making meaningful feedback seem irrelevant. Contention 3: Grades harm interest and ambition. [2] When a student receives a grade that does not live up to their standards, they are discouraged from pursuing work in that field. A student who gets a bad grade in math for example, may think, “I’m interested in math, but I’m not good at it, maybe I shouldn't take advanced math classes.” Students have two reasons to come to this conclusion due to grading. Firstly, they are dissuaded because of the possibility that further grades may be bad, lowering their GPA and making it harder to progress into a desired institution for the next stage of their education. Even if a students bad grade comes from external circumstances or if the student was merely behind because of a class that did not prepare them earlier in life, the result is the same. With the way that most grades are doled out; someone who made use of their skills from a disadvantaged position to attempt to solve a problem but failed, will receive the same mark as one who makes little use of the wealth skills they have; and fails anyway. Taking away grades forces teachers to give meaningful feedback about student work and effort. Secondly; grades emphasize 2 things: adeptness over interest and precision over creativity. A student with a controversial approach to a problem who gets some minor calculation or detail slightly wrong thinks that they had better not go into the field in which they failed, because grades teach that one must be adept. Contention 4: Grades put emphasis on external, extrinsic motivation. Kids are learning not because they are interested, but because they want to be given a good ranking in comparison to others. This type of motivation tends not to interest students in the subject but rather interest them in a grade. In fact, extrinsic motivation has been shown to directly impair intrinsic motivation, and “ A “grading orientation” and a “learning orientation” have been shown to be inversely related and, as far as I can tell, every study that has ever investigated the impact on intrinsic motivation of receiving grades (or instructions that emphasize the importance of getting good grades) has found a negative effect.” [3] Contention 5: Grading fosters individuality and detracts from interaction, as well as promoting cheating. Because of the intrinsic competition involved in grading (especially grading on a curve,) students are encouraged to compete rather than to work together. If you work with Johnny, and it turns out you understand the material better than him, then he will benefit from your knowledge, and drag your grade down. Collaboration has been shown to be an integral part of student learning, and has been shown to raise intrinsic motivation, cognitive functioning, and retention of information, as well as decreasing racism. [4] Conversely, the pressure often leads students to cheat, so as to do as well as (or better than their piers.) [5] Contention 6: External standards do not allow for teaching to outliers. With a grade based system it is difficult to teach to children that are either far above average or far below average. A student that is far above average is given an A, and rewarded for what is simple to them, where they should be being pushed and challenged. Every detail should be explained to them. Conversely, a student with a D or an F is discouraged and, instead of having the general picture explained to them comes away with a sense of disappointment and dislike. Contention 7: Grades foster rote memorization over creativity, and put arbitrary standards on creative processes. In any system grades will be somewhat arbitrary, especially in the humanities, but it is hard to grapple with that rationally as a young kid. A kid receiving a B from a class with a more difficult professor that a friend receives an A in with a different professor, assumes that they can not work at the same level as their pier. To account for this, schools tend towards rote memorization. It is easier to see if Student A is better than Student B, if both teachers give a grade on a vocabulary quiz, rather than a piece of creative writing and or an analytical essay. This has results in horrible curriculum standards, especially in STEM fields. To create a level playing field and make sure kids are learning the same things, they assign a curriculum that everyone can take standardized tests on. This allows for people's results to be quantized, even if the tests are arbitrary and meaningless. In the field of mathematics especially, most students must get to college or even grad school before they actually start doing proofs, research and creative work. This deters students from taking math, and gives the impression that math is a field only used as a tool. The same is done with many of the sciences. Contention 8: Grades promote focus on easy problems, and detract from willingness to challenge oneself. Lets say that a student were to have a homework assignment with 10 problems, and had only one hour to complete the assignment. Now assume that 5 of the problems take from 3-5 minutes, making them comparatively easy to get done, but 3 of the remaining problems take 5 to 10 minutes and the last two take 10-20. From an interest and educational standpoint, the last two and the three before that are the most important, and all five could probably be done within the hour the student has available. A student with internal motivation about the subject does those five problems, but a student motivated by the need to get a grade does the first 8, completing more problems in less time. By assigning a grade, the teacher detracts from the level of work students engage in. The same is true with the humanities; students are discouraged from writing about topics that are more complicated than necessary because there is a greater chance of failure. This is corroborated by educational psychologists mentioned in my 3rd and 6the sources. Contention 9: Students who are graded tend to forget what they learned more quickly and think in a more superficial manner. Students working for a grade view knowledge as something that must be internalized in order to achieve a high mark, instead of something that can be intriguing when discussed and grappled with. It follows that once their objective is completed, the knowledge becomes unnecessary, as it is no longer necessary to obtain a grade. It also follows that students are less likely to engage with material, thinking only about what they need to know for a test and not about what a particular passage means in the grand scheme of things, or how a text relates to the world. In a study “students told they’d be graded on how well they learned a social studies lesson had more trouble understanding the main point of the text than did students who were told that no grades would be involved. Even on a measure of rote recall, the graded group remembered fewer facts a week later.” (Grolnick and Ryan, 1987) [6] Thank you, please vote Pro [1] http://www.apa.org... [2] http://www.bbc.com... [3] http://www.alfiekohn.org... [4] http://www.ccsstl.com... [5] www.mendhamboro.org/cms/lib02/NJ01000391/Centricity/ModuleInstance/638/Anderman_et_al._1998_-_Motivation_and_cheating.pdf [6] http://www.alternet.org...

All right, For this (sort of) single round debate I'll be playing the Devil's avocate and debate that homework should be banned. There will be no rebuttals since my opponent cannot answer my case. I wish my opponent good luck and happy debating.you may set forth your arguments.

Support for the Pro position of this resolution if bountiful and defensible in a properly framed debate. At the outset, the Pro debater needs to recognize there is significant negative press against standardized testing arising from a multitude of factors, many of which are unrelated to the question of whether or not standardized testing is beneficial to student education. These negative factors poison the well and spread the perception that because some elements related to standardized testing are undesirable, then standardized testing in general must be undesirable. This, of course, is a logical fallacy; a kind of fallacy of composition in which one draws conclusions about a whole based upon an examination of smaller portions. Standardized testing is a tool and like any tool can be designed for specific purposes. We shall examine those purposes and their effect on education and we will scratch the surface of an abundance of studies which measure the effect of testing on students. Much of the research extends back several decades and is still cited in research journals today. A Basic Definition To clarify the position, I will provide a definition for standardized tests which describes their nature and their purpose. JCCHD (undated): A Standardized test is a test that is given in a consistent or "standard" manner. Standardized tests are designed to have consistent questions, administration procedures, and scoring procedures. When a standardized test is administrated, is it done so according to certain rules and specifications so that testing conditions are the same for all test takers. Standardized tests come in many forms, such as standardized interviews, questionnaires, or directly administered intelligence tests. The main benefit of standardized tests is they are typically more reliable and valid than non-standardized measures. They often provide some type of "standard score" which can help interpret how far a child"s score ranges from the average. Based upon this definition we can surmise that the test may be administered by a school in accordance with some over-arching direction or purpose and may be required by local administration or government or at the state level. A key principle is the test must be administered and assessed in a standardized and consistent way aligned to the purpose it is designed to serve. Key Advantages Standardized tests offer advantages to school system administrators which are not possible with in-class testing and assessments designed and graded by teachers. The key advantages are objectivity, comparability, and accountability (Churchill 2015). Depending on the type of test one teacher's evaluation of a student's test may be different than another teacher's evaluation of the same student's test results. This variability can result from a lack of objectivity in the design or assessment of the test and lead to different impressions of a student's level of achievement. Standardized tests are designed to greatly reduce subjective grading. Often, standardized tests are assessed by computers rather than humans. Not only does this reduce costs by eliminating the need to pay graders, it enforces objective standards. The second major advantage is seen when a local school board needs to determine the overall level of achievement of, say sixth-graders in several different schools within their jurisdiction, Standardized tests ensure that all of the sixth-grade students will be evaluated on a common, objective standard. This allows a fair evaluation of sixth-grade achievement and helps determine which schools or classes may be in need of improvement. Objectivity and comparability are both necessary to realize the advantages linked to accountability. School system administrators use the tests as a feedback mechanism for the schools and classes to alter curriculum or resources in such a way they can benefit student achievement. Accountability requires the individual schools and instructors demonstrate forward progress in achieving the goals of the school administration. From Feedback to Blowback I do want to spend a little time discussing the downside of standardized tests because I believe a thorough evaluation and acknowledgement of problems increases the Pro ethos. Accountability is pushed by governments intent on maximizing their educational dollars. Obviously, an administration concerned with high costs will tend to view standardized tests as a mechanism for achieving goals for the least cost. First, the cost of testing is relatively cheap and secondly standardized tests can potentially isolate problems in individual schools, classrooms, or teachers putting increased pressure on those systems and individuals. Moreover, politicians can use accountability to enhance their own political statuses. Merrow (2001): But the fundamental problem is that many schools and school districts use standardized test results more for accountability than understanding or diagnosis. I'm not blaming educators for this situation, because they're only following orders. H. D. Hoover of the University of Iowa defends testing but agrees we've gone overboard. He places the blame squarely on politicians. "They want quick fixes, and they like tests because they're cheap. They mandate external tests because to the public it looks like they're doing something about education when all they're doing is actually a very inexpensive 'quick fix.'" When accountability increases pressure on school districts in a heavy-handed way, students are often re-categorized for failure to demonstrate achievement above a particular "cut-line" which alarms and often angers parents. Teachers are pressured to increase the performance of students and some teachers are viewed as professionally incompetent. All of this pressure results in negative attitudes about standardized testing and leads to abuses which have resulted in overly narrowed curriculum which focus entirely on the tests, and in extreme cases, cheating. All of these negative impressions ripple through communities and result in the perception standardized tests are the problem. The link between the home and the administration is the classroom and the teachers themselves play a significant role in the success or failure of the testing programs. Brown & Hattie (2012): The belief systems of teachers are a significant factor in whether standardized tests can be educationally useful. Clearly, pre-existing beliefs that standardized tests are irrelevant can and will influence how teachers respond to the possibility of using tests educationally. But there are other options for understanding the purpose and nature of assessment; assessment can evaluate schools, it can evaluate or certify students, and it can be for improvement (Brown, 2008). For example, in the development of the asTTle standardized tests system, it was found that teachers who endorsed the conception of assessment related to "assessment is powerful for improving teaching" had higher interpretation scores on a test about the meaning of the asTTle test score reports (r = .34). In contrast, teachers who endorsed more strongly the conception of assessment as a means of evaluating or holding schools accountable had the lowest interpretation scores (r = -.21) (Hattie et al. 2006).Thus, successful use of standardized tests requires believing that they can contribute to improved teaching and student learning for the individuals in a teacher"s class. This belief leads to more accurate interpretation to the educationally useful information communicated in standardized test reports.[290] We can see tests as simple measuring systems which serve as an important tool in guiding the educational development of students. Ultimately it is how those tools are used and people's attitudes about how the tools are used which guides perception of whether or not the tests are beneficial. No doubt it guides the perception of the PF debate judge as well.


Question: Is Assigning Homework Advantageous?

The practice of assigning homework should be discontinued.

The rationale for banning homework stems from the observation that the primary site for learning is the school, whereas understanding and independent learning may not always occur at home. In some instances, students may struggle with homework at home, leading to a decrease in confidence and self-esteem. Additionally, students may not always receive the necessary assistance at home, which can result in additional stress and tension for both the student and their parents. According to Dr. Justin Coulson, a parenting researcher and author, homework increases family conflict and reduces time for other activities that provide balance and variety to a child's life, such as sports, music, art, or other extracurricular activities. This can lead to problems for parents who often don't know how to help their child with homework, especially if they have a disadvantage in their educational background.

Homework can also cause problems with family interactions, affecting family bonding and other fun and relaxing activities. This can lead to issues for parents who do not know what to do if their child has homework, knowing it has detrimental effects on their health. Homework often conflicts with students' quality family time, which is significant, especially when they only have the weekend together as a family. Moreover, homework can deprive students of other life responsibilities and does not allow time for other activities. Due to homework, students have an imbalance in their life, as the workload can be overwhelming, leading to difficulties in time management. This can build stress and anxiety, leaving them depressed and having to back down or give up on other life roles and activities.

Homework can also cause students to become introverted and alienated from society, as they are unable to express themselves or do things they enjoy doing. Homework keeps students trapped to only learning what they were given or taught, so they do not become aware of other life lessons or responsibilities. Stephanie Donaldson-Pressman, the director of the New England Center for Pediatric Psychology, found that homework takes time away from free play and learning creative thinking, increases stress, and cuts down on time for building social skills.

Homework should be banned because it deprives students of their social skills and overall health. The amount of time spent on homework can also cause problems with family interaction or even lead to stress due to distractions in the household from people or technology. With the ban on homework, students will have more opportunities for leisure time as they are able to participate in out-of-school activities, which can help them enhance and develop their creative and interacting skills. As communication plays an

Don't know why you just repeated your first statement. Meh, I'll do this anyway. Not all kids think the same way, so they should attend classes the best suit them. It's not fair if a kid fails his/her assignment because they take longer to grasp a subject than the other kids. They're not stupid they just learn a different way. That is why I believe ability tracking in elementary schools and all grades is ultimately a good thing for students.

On the subject of grading this debate: There is a difference between a competition and education, and between score and grade. A grade pertains to ones performance in an academic endeavor, but a score pertains to the rating of someone in a competition, like a debate. Saying that people voting on a debate is giving us a grade, is like saying that a soccer game is graded. One indication of this is that anyone who votes can give certain categories to one person and other categories in favor of another, and is not giving an objective rating to each person individually. Rebuttal to point #1: Instant gratification isn’t a good thing. People do better in life if they can work towards a more concrete, important goal further down the road [1. ] This goal can be to learn enough to pursue a career they are interested in, or to learn something interesting about the world. Grades detract from ones ability to think this way because they force people to do less difficult activities. This whole argument plays right into a lot of the contentions that I brought up because all of your ideas focus on the idea that any motivation is as good as any other motivation and that as long as a student is motivated, you are doing something right. The whole point of my fourth contention is to show that extrinsic motivation is detrimental to important intrinsic motivation, as well as bringing a host of other problems with it. In the case you mention with the student Bobby, there are a few things that you don’t account for. Firstly it doesn’t account for the fact that Bobby, instead of being motivated to get the grade, is motivated to get the PS3. This makes things even worse, now getting the A doesn’t give Billy a sense of accomplishment, getting a PS3 does. So now the motivation to succeed in any intellectual way is completely gone. Secondly, this means that Bobby is more likely to forget what he learned, as my earlier study shows. And thirdly Bobby doesn’t do the more difficult problems and doesn’t take intellectual risks because he is only interested in getting the grade. This also means that Bobby doesn’t do more work than is necessary for things that he is interested in because it could harm his A. You state that “Even if this motivates students to learn indirectly they are learning. ” But they aren’t retaining what they are learning, and aren’t learning in a meaningful way, aren’t striving to know more. Grades (along with rote memorization and standardized curriculums and testing) are what Carl Sagan meant when he said “Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. ” Kids file knowledge away as ‘learned’ instead of ‘interesting and useful’ and ask questions like ‘will we need to know this for the test’ instead of, can we learn more about that. Rebuttal to point #2: I see two problems in this contention. Firstly, this contention is irrelevant. This debate is about whether or not education is benefited, not whether educators are helped to make decisions. Even if you accept that as a valid argument, once again we as a society are putting ease and comfort above education. The other main problem I see with this argument is that the whole idea of needing an objective way of determining between students results in the detraction from the overall quality of the students. It is like a college cutting off a child’s hand and then using how well they can withstand pain. The students who are best at handling get to go to college, but all the students are worse for it because they don’t have a hand. If in setting up a standard on which to choose people, you make everybody worse, it isn’t a good standard. Colleges can look at narratives and work more on the basis of interviews. As fare as your one campus switched argument, the fact that one campus switched doesn’t mean that they were right, or that all non-grading campuses should follow. Hampshire College does not employ grades, and MIT doesn’t grade for freshman year to reduce stress, and foster student’s interest in the subject matter. Rebuttal to point #3: Once again, grades reduce to the least common denominator. You may be able to show students that they aren’t learning well slightly more effectively, but it comes at the cost that on average, all your students will score worse on the quiz, and forget more of the material. Additionally students can tell from their professor’s comments whether or not they understand material, but in this case are motivated to fix what they did wrong because they are interested in the subject, and not merely trying to get a grade. Rebuttal to point #4: Firstly, I don’t see how grades remove a bias. Teachers that are more likely to say that a student they like is better than a student they dislike are also more likely to give a better grade on an essay to a student they like than to one they dislike. Additionally, students who are learning for a grade are less likely to talk because they feel they are constantly being matched up to their classmates and to some arbitrary objective standard, and are therefore more afraid of making mistakes. If class participation is being graded, then students worry about their comments level of complexity, when adding what they have to say to a conversation is the first step to getting their ideas tested and coming up with more complex ones. I personally talk with friends about things that I am not quite sure about, and may seem somewhat absurd, to use them as a sounding board. I have a more interesting, developed, objective standard because I have taken the time to voice my opinions in setting where I don’t feel threatened. As a result of this, I am more confident about stating my ideas in class; I am not worried about a grade, but about having an interesting conversation. In this way, taking away grades gives students spontaneity, creativity and collaboration, all of which are essential. Narratives are just as biased as grades, but they tell more. In conclusion, I would like to state two things. Firstly my opponent’s second third and fourth arguments all rest on the idea that students, teachers colleges and/or parents need a way of discerning whether or not a student is learning, and that the only way to do this is to grade them. Not only have I already stated that there are other alternatives that allow for this, but I have also showed a myriad of ways in which the practice of grading is detriment to students. Unless my opponent can show that these other forms of judgment pose the same detriments to Education, he looses these three points. This follows from the fact that, when comparing my alternative, which doesn’t have any detriments to its name (and is in fact more indicative than just assigning a student a number or letter) and my opponent’s, which does; it is a fairly clear choice in favor of my alternative. Secondly, my opponents first argument is erroneous in that it rests on ideas that I have already disproven, namely that all motivation is equal, and that none is detrimental. If my opponent can not directly show that his form of motivation (grades) do not cause the harms that I have laid out he looses this contention as well. This covers all of my opponent’s contentions. To ensure that students are, on average, more creative, intrigued and intrinsically motivated, and to increase their retention of knowledge, their ambition and their inquisitiveness, I urge a pro ballot, thank you. [1] . https://www.apa.org...

I agree with you, the grading system is a joke; children experience too much stress as a result of it especially when given too much homework. A lot of times I'd to do the bare minimum due to the amount I had, so it was pointless being graded every time. The combination of too much homework and grading can cause students to lose interest. However, the reason why children are so anti-homework is because they want to avoid being told off. They simply don't understand that it is for their benefit. By being given a grade they can see how well they are doing, and can know how much more effort is required to get the final grade they seek. If grades were simply abolished, no-one would take homework seriously. The solution is to give students the option to get their homework graded by putting a sticker inside their book, or to place their work in a separate pile. They deserve respect. The only subject where grades should be compulsory is Maths because grading is mathematical, and a maths teacher can get students excited about getting their homework graded. I think most children would want their homework graded if they knew it was for their benefit, if they got low grades they would be more likely to ask for help. I look forward to your response

Let us go straight to the arguments. I. Life For the rest of this debate, aka. this round, let us assume that my math was incorrect. Let us assume now that there are 100 minutes of lessons and 20 minutes of break. This was not clear at the beginning. It must have been a brain block on my part. Notice that pro has not in the least addressed the dilemma I created. In it I showed that teachers would have to teach twice as much if half the class elected to take their 40 minutes free time (As presented by Pro) in the morning and the other half in the evening. This would create added work on the teachers. Unintended by Pro’s model, maybe, but present nonetheless. According to Pro, his model actually increases free time outside school. This is weird. There is only 24 hours to a day. Let us assume that the current school time is 9-3, his proposal would be an effective of 9-2:40. However, as stated in his resolution, the model proposes a 9-5 schedule. If he wishes for students to come and go throughout the day with small snatches of time, this would mean small portions of time with no adult supervision at all, aka. time which can be spent committing minor crimes. As far as my experience goes, no company would employ any workers for short snatches of time before seeing them head back to school or something like that. Thus, unless pro meant a reduce homework, reduce school time in his resolution, this model is absolutely impossible to implement for just these two reasons alone. Unless Pro wishes to stay up past midnight doing homework and getting up at 5:30 the next morning to go to school, I suggest not implementing the particular model in which I am familiar with. II. Memory retention Pro has unfortunately continued to ignore the counter-proposal I made in the previous two rounds. Digitalize homework. This is already happening in many places, as I found out through personal experience. Unless Pro wishes for the model to change somewhat when students come of working age, his counter to my points about working is mute (:D). As I showed in the previous point, increasing net free time is not effective unless those free time comes in large blocks, which as far as I understand Pro’s model, is not part of.It would seem that our two studies contradict. However, although Pro’s opinion poll was from CareerBuilder, mine was from Stanford. It is up to the reader to determine whose is the more reliable.The whole point of my citing the study, I thought I clearly linked the two, is that as workers are more productive at home, it must be because they have better memory recall. Note that I have as such turned Pro’s quotation against him, showing that people are more productive at home, aka. remember more, than at work. This also ties in with the conceded point about comfort. All these factors argue strongly against Pro’s model. The fact that most school students do not work is a testament to short-sightedness and lack of life-planning. III. Cost Even were we to concede all of Pro’s points here, they will still not increase the quality of learning. In fact, my point regarding teachers working all-nighters have not been addressed. How does spending 95 minutes at school accomplish what is done in one night? It does not. Not in the least. Should I extend arguments here? IV. Social Mischief My opponent has not shown that crimes are committed disproportionately between 3-5pm. Even if we forced students to complete their homework in school (Negating the whole purpose of homework), you can only keep them in school for so long. Let us assume that we release students from schools at 5pm. Not only does students who have completed their homework have absolutely no motivation to do anything, as pro noted, not even work. This would increase the motivation, brought on by boredom, to commit crimes, reversing any benefit intended by Pro’s model. If, on the other hand, more net free time is given in which no homework needs to be done, like as I noted above, not only would companies not hire such students, they would actually be motivated by boredom to commit crimes. V. Mindset All counters have been adequately addressed for this point in other points. The net effect would not be beneficial, rather, destructive to students. VI. Teacher Instruction As I clearly showed in the earlier round, this is merely an assertion. From personal experience, I know that even though I self-studied for much of my high-school equivalent syllabus, I still outperform the average high-schooler who have the “advantage” of live teachers. This also is an assertion, but is one that at least is backed by my own experience. Iron only sharpens iron if both iron are as hard as each other. Have you seen katanas cut through long swords? Conclusion So it can be clearly seen that teacher instruction is not a requirement for memory retention, mindsets are the result of nurture, which is impossible to implement for varied reasons I mentioned above, the cost of health for teachers would be catastrophic, unless one increases drastically the number of teachers. Life and memory retention would not benefit from this change in school schedule. In regards to voting, note everything Logic has said. With that, I would like to thank Logic for a thought-provoking debate. I have certainly learned not a few things.

Keep in mind I cannot respond to any of Con's dropped contentions.Point 1My opponent seemingly defeats his own argument. In the last round he said exactly this: "Here is a remind of my counter plan: Homework should be given in moderate quantity (in short).This is about homework QUANTITY (ie. how much homework is given) NOT homework QUALITY (ie. how beneficial it is)."And yet when explaining why my sources are allegedly irrelevant, he says:"She falsely states that I must prove that homework assigned then vs. now is different in quantity... All I need to do is show that the systems of education have changed since then because that affects everything. If homework is different in regards to difficulty (for example), then higher quantity is not as necessary if it’s harder." In the first statement he says that he is arguing QUANTITY is what matters in assessing homework. And then in the second statement he says DIFFICULTY is what's relevant and quantity isn't relevant at all. I'm sure I am not the only one confused by Con's statements, and once again, I will not have the opportunity to respond.To repeat my position, students have had roughly the same amount of HW quantity over the last 30 years. Con does not deny this - nor has Con proven that a DIFFERENCE in education standards over the last 30 years means a difference one way or the other (easier or harder) let alone a difference in the quality of HW assignments. Moreover, I argued that Con had not proven that his studies account for more of the population than the ones I have presented. If he cannot, then we have no reason whatsoever to believe that the pro-HW studies he cites (noting that quantity of homework is most important -- which I've argued against) are any more valid. He dropped this contention and has not proven that his studies represent a larger sample size.I pointed out that my study examined data of more than 18,000 students to uncover explanations for academic performance. Con suggests we have to use the entire world population of children as a measure which is absurd. Out of 1.9 billion children, 1 billion of them live in destitute poverty [1]. These children, especially in the third world, can't even eat or drink and millions die from starvation daily -- yet Con suggests we should factor them into the population of students who benefit from homework, when they have never seen a school in their life. That is an abusive standard no judge would take seriously. Quite obviously we are discussing homework in the West (especially the U.S.) where public education and the subsequent standards is the norm. Thus 18K is a good sample size for research. Con has not even tried to present us with an estimate of the number of students his cited studies cover, let alone present research that accounts for a larger size. Some studies in his favor have "hundreds" yet I invite Con to prove his studies are more relevant in size, date and scope [2, 3]. One study in his favor had a sample size of around 1,300 students -- or about 1/18th of the population my sources covered. In short, Con has dug himself a hole in trying to attack the credibility of my sources and studies; he has not proven his are any more valid. In the last round I decided to move on from this and noted it would appear SOME cases show that homework could be beneficial (accounting for a lot of different variables). Of course, that is completely irrelevant to the rest of my argument. I've pointed out that not everything that is beneficial ought to be required as well as suggested the potential negatives of HW outweigh the potential positives. Indeed that is the crux of my position in this debate. 1A. I pointed out that even if HW can sometimes be beneficial, Con is only saying that *beneficial* homework be required - not all homework. Yet he cannot ensure the HW assigned will be beneficial. He responded with accusations of straw mans when in fact he fails to see the absurdity of this objection. If Con is not saying that only BENEFICIAL homework be required, then he is advocating that even NON-beneficial homework be required. Why would Con advocate non-beneficial homework?! That would be punishment with no substance or positive effect. Therefore it is only logical to assume Con is only advocating BENEFICIAL homework. If he would like to challenge this, I guess he can...1B. It would appear Con does want to challenge this lol. He writes, "Again, this seems to be a misinterpretation of the counter plan. I never mentioned that it had to be beneficial, nor did I say that beneficial things have to be mandatory." So here we can see that Con even supports HW that is not beneficial, meaning he has no good reason (positive benefits) to support HW at all. And furthermore, Con skirts 1B as if it is a meaningless statement when in fact it is the entire basis of my argument. Please extend all of my 1B points -- I pointed out why not all things that are beneficial should be required. Ergo, even if homework were beneficial, it need not be mandatory. Con thinks HW (despite being so problematic) should just be imposed whether it has benefits or not, which is an even more ridiculous position than I think anyone expected him to take. Point 2Con accuses me of not refuting the counter plan which is false. His counter plan is simply "less homework" which I have argued, especially in Point 2. "Con argues that by reducing HW time, the problems of HW won't exist. But while they might be less significant, they would still exist. Even 1 hour of HW per night interferes with 1 hour of family or recreational time. Furthermore, Con cannot prove that all students spend the same amount of time on homework..." which proves I did address his counter plan of less HW time. My opponent says that it's okay for students to spend different amounts of time on HW, which fails to address my point on an undue burden for slow learners or those who take longer to do assignments. This means additional stress and imposition for those students on recreational and rest time, which Con glosses over as being addressed by special classes/assignments but this cannot be proven or enforced. Even students in special classes learn at a different pace from each other. Con asked for sources proving that parents do their kid's homework. I presented the studies; Con dropped this point and said "Well kids should be doing it themselves." Sure, but extend my argument that they are often NOT doing it themselves based on my statistics. Con must concede this point; instead he suggests this simply doesn't matter. Obviously when parents do their kid's assignments, it places burden on the parents and provides no utility to the child while still creating work for teachers. Once again - whereas some parents have the time and resources to dedicate to HW monitoring and assistance, other parents do not have the opportunity to be as involved. Thus a shoddy HW response might reflect poorly on the child unfairly. Many students (especially in low-income areas) specifically have a hard time completing their assignments.In response, Con says "since there will be a lower homework quantity, this means that these people will not be overwhelmed with homework" which clearly doesn't address my points at all regarding lack of resources, not just time. Con also says that the states account for financial factors in HW assignments and cited this source from the UK -- yet not a single line from that source said anything about poverty affecting assigned work or HW. I invite my opponent to copy and paste the line from that source which proves his point here [4]. I have no reason to accept it thus far. And besides, people within the same school can still come from vastly different financial backgrounds. Con states, "If [students] do not understand [HW] and get all of the questions wrong (for example), then it is the teacher’s duty to correct the student and explain the homework to them." However teachers do not give students more help if they have trouble with homework - a factor cited in Con's previous source from the CPE [5]. Con dropped that even when good HW is assigned, it is the student's approach that is critical. However teachers cannot monitor or control how students approach their HW. Con also dropped that his citations don't account for today's HW distractions. Research shows that students today are not grasping as much of the homework material even when they complete it, because they are distracted by social media and don't retain the information.Point 3Con says "She makes a an argument riddled with fallacies. She claims that homework cuts into time for anything." That is not fallacious but a logical fact. If you spend time on X (homework) you cannot spend time on Y (anything else) that requires significant attention. That's called the law of non-contradiction. Just because school provides some activities doesn't mean it provides the same activities or amount of time/attention on those activities as parents or kids would like. Con notes that school, work, etc. cut into people's time and yet I am not advocating those be abolished. I explained how homework provides a "second shift" of work that kids should not have to face. Please extend my arguments on parents not being subjected to this burden and having options here; Con dropped it and I will not be able to respond.Point 4Con says that HW "counts for nothing" yet HW is often graded. Con says I have provided "no evidence" of cheating. See explanations regarding points 12-15 in the last round. He only contested 1 of those sources. One is a forum - the rest are academic - and he ignores that parents doing HW is cheating which he admits happens. He dropped every one of my arguments on copying and using the internet to cheat as well. Con also dropped the negative effects of HW's "drill and kill" methodolgy and its impact on learning. PLEASE EXTEND MY LAST ROUND'S CONCLUSION.Thanks!SOURCES: http://www.debate.org...

In a nutshell, does homework take away from your free time? Does it get in the way of being home? Should homework be eliminated so that home and school is separated? Definitions: Homework - Work to be specifically done at home, does not include projects / work that was not finished in class Interrupt - Disrupt / Take a substantial portion of time away from Home Life - Time spent not in school, "free time"

First thing that I saw that you gave references at the end of the post, I thought that the argument is going to be tough. But then I saw how the research that you posted mostly regard a marginal point which is not that valid to this discussion. However, I studied A-Level psychology so I can address that point. Google search, like any other information data storage, if it is computerized or not. Is beneficial. People use google for all kind of of uses, if it is for choosing what movie to see, how to reach a place or what to buy. Why would you want to store that information in the long term memory. Even if you are a programmer or do software/hardware related work, you need google to refer to documentations and manuals. Everything is stored in the short term memory, for long enough to have the task done. The only main thing that needs to be stored in your long term memory is language. And you practice it a lot regardless if you use a computer or not. Regardless of the debate, schools arent mostly about storing as much information as possible in the long term. You can test yourself. Take a pen and paper and write everything that you remember from secondary school. You would hardly reach 1% of the material in the syllabus that was taught. With computerized technology all your notes wont be lost, they will be in some server on some cloud, so you would be able to refer to them. You might also be able to drill the material after you finish school with the apps that you had on your ipad. 1. What?!?! you can reply the lecture again. Universities such as Stanford and MIT already exploit that way of learning. In the traditional way if you lost focus during the lecture, you are screwed, because you cant replay the session. 2.ha! I do remember learning about context dependent learning in psychology. The point is so weak. You can print the paper from its digital version if you wish, and it would give you the memory effect that you are after. Again that technology is already applied in universities, and it was applied at the university that I was at. 3. What do you mean it is not their right??!? all a student has to do, is reach the school, or classroom, and open the app and press on a button. The app would trace his location. The teacher can then open his app and confirm the attendance. I used apps like that when I was at work. It is just a better technology to track the student attending lessons and then create graphs, histograms and make other statistical representations which could be then presented to the school senior staff in a form of a power point presentation. 4. Virtual learning is being deployed on many sites today. Linda.com, Khan academy and Coursers. Entrepreneurs, learners and even professors believe in it, because they all participate in those programs. Apart from replaying all or any lessons again, you could prevent courses that were badly instructed by some teachers and receive community support from people all over the world. The only problem is that for you to be examined you need to be physically present. 5. Apps accelerate learning. There are many apps there that have got different drills and progress tracking features. If you learn networking, then there are many networking apps such as CCNA and Network+ apps with tests and quizzes. They dont do any harm, but assist you in learning. You could avoid using them anyway if you wish. 6. 7. It may only lower learning on specific classes such as classes that require lab work or special equipment. There is no need for you to spend money on a class that you could watch online. A school is like a business, it has to create a model that works. It needs to hire lecturers for a specific period of time and rent a place for them. All that increases your costs significantly. A degree from a top university costs around quarter of million dollars today. And it doesnt include the cost of accommodation and other fees. A degree can be much cheaper and consist a few thousands of students each semester, and not a few tens each semester. 8. Lol, since when do you get extra help at school? Do you mean an extra hour or two with the teacher? dont you think it would cost you more money? why not to have an online community that helps you for free and without attending some extra class in some place. I remember having paid for extra classes during the holiday in my school.. That was so expensive! I wish I just could go online, and search for definitions and learn maths from the internet. I can go and learn calculus right now, and learn it well.. with all the material that is there. The only issue that people have with that kind of learning is that they are afraid they wont have the discipline to do so.

I see your point that many children wouldn't be able to manage their time well enough. However, it can be only a case to few of them. That means it is not an obvious fact that a lot of children are not responsible for managing time. Even though that problem is considered seriously, there are a lot of benefits other than that. By using electronic devices, children do not have to carry their heavy books to every class. It is pretty hard for them to carry their books home whenever there is homework. However, with the electronic books, they do not have to do that. It gives them a total convenience. Also, children can get extra lessons through electronic devices. For the most representative example, there is computer. A lot of educational websites are already helping children to study, but there has been something newly popular recently. It is called "Online lectures", and is gaining a lot of support from students all over the world. They offer many subjects that not only what we learn at school but also other subjects that we don't even have at school. Children can try other practical subjects that they have wanted to try before, or they also can get extra help from the lecturers if they didn't understand the class enough at school. Of course they can contact with their own teachers whenever they have questions through email, if they didn't get enough answer, internet lecture can be a great help.

I remember homework (vaguely). Yuck! I wouldn't want to take unfair advantage. Post your next argument when you are able, there are plenty of rounds left :)

Rebuttal 1: Some chores are also outside. Mowing, weed whacking, and clipping the bushes are just a few examples. These you wouldn't let a child do, especially by themselves. Many a parent will tell their kid to go out and rake or do some other physical chore while they sit down and watch a movie or play on their computer. The kid, especially if their small, are doing something that they may not have the physical capability of, but they have to do it anyway. The parent should be out there helping them. One shouldn't tell their kid to go out to do something and not help them. Argument 1: Grades can be affected by chores as well. If a child is expected to go clean their room, or even the yard. Depending on how messy it is, it could take away all their time to do homework. Children are encouraged to take at least 1-2 hours out of their day to homework. But if they are told to do a chore that could take a long time, they lose that opportunity. Then they're getting in trouble at school for not doing their homework and at home for not getting good grades. So who's the one that's supposed to be taking the heat (the blame/ chewing)? Rebuttal 2: Some parents will force their kids to clean their room everyday, even if it's already clean. My opponent says that some kids willingly clean their rooms to make their parents happy, but would a kid willingly clean a clean room? To add to that, some parents are bad enough to go and wreck their rooms while they're at school, just so the kid can clean. This doesn't seem humane to me. Rebuttal 3: Though I agree with my opponent somewhat. Some parents give their children treats for doing their chores. For instance, T.V. time, playing with friends, but the majority of parents don't really care, as long as they don't have to do the work. My parents for instance, feel that children were put on this world to do the work that the parents don't want to do. This is a little humane, but it's still a little bad.


Question: Is Assigning Homework Advantageous?

Homework should not be mandatory for students.

Thank you for your input, Danielle! In your argument, you mentioned that I failed to explain the relevance of the date in relation to the studies I cited. However, I did provide an explanation and sourced my claim that the education system has changed since the publication of those studies. I also highlighted the inaccuracy of the studies due to the fact that they only accounted for a minuscule percentage of children. You dropped this point and instead claimed that I failed to explain the relevance of the date to your contentions. However, as we can see, this is not true. You made a mathematical error in the dates, stating that my sources were from 8-20 years ago. In fact, they are from 8-26 years ago, and I clearly sourced the claim that education and homework have significantly changed in the last three decades. You dropped this point as well.

You falsely stated that I must prove that homework assigned then vs. now is different in quantity. This is incorrect. All I need to show is that the systems of education have changed since then because that affects everything. If homework is different in regards to difficulty, then higher quantity is not as necessary if it's harder. If it's easier, then the opposite is applicable. So the fact that the system of education was different then is a valid reason to consider your sources (at the least, the ones from 20+ years ago); the differences are too large to compare to the present. The fact that my sources are outdated is irrelevant as my intentions and uses of them are different. If I was using those sources for statistical evidence or about the education system (which you do), then outdated sources are unacceptable. If I'm using them for more generic purposes (which I am), then the date is not applicable as it does not affect my point.

You cited some con homework information in my source. I am aware that there is information in my source that I disagree with. I was using that source to reinforce a point that I agreed with in the source. I agree with some of the claims made, however, I disagree with the source's impact analysis and conclusion of information. Debaters are not expected to agree with everything said in every one of their sources. They are expected to agree with the statement that they are using the source to reinforce.

[Counterplan] 1A. This is false. I never said that only beneficial homework is allowed. This would be ideal but not once in my counter

People, especially high school students, spend countless hours typing up an essay or finishing that last assignment at 12 or 1 in the morning. If people did not have homework they would be able to sleep earlier instead of spending their nights doing homework. You also have the students who rush to get it done and dont care. What is the point of having homework if one person does it and it gets passed around the lockerroom.

All right, For this (sort of) single round debate I'll be playing the Devil's avocate and debate that homework should be banned. There will be no rebuttals since my opponent cannot answer my case. I wish my opponent good luck and happy debating.you may set forth your arguments.

Thanks for the debate, massvideogamer. Best of luck! The education system in the USA is actually very laid back compared to the rest of the world to the point that it's laughed at by many for its ridiculousness. I could write an eighteen-page report in a single night when I was in eighth grade, so I am not sure what your point is here. You obviously are not working like crazy, as you state, if you have time to initiate and engage in three debates on this site. I am more inclined to believe that you and your classmates are lazy and poor at managing your time. In fact, I get the impression that you want someone to do it for you. It's a common trait in many of today's youth. You have such a sense of entitlement, but you haven't earned such. STOP DEBATING AND DO YOUR REPORT FIRST!

I think we should change the amount of homework kids have. I think that kids do have too much homework today. Kids have a lot more then adults today ever have. If you are a parent time how long it takes your child to do it you will be surprised. It has been found that kids do more homework then kids ever had. It has also been found that little is learned from homework that the lessons you need to be taught can not be taught inside of a classroom they mus be experienced.

Thanks Danielle! Observations OBV1: My opponent is affirming a change in the status quo meaning that my role is to defend the status quo. My opponent’s burden in this debate is to show why the status quo should be changed and as a result of this they hold the burden of proof. Since my opponent holds the burden of proof here, I will not be providing a constructive case. I will merely be refuting my opponent’s case. OBV2: Voters ought to vote pro if, by the end of the debate, they found Pro’s case more convincing than mine. Voters ought to vote Con if, by the end of the debate, I have managed to refute my opponent’s arguments (and therefore proven that the status quo is better than my opponent’s proposed change). Counterplan I will be producing a counterplan upon the resolution. This counterplan will allow me to advance my burden and win the debate but by making a minor alteration to the status quo (and therefore giving me a small share of the BOP to defend it). The Center for Public Education (CPE) produced a balanced report showing both sides to the debate on the necessity of homework. The conclusion that they made was that homework can be bad and get rid of children’s motivation when it is given in high quantity. Homework in moderate quantity produces better effects. With this information being considered, I present the following syllogism: P1: Too much homework is negative. P2: Homework in moderate quantity is positive. C1: Homework should be given in moderate quantity. This simple counterplan advances my burden and also improves the system of homework since it negates the arguments regarding stress, loss of motivation, etc. [Rebuttals] Point 1 My opponent’s report collected data from 14 - 26 years ago [3]. The system of education in all countries has changed since then [2]. As well as the data being largely outdated it is also very limited, in that it only analyzed 0.00000947368% of children [3][4]. This is extremely low and cannot sufficiently prove that homework is a net detriment when 99.99999163742% of the children are excluded from this study. Furthermore, even the article my opponent cites claims that this isn’t a reason to abolish homework - it is merely a reason to change the system [3]. The entire article that my opponent cites next (regarding TIMSS) is contingent on there being heavy homework loads. My counterplan explicitly deals with this issue. In fact the very study my opponent cites states directly after it speaks out the claim that my opponent uses: “The TIMSS can’t be used to determine if homework is actually helping or hurting academic performance overall. But it can help us see how much homework students are doing, and what conditions are associated with higher national levels of homework.” [5] This conclusively proves that the issue here comes down to homework quantity which is something that is negated already. Point 2 Next my opponent attempts to show that homework places a burden on parents. My opponent fails to explain the impact of this argument which is why it breaks down easily. She states that parents have rebelled and that some parents have gone to court and won. I am confused as to how this advances her burden in this debate. I could easily cite people going to court as proponents of homework and winning. I could easily also show that people have protested as proponents of homework too. It’s a controversial issue - of course there will be people for and against it. That doesn’t contribute or advance your burden in any way. One example is where a boy and his classmates demanded more homework and the parents agreed [6]. This protest negates my opponent’s since this is all they cite to attempt to affirm this point. My opponent’s next paragraph of point 2 is once again contingent on quantity. Homework can cut into family time but given that my counterplan specifically reduces the issue of homework in large quantity this point is negated. The same response can be made for the next point regarding the Stanford researcher’s findings. The next sub point regarding the “one mother” is extremely minor and is once again refuted by the counterplan. Additionally, only 10% of parents find that their child receives too much homework (on a national level); 64% find that their children’s homework is “about the right amount” and 25% believed that their child was not receiving enough homework [7]. This ultimately means that this one scenario that my opponent cites is in the minority and this will be solved under my counterplan regardless. The next reason is precisely why I am introducing the counterplan. I am aware that people may not have the time to dedicate to producing excellent quality homework which is why I introduced the counterplan which (again) refutes the point. My opponent makes the unsourced claim that most of the time parents need to help out their children with homework. I will not be addressing the bare assertion here. If / when my opponent chooses to source this claim I will respond to it. Lastly my opponent claims that it adds an extra burden on to teachers. The fact of the matter is that teachers are paid to mark homework (as well as fulfill their other duties). If homework were to be removed the salaries of teachers would also decline. It is part of the responsibility of a teacher and it is a burden that they accept and are made aware of when they apply for the job. [8] Point 3 My counterplan partially addresses the point regarding too much time being spent however I will expand upon another point I wish to make. My opponent raises the (unsourced) objection of children losing time for activities and rest. Sutton Trust Research concluded that 76% of children of all backgrounds do a range of out of school activities [9]. This shows that an overwhelming majority of people manage to do homework alongside creative and physical activities (and this statistic only refers to out of school activities). Next my opponent talks about a hateful relationship regarding learning being an issue. This article specifically references to the quantity (which my counterplan addresses). In the conclusion it even recommends that homework should be given in smaller quantities as this is ideal and will help them to learn and to have time to do activities that will help to benefit them [10]. My opponent also lists many things that are beneficial such as sports, artwork and playtime. All 3 of these things are taught / applied at most schools [11]. With this information alongside the statistic that 76% of children participate in out of school activities this point is successfully refuted. Point 4 Again, the review my opponent cites in an attempt to prove that homework results in the loss of sleep, self esteem and childhood is refuted by the counterplan as it once again references to excessive homework and homework taking up valuable time from children. Voters should NOT buy my opponent’s claim that it encourages cheating and creates a gap between the intelligent and academically struggling because this is once again bare assertion on my opponent’s behalf. Afterwards, my opponent quotes Alfie Kohn in an attempt to show that there is a better alternative to homework. The problem is that the proposed change can be done within the status quo, thus making it unnecessary to ban homework. Involving students in decisions about assignments can be done within school and then the assignment can be set once those decisions have been made - this can and does happen [12]. In the final paragraph my opponent quasi-concedes. She says: “As such, we can improve the status quo by asking students the best way to reinforce what they have learned in class. While this might include some work from home, it probably won't look like the standard version of homework that is uniform, repetitive and monotonous.” She says that the improvement might involve some work from home. My opponent attempts to distinguish this from homework by saying that homework is uniform, repetitive and monotonous whereas her work from home idea will not be. The fact is that homework is simply defined as: “schoolwork that a pupil is required to do at home.” [13]. Meaning that my opponent’s proposition falls under the definition of homework and is therefore, in essence, a concession. To conclude, my opponent is unable to provide any good reason as to why homework should be banned. At best she manages to show that homework (at its current state) can be slightly excessive and can take away time from students. My counterplan addresses this and even if it didn’t, this isn’t a valid reason to ban homework, as this issue can be resolved within the status quo. On multiple occasions she fails to provide the impact of her contentions. I have successfully refuted my opponent’s points and shown why homework should not remain as a part of the status quo. The resolution is negated. Sources [1] http://www.centerforpubliceducation.org... [2] https://www.oecd.org... [3] http://research.indiana.edu... [4] http://www.gapminder.org... [5] https://www.washingtonpost.com... [6] http://www.express.co.uk... [7] http://www.encyclopedia.com... [8] https://www.prospects.ac.uk... [9] https://societycentral.ac.uk... [10] http://www.salon.com... [11] http://www.bbc.co.uk... [12] http://www2.ed.gov... [13] http://tinyurl.com...

I remember homework (vaguely). Yuck! I wouldn't want to take unfair advantage. Post your next argument when you are able, there are plenty of rounds left :)

First off I'd like to say, thank you for debating with me. I have enjoyed our discussion. Here is part of a paper I wrote on the mental health of students. This paragraph pertains to how stress impacts mental health: The byproducts of these hormones are said to have the ability to act as sedatives. When large amounts of stress hormones are released it can contribute to low energy or depression. It"s normal to experience highs and lows from day to day, but an extensive release of byproducts from stress can cause people to be down in the dumps for long periods of time and develop what is known as Major Depression. According to Mills, Reiss and Dombeck, "Symptoms of Major Depression may include: sleep problems; fatigue; appetite changes; feelings of worthlessness, self-hate, and guilt; an inability to concentrate or make decisions; agitation, restlessness, and irritability; withdrawal from typical pleasurable activities; and feelings of hopelessness and helplessness." In a research study focusing on the coping mechanisms among students conducted by Deasy et al. states, "coping is defined as cognitive and emotional attempts to deal with the internal or external demands of the encountered situation. It is perceived as a process as opposed to a trait or outcome ". The results of this study showed three prevalent methods that students used to cope with psychological distress: escape/avoidance, support and taking control. The most frequent of these methods was the escaping and avoidance method. This included substance abuse, oversleeping, eating disorders and other detrimental habits. (http://journals.plos.org... http://mhn.centersite.org...) To me creating means that it is the sole perpetrator of anxiety and depression. I am stating that it is a contributor due to the stress that homework and tests can place on students. I am also stating that school is not the only reason why people have anxiety and depression. However, my claim is that the American education system increases stress, therefore, increasing the likelihood for depression and anxiety. Here is another article stating the influence on how tests can take a toll on students. http://brainconnection.brainhq.com... I will have to agree with you on the idea that teaching kids about coping mechanisms and how to deal with mental illnesses should not fall completely on the school. However, most parents don't have the right knowledge and resources to help their kids either. Part of the teaching that I believe schools should offer is helping the students recognize patterns of depression and anxiety so they can get the help they need whether it be from the school or from an outside source. I also think another part of the issue is the stigma place on mental illnesses. This article : http://www.newsweek.com... talks about how college specifically have a negative view on mental health. It talks about how some students who went to seek help ended up getting kicked out of college. This then caused students to be afraid of what might happen and therefore not going and seeking help when needed. You talk about how it is mostly home life that is causing mental illnesses. From that point of view I could see how you could come to the conclusion that its not the school's responsibility to provide the resources to help deal with these mental illnesses. So I must ask then, would you say that the school then have no effect on a students mental health? I would say by nature, because students spend an average of 7 hours a day at school during the school year, it must have some effect on the student. I also feel as if you are taking an all or nothing approach. Are you stating that the only way that our American education system can negatively impact students is if it is the only contributor? Say everyone is working on a group project, and five people work on it and get an A. From what I am getting from your statement " if it isn't only the tests and homework that is causing these issues, then the school is not pushing these students to have these mental illnesses." I would assume with the same logic, you'd be saying only one of the students ("home life') got the A on the project and the other student ("the American education system") did not contribute at all to get the A even though every student worked on it collectively. The impact that the American education system has on students is one a piece of what influences a students mental health. There are many others such as home life as you mentioned and social life. It is that the American education system has a negative impact because of the high levels of stress it places on the students with tests and excessive homework amounts (not the only contributors to stress just 2 of the examples I used). If we were to argue that the American education system is the only factor that impacts students health then I could agree with you that it is not the system at totally at fault. I believe it does play a part of it though.

2. YOU NEED TO LEARN.Homework is to make sure that you know what you need to know to succsed. If no work was given then many people will have a decreased amount of educational skills. Bringng fourth a brand new breed of idiots. Increased homeless rates and a very very slow advancemnt in scientific learning.

Hi. This is a 3-round, 72 hour, 10,000 word limit polite conversation whether homeschooling is beneficial or not. If you believe homeschooling is detrimental, then I want to hear why. If you've been around enough, you know how this goes. For the new guys, welcome, and the pattern is traditionally "The first round is the challenge and acceptance, the second round consists of the main arguments, and everything else after that is rebuttals." This is my observation from this very site. If it is done differently for anyone else here, no problem.

Extend my entire case to this round. To add, another way in which computers can be beneficial to education is the fact that one can register for college classes or particular colleges which they wish to attend. Once more, an advantage which a book doesn't even come close to reproducing.