Question: Is Assigning Homework Advantageous?

Students ought to be assigned homework.

Research indicates that homework can enhance test scores, provided it is not excessive. Without homework, there is a lack of additional practice for students. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com...) While it might not necessarily alleviate a significant amount of teacher complaints, educators would likely prefer to endure complaints over witnessing poor academic performance. Low grades not only negatively impact the student but also reflect poorly on the teacher's effectiveness.

Thank you. Nice to be debating you too! Opening Arguments Only!!!!! Whether you home school your kids or put them in a government provided (public) school is an option you as a parent may decide as one of our precious freedoms that we as Americans have. How do you decide on which environment is better for your children to grow up in? Here are some interesting facts I have found when researching home school.•Children who are home schooled "... may be more socially mature and have better leadership skills than other children ..." - Richard G. Medlin, Ph.D. (NHERI)•Recent studies demonstrate that 98% of home taught children are involved in two or more social/community beyond the home each week, including such things as 4-H, Bible Clubs, Scouts, Ballet Classes, Music Lessons, Sports, Field Trips and Sunday School.•The Galloway-Sutton Study, which examines five success indicators, showed home schooled children (with the exception of the psychomotor) excelling above other students in the academic, cognitive, spiritual and affective-social categories.•On average, home school students, grades 1–4, perform one grade level above their public and private school counterparts. The achievement gap grows in grade 5; by 8th grade the average home school student performs four grades higher than the national average. (SADC)•Students who have been home schooled their entire academic lives have the highest scholastic achievement. The difference is more pronounced during the higher grades; students who home school throughout high school continue to flourish while in that environment. (SADC)•Kate Grossman, Chicago Sun-Times reported noted, "The number of homeschoolers receiving National Merit Scholarships has increased more than 500 percent: from 21 in 1995 to 129 in 2003." (HSLDA)Not only does home school help a child succeed socially and academically but it also provides them with a secure stable educational environment and does not force them to face peer pressure, sex, drugs, bullies, and all other immoral things the secular world has to often. Although they may face it in the future, It is proved that if faced with these these things while the child is still ageing, they are almost 6 times as likely to give in as if they were faced with it as an adult.Home school gives parents more say in how their children grow up, and what kinds of things they are exposed to. It also gives more Religious Freedom. Many families feel their religious and spiritual beliefs are an important part of who they are. Home schooling provides the opportunity for parents to incorporate their beliefs into their daily lives.Well-Rested Kids. As more and more studies are illustrating, sleep is vital to the emotional and physical well-being of kids, especially teens and preteens. The effects of early morning classes can be devastating to many children, especially those who are not morning people. After realizing that lack of sleep and hours of busywork often left her boy in a zombie-like stupor, Haya has decided to try home schooling: "My oldest (age 13), is up at 6:30 in order to catch the bus at 7:15 and start school at 7:30. He comes home at 3:00 and does homework — sometimes until midnight. He's often exhausted. I'm hoping that when we home school next year, the dark circles under his eyes will disappear and his real personality will emerge again."This also provides parents with a better schedule as they don't have to work around the public school schedule and are free to go on vacation or go to public places during the week where otherwise it would be prohibited or discouraged.Hopefully, in my argument I have disproved the false theories that home schooled children lack academic and social skills and home schooling is far fetched for the average family.I am interested in Cons point of view. Remember this round is only for opening arguments. You may rebuttal in the next round. Thank You!!!!

Ya know, if you wanted help with homework, you could AT LEAST have gone through the courtesy of putting forth an attempt to debate me in exchange.

First of all, I want you to know that I have been stating various kinds of advantages that the internet has, but you oppose it with only few facts and statements. I do not think you simply understand the topic of this argument, or you do not know how the internet teaches children. There are more reliable sites than you know. Over 100 countries have used the online course called Udemy and Udacity that makes students able to get their degree online without actually going to a university. Internet is developing more ways to teach students in a more effective way and some online sites are already developing an online university, And ask yourself this, if you could not understand something, did you ever go to Youtube and search it? Everyone once learned various types of things in Youtube. There are online professors who teaches you like any teachers, so you can always ask a person than asking to Google. As for your cyber bullying note, students who goes to school also gets cyber bullied and plus bullied again in school. No matter you get education from school or internet it does not change the fact cyber bullying exists. It will also be there, so the fact you stated about Cyber bullying was not a good point to go against internet education. You said no amount of technology is going to make algebra interesting, but actually you can make education interesting through the internet. Through games, competition, awards, etc. You can motivate a child to become eager to learn when they are young. Everyone knows wikipedia is written by anyone so we do not visit that site often. You said how many times you have typed "lol or "haha" without even feeling your face twitch, but I ask you how many times have you laughed watching a video? Just how many possibilities you can do through the internet, imagine. You asked how are we to learn basics, such as language, reading, writing, and use grammar? Once again by reading this I do not think you understand the topic of this argument. How many classes are there in the internet? How many teachers you can ask by video chatting. And how to write? Just get a pen and a notebook and write down what you are learning in the internet. When you are very young and do not know how to write, you can just look at a video or surely I know you learned some basic writings from your parents. You did not go against all of my statements in the previous arguments, why is that? Did you not read carefully or you can not go against some of the facts? I will answer your closing questions. I do not believe that schools force students to comb through countless books and libraries to gather info because, it is up to the students to decide if they want to learn what they learn in schools, most of them simply do not care, sometimes they even get picked on teachers. Teachers were once students remember that. I do not understand why you asked the question, "Do you truly believe that schools have failed to recognise what a great tool the internet is, when even small children understand it's value?" You even misspelled the word recognize, you see how the internet can simply detect the misspelled word but when you write, you can not? I can tell you are carelessly writing this argument without going over the grammar mistakes and spelling punctuation. Next question, I believe that young children will decide of their own free will to learn the basic mathematics and other subjects because it is so easy and simple. Once screen you are looking at and who can not handle that? It is sitting their and understanding the video in front of you while someone else older can just turn on a online course. You start school in either K4 or K5, but before that you get education from either your parents or videos. Children will still go outside after learning the great establishment of the internet even when addicted to online gaming and the internet because a person knows what is right and what is wrong. They have common sense, if they feel like they are overdoing something, they will stop. A person will eventually get tired of a game they do not do it for the rest of their lives. I have stated more facts and advantages about the internet and went against your statements.

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...

you have my congrats. Your thick skull got the message to your new brain. Your now evolved! You fool, the give us homework to go and see if we know what we learned. longer hours still means homework you idiot. the less school we have, the harder it'll be to fit in homework in the puzzle, since we would have instead of around 7-8 hours, we'll have around 4-5 hours a day. Try doing an entire 4 lessons of physics in around 30 minutes! not possible. No long periods, no hour long lunches (trust me, they are quite dull. they make me want to do more physics) and no wasting mornings getting stressed about a huge math test, or getting bored to death from lectures (i had to tazer my friend awake) or even spending time in trouble. Less school is less bullying, less wearing uniforms, and less, well, school. thus being said, i need to tell you 2 things. 1: i would like to friends with you, seeing of i find you able to be up to my level of mind, and 2: i have a Halo marathon to go to, have a nice day :0

I agree mostly with what my opponent says in his first paragragh OUTSIDE of a school environment. You need to encode the information into long term memory because they won't let you make a google search on your exams. My opponent argues that you can store information in the digital realm so you can access it after your time in school is over. If your incredibly concerned with being able to have access to your 10th grade history class twenty years down the line then this argument is completely valid. However, most people are more concerned with getting high marks on their exams which requires mnemonic encoding. 1. if you lose focus on the lecture and you find yourself without an answer, chances are your class has assigned homework. if you find yourself without an answer on the homework you can look up the answer and incorporate it into the notes thus facilitating encoding. 2. yes, you can print the paper but if you learned it on the computer attempting to encode it on paper will still be more difficult. And I'm not saying that computerized learning has no meritorious traits. Simply that there needs to be a balance to ensure the most efficient learning. 3. It's not the right of the university to track the movements of its students. it's invasive. At work you can sign a contract. I wouldn't want my workplace to track my location either. This point is one of the smaller ones in both of our cases. 4. I believe these websites are great tools to facilitate learning as a supplement to what was taught in a lecture. to enforce this method of learning upon all students when many learn best from face to face instruction would defeat the purpose of these learning supplements. 5 again. these apps could be used as a supplement to learning and could be used to drill information that has already been encoded to increase the ease of access by drilling synaptic pathways. 6.7. Again, since you won't have access to google on the exam you will need the information encoded into long term memory as a result face to face communication is the best known methodology for facilitating encoding. What's actually driving up tuition are the redundant administrative positions that are growing in number. not hiring professors. but that's a debate for another day. 8. I don't think we were on the same page for the first part of this. For getting help from the teacher I was referring more to High school. Tutors were more for college. Having an online community to help you would be beneficial as long as it was used as a supplement to what was taught in the lecture. Information must first be encoded into long term memory in the lecture, then it may be supplemented with whatever means work best for you.

Hi. Refutation: Contention 1: Price Sure, if you have evidence to back up your claim that homeschooling children perform better, I agree. However, what happens in high school? Does the parents continue to teach, and if the child's intended major is not his parents, what will his parents do? In elementary school and maybe middle school, homeschooling is fairly easy as most people know how to teach 1 1=2 and all that good stuff. But in high school, as the intensity is higher, homeschooling becomes more as a hassle than a benefit, as parents may not know much of the high school curriculum. And what happens when the kid goes to college? It will be an entirely new experience as he will be socially awkward, and it is better to have training for that in middle school or high school. And please, I would like to say that the $10,000 is not entirely true, as donations etc. make up the bulk of it. Public school is free while in homeschool you have to pay money for supplies. In public school the material is funded by the gov. Therefore this contention is entirely refuted. Contention 2: More time to pursue interests This is a weak argument. Walking home takes only 5-20 minutes, and most of the time students get picked up. We cannot ignore all the benefits of normal school just because of the time it takes for a mere 20 minutes to walk back from school. I can turn this to my side too. As students will arrive 20 minutes later than homeschool, they will learn time management which can be a vital skill in college and the real world. While this may also be a weak argument, it does not matter as your contention is refuted already. Contention 3: No bullies This can be turned to my side of the argument. Bullies are GOOD. At least in school. Why? Because in the real world, there are tons of bullies like your manager or job interviewer. You just got to be prepared for them, and learning how to deal with them in school can prepare for the real bullies in life. It is the journey that counts and makes you stronger. This principle of having a weaker form of a bad thing to immunize the person from it can be demonstrated in vaccines. Therefore not only is this argument refuted, it is turned to my side of the debate now. Contention 4: Curriculum You talk about higher GPA. This is totally false as GPA is only in public schools, not home. Next, if the parent gets to choose the curriculum, then he will be biased, and make the curriculum based on their interests and what he wants his child to become, NOT his child's own interests. This breeds a weak child who struggles in his area because he does not like it, but is forced to do it. For example, a child is fascinated by science. However, his parents love math and computer engineering. They force their kid to learn computer engineering, which their child not only struggles with, but hate. This is a bad way of teaching. Therefore this argument is refuted. Contention 5: Attention This can also be applied to the real world. In the real world there are a lot of people who work with you and can "distract" you. Again, you just have to learn to deal with it. In homeschool, there is a bit too much attention, and can make the child self-centered and selfish. This will ultimately spoil the child. Therefore this contention is also refuted. Rebuttals: Contention 1: Social interaction Most friends stem from school. Parent's friend's children is more based on the parent, not on the child. The child may not have the same interests as his parent's friend's child. You say that children are not in the house 24/7 but this is a weak refutation. Even though children are not in the house 24/7, 1. other children who attend public school are at school, so therefore the homeschooled child is never in sync with public school students, therefore he cannot really meet and befriend other students, and 2. In public school, there is more social interaction than in homeschool, even when the child is in his free hours. Therefore this argument is won. Contention 2: Discipline However, in public school, there is a rigid discipline stronger than homeschool. In public school, this is the teacher's job, so she must get it right. Therefore they will work extremely hard, creating a well-rounded curriculum and schedule and having homework, and consequences such as calling parents. If children still disobey, they are brought to the principal, who will punish them. In homeschool, the schedule is very laid back, as they are in their own home, with their mom, so there wouldn't be a true schedule. They would just skip around as necessary and this is a bad teaching method. Homework would be classwork, and homework is more important as classwork as it strengthens responsibility. Therefore this argument is won. Contention 3: Preparation for the real world This is a weak refutation. In homeschool, you are isolated, while in public school you are with real people. Field trips wouldn't be the same without peers, as they are ultimately the competitors of the child when they grow up. Obviously, this is an illogical refutation so it should be disregarded.Therefore this argument is won. Contention 4: Tiring for the parent If the parent gives the older a task, the parent is not watching her, and she is at her home, and these two combined gives distraction. In public school, the teacher also does not watch you, but the student is not at home with all his toys and video games. Also, you keep on using your friend as a source and example. Your friend does not represent all the home-schooled kids. Therefore this contention is won. Contention 5: Schools have extracurricular activities and clubs Yes, they can do activities, but it is different as it is without peers, therefore without teamwork and cooperation. If they want to debate, then who to debate? Their siblings? Maybe, but that will get boring as they always have the same opponent. In school, you have teammates, and tournaments, and it is official. Doing something with peers have better life skill and normal skill development than with homeschool. Therefore this contention is won. Contention 6: Competition Graduation. Huh. What do you define graduation, as official (as with normal school) or just in name (with homeschool)? In homeschool, everything is laid back, and graduation at home is not the same at school, where it is much more competitive. Even if homeschooled kids have better scores and averages, they cannot improve, and cannot strive to compete as in the real world. Competition is ultimately more significant than with better scores temporarily, so this contention is won. Lastly I would like to add another contention. Contention 7: Bandwagon What bandwagon means it that since most kids (actually 90% ) go to public schools, kids at homeschool would want to go to public school too. They feel left out and different from the others and want to fit in. They would be more happy to be with their peers than with their little brother who is younger by 5 years and their mom. To clear this debate and organize it, voters, I will like to sum up the debate as of now. First, children like normal school, as stated in my 7th contention, parents like it, as stated in my 4th contention (they have less work), and therefore why not? Next, I would like to say that I have 7 contentions of my own that are still standing and 2 contention of my opponents's (contention 2 and 3) that I have turned to my side of the debate. That equals a total of 9 contentions, and since I refuted all my opponent's arguments, the contentions that we each have is 9:0. This is a huge difference and I have obviously won at this point. I still respect my opponent's new refutations and contentions, but I doubt (no offense) that they would be enough to win, as I have 9 contentions while my opponent has none. Vote Pro. Thank you all.

My thanks to Bull Diesel for his response. Before going to arguments I’d like to address questions regarding conduct. It is true that I said Con had not attacked my R2 arguments; a prompt for R3 counters, as well as reminding readers that the arguments existed; the attention span of readers can be short. And, it’s not like I didn’t mention the rules! To quote last round: “Granted, the rules themselves disallowed direct rebuttal (!), but it’s important to note these extensions – they are all important points. Con had best rebut them this round lest they be considered dropped by myself and readers.” That’s not unfair conduct. Nevertheless, the reader can decide on this issue. On logistics, if Con decides to attack on the grounds of time (extracurricular activities) then I can recourse to my model to refute such attacks. I do admit that I should have defined logistics, point conceded, but I don’t think my conduct merits the loss of the conduct point. I tried to pre-empt ideas like ‘the government would have to issue a new transport policy to deal with the increased strain during peak hour, which...’, essentially, implementation issues. Just the sort that result in the US using the imperial system of measurement. I digress. Let’s go to arguments. School Day Con doesn’t refute my points here. Last round I pointed out how the poisons less homework and less freetime can’t apply, giving extensive analysis as per my model; I showed how students got more free time assuming the same amount of homework given! Now, as to whether homework is terribly different from schoolwork, that’s a different matter [see below], but Con hasn’t differentiated between the 2 in terms of benefits. I have - I’ve talked about memory retention - the spacing effect, the encoding specificity principle as exemplified by state dependent and context dependent effects, teacher instruction etc. This is all improved by moving things into schooltime, as I’ve stressed this debate. The Merits of Homework Con says “It does not make sense for Pro to argue that we should reduce homework yet imply that homework can still be assigned as schoolwork. This is a waste of resources and is largely impractical.” That’s begging the question... it’s what this debate is about! In R2 Con laid out reasons why homework was beneficial. I countered by noting that homework put into schooltime (hence the longer day) still retained these benefits, while adding some – teacher instruction, stronger student-teacher bonds. I talked about how homework causes familial conflict, as supported by Peter Frost. Con has not discussed how the benefits of homework are greater than the benefits of this homework in school time as ‘schoolwork’ . I have, as aforementioned and detailed last round. Reduction in General Mischief Extended. A solid school environment reduces the disproportionately high amount of youth crime for the reasons discussed in R2, such as empirical evidence showing how governments reduce harmful drug use, with education being cited as one of the main factors for smoking’s decline being one. Refer to R2. Working Mindset / Lack of Agrarian Workfroce Currently Extended. The school day was made 9-3 because societies were agrarian. They are not agrarian currently. Furthermore, instilling the values of work is important. Why isn’t adult society 9-3? Why aren’t extracurricular activities a big part of work life? There are clear reasons, and preparing children for work life is a big part of education. Also, remember, Peter Frost talked about how homework caused familial discord. The proposal reduces this. Feasibility / Cost On this point Con has directly countered me. Let’s get to it. On cost, as said in R2 and uncountered, private tuition costs are debased, public transport is used more effectively and hence a reduction in the total number of buses and trains the government must actually provide. Also, critically, “parents can work for longer. There’s less concern for parents to be at home, supervising their children, if they can trust that their child is safe and productive at school, vs. potentially the converse at home.” – R2, parents working longer hours means more money for the family and a higher standard of living; Also, remember those disproportionately high crime statistics? Parental concern is alleviated by a secure school environment as discussed in R2. Onto Con’s rebuttals now. Remember the positive financial counterarguments mentioned above when weighing for impact. Teacher dissatisfaction due to an increased workload is rather unlikely as per Con’s logic on homework. The additional time doesn’t have to be purely instructional in nature – the teacher may assist students, mark schoolwork etc. It doesn’t have to be a lecture. In essence, teachers are simply marking the schoolwork that would have been assigned as homework at a different hour, and crucially, will take less time to mark at school. Why? Students memory is worse for reasons already discussed, and teacher instruction is missing. That means students will have more problems to discuss, meaning the teacher has to take more time in class addressing problems than would occur if the teacher could pre-emptively address student difficulties in the classroom, through instruction. A net save of time for the teacher, plus the students get better results. The teacher workload may actually be reduced here. On the matter of budget constraints and teachers poor pay, it certainly is an issue in some countries. In countries like Finland, renowned for it’s educational system teachers are paid quite well. In fact “Teaching is rated Finland's "most respected" profession, and primary school teaching its most sought-after career” - http://www.smh.com.au... Teachers pay in the US is fairly poor. See this graph: http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com... But it’s clear that many countries are capable of increasing their educational budgets or absorbing this cost. I’d like to think that it would be feasible to pay teachers more, although we’ve already discussed the minimal (if even existent) increase in workload above. Readers can decide on the feasibility given political circumstances on an international scale + the benefits mentioned in various other areas. And, for the strongest point in my case... Memory Retention There has been no refutation of the spacing effect, context dependent and state dependent memory effects and how school helps use these effects to increase memory retention. School timetabling forces the spacing effect to occur, vs. massed presentation in the home environment. Better memory retention at school. Physical context is the same with school... and school vs school and the home for homework; better memory retention. The power of these effects has been documented by psychological experiments like the one mentioned in R2. That Con has not responded to the entirety of the memory retention argument is a very, very strong point in favour of the resolution. Summation The points about memory retention, reduction in general mischief, working mindset / agrarian workforce have not been refuted last round, when Con had a clear chance (yes, rules allowed it) to do so. Those are key advantages for the resolution as per R2 and R3 analysis. My model is proven to grant extra free time given the same amount of homework. Con advocates conflicting poisons of less homework and less time. Con failed to differentiate between homework at home vs. in schooltime. I did, citing teacher instruction and other points. On feasibility I can only point to international budgets on education; the US lags behind. However, I have demonstrated how the teacher workload can be reduced. My thanks to Bull_Diesel for an interesting debate on this topic. Readers, please vote based on the arguments presented and not preconceptions. Thanks to all readers and voters.

I disagree with this statement. The first reason is because i think children should not be given homework because they need time to relax and take their minds off work. The pressure of having to complete homework every night is quite daunting for most children and they need time to refresh their minds and bodies. Also,it reduces the amount of time that children could be spending with their families. Family time is especially important to a growing child and without it social problems can crop up and a family unit can be compromised by a lack of time being spent together.

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?


Question: Is Assigning Homework Advantageous?

Homework is an unnecessary use of time. Do you think homework is an unnecessary use of time? I firmly believe that it is a misconception that homework is beneficial, as it actually helps us to reinforce and expand our knowledge. In my view, homework is essential for a deeper understanding of the material we learn in school. It is well-known that teachers cannot always provide comprehensive explanations to every student, and homework fills that gap. Additionally, homework promotes responsibility by encouraging independent work. I credit homework with helping me become more organized, as I consistently completed it daily throughout each academic year. This habit instilled in me the discipline to complete tasks promptly and effectively. It can be argued that increased organization leads to more efficient work completion.

Resolved: It would, on balance, be beneficial to reduce the amount of homework given in conjunction with an extension to the school day [see model below].Proposal: Have a strong reduction in homework, lengthen school to a 9-5 length day.RulesThe debate shall adhere to the following structure:Round 1: Acceptance, Rules, Resolution / Model Outline and DefinitionsRound 2: Opening Statements, No Rebuttals (see below on this)Round 3: New Arguments and RebuttalsRound 4: Rebuttals and Closing Statements (No new arguments)The only rules I insists upon are the following, but I will accept any reasonable clarifications or amendments my opponent might choose to provide in Round 1, although clarification prior to acceptance is preferred.Arguments and source citations must appear within the four rounds of this debate only. Arguments and citations may not appear in offsite links, other debates, forums, or comments.Dropped arguments are not concessions. Arguments should be seen as whole units from opening to closing statements.Although R2 is not to be used for rebuttals, it is possible that my opponent’s arguments may lend themselves to countering mine naturally. This is allowed as it’s not a rebuttal per se. What I don’t want to see is a line by line refutation in round 2.All words are to take their standard definition. The only matter is what constitutes homework. A discussion of this is under the model outline section.To voters, please judge this debate based on this debate and not upon preconceptions you may have.Model Outline / Resolutional MattersWhile R1 is not for arguing, it’s critical to discuss the resolution and precisely what we’re debating on this contentious issue. Let me outline a few things that are to be taken as given barring reasonable amendments in round 1.ScopeThis debate is not limited to the US only. Also, the debate focuses primarily on a high school context as we might make exceptions for kindergarten students for instance.HomeworkI divide homework into 2 categories:1. Assignments / assessments / major projects2. Worksheets, maths exercises etc.We are discussing the elimination of type 2. Type 1 still exists, although in a perhaps reduced manner. The extended school day enables more learning (vs. homework) ; Con can dispute this if he wishes later.Timing / School logisticsLogistics, on the school level, is not meant to be a crucial issue in this debate – bureaucrats could probably resolve this matter. However, the school day would be reworked to accommodate a 9-5. My proposal is as follows:To accommodate the 2 hour extension to the school day an additional 20 minutes of rest / break, in the vein of lunch or morning tea, would be added. This would be added to the 20 minute morning tea and 40 minute lunch break typically found in schools (no negotiation on this – this is to be accepted) . That totals 80 minutes. Students retain their 40 minute lunch. 2 other 40 minute blocks would be scheduled into the day – one near the end of the day, one near the start. Students would choose which time block they wish to spend their free time (like choosing an elective; it’s a choice for the same duration that the same subjects are kept) in (40 minutes), and be in class for the other 40; yes, classes aside from this one retain their usual one hour length.Why the complexity? If students choose to have their free time in the later 40 minutes block, after all other classes, then they could leave school during this break. This is to accommodate extra-curricular activities and the like. More on this in round 2.A clarification To clear up 2 uncertainties from my previous debate, teaching will be as normal from 9-5 as per the model outline. On the scope, I’d prefer this remain to higher years where it’s more applicable – homework reduction + school extension doesn’t work if there’s no homework to reduce, as with younger students! However, I’ll say that all students go from 9-5. However, the amount of free time would be greater for younger students because the homework reduction associated with increased school time does not exist for them; this time is transferred to free time. Let’s not get bogged down on logistics though if possible. Weighing mechanismsThis is up for contention, to a point. One judges education reform based on what educational end (or ends) are desired. It is the debaters place to forward these ends, and have the voters judge policies as per which end they believe encapsulates the goal of education, or should encapsulate such a goal. The greatest overall good resulting from these policies is to be preferred when judging.More in later rounds if need be.A quick note on sourcingSome among you will have noted that some sections of this are eerily similar to this thread’s OP http://www.debate.org... Before people scream plagiarism, I am that thread’s author. This idea had it’s genesis from http://www.debate.org... and I will later be borrowing on a quote from YYW in that thread (which I was a contributor to). Aside from not having to source these repeatedly, I’d recommend the audience read these threads for their own education (mind the pun) , especially the latter one. Also, I have done a partial debate on the subject, so I'll be using my round 2 arguments from http://www.debate.org...;. http://www.debate.org...I thank whoever my opponent may be for this debate for agreeing to debate this subject. Let’s have an intellectually rigorous debate on this subject (I myself am undecided personally) and be civil and convivial. Voters, please read the debate in full and judge appropriately; we are in your debt for taking the time to read this debate readers.

I disagree with this statement. The first reason is because i think children should not be given homework because they need time to relax and take their minds off work. The pressure of having to complete homework every night is quite daunting for most children and they need time to refresh their minds and bodies. Also,it reduces the amount of time that children could be spending with their families. Family time is especially important to a growing child and without it social problems can crop up and a family unit can be compromised by a lack of time being spent together.

Thanks, Con. My opponent has the burden of proof yet has failed to make an argument thus far. I'll begin by pointing out that home-schooling students is still an option in the United States. Cyber-school would essentially be an extension of home-schooling, using online and other computer tools extensively as part of the education process. I see no problem with this whatsoever. Considering the importance of the internet in social media, networking, business ventures and other opportunities, utilizing the benefits of the world wide web could have significant advantages in terms of learning. Encyclopedias were originally glorified as educational tools on the basis of them offering a significant amount of information all in one source. The internet offers this opportunity magnified innumerably. Online search engines put a vast amount of knowledge at your fingertips. You can use the internet to learn about a variety of subjects from a plethora of credible sources. In short, utilizing the computer can be significantly advantageous to a student and a viable alternative to traditional schooling. One could use programs, tutoring or other methods to learn at their own pace. Lessons can be specifically structured to appeal and cater to the student's learning needs. The student will most likely be very versatile so long as they're encouraged to use the right methods to make learning optimal. For instance, I've taken several online college classes structured very similarly to the content on DDO. There were forums where the class would meet, get together and discuss certain topics. Conversation was just as engaging and thought-provoking as it can be on DDO. In fact using the internet as a medium was even positive insofar as encouraging more people to participate, appeasing those who are usually shy in person. Young people can be taught to use similar techniques and mediums to make learning more engaging. I doubt my opponent will be able to provide significant benefits of attending school specifically. For example, while learning social behaviors and how to interact with others, make friends, etc. is significantly important, this is addressed by home-schooled children often being enrolled in a variety of outside activities such as sports, music lessons, community service, etc. It's entirely possible for home-schooled kids or kids who learn online to adjust normally and function well within society. There are plenty of informative websites that detail how to ensure the most versatile and complete learning experience for a home-schooled person [1]. There is no reason for cyber school to not be an option for students. I now turn the debate over to my opponent to prove otherwise. Thanks and good luck. [1] http://localhs.com...

Thanks again to Logic_on_rails. Let’s make this short and sweet. First point: Pro , The Instigator of this debate, determined his resolution and the rules for this debate. Pro has attacked me for not rebutting his arguments in my Second Round. Readers will recall the rules, as provided by Pro. Round 1: Acceptance, Rules, Resolution / Model Outline and Definitions Round 2: Opening Statements, No Rebuttals (see below on this) Round 3: New Arguments and Rebuttals Round 4: Rebuttals and Closing Statements (No new arguments) It is my opinion that in the spirit of debate we should follow the rules set by the instigator, criticizing me for not attacking his round two arguments with my round two arguments (which is clearly outlawed by the instigator) is not very sporting and is an outright misinterpretation of his own rules. This is likely an attempt to distract readers from my argument and its merits and cast doubt among readers as to the competency and validity of my arguments. Know this, my Burden of Proof is ONLY to prove that the Benefits of maintaining the status quo with regard to the current school day/homework model sufficiently outweigh the benefits of extending the school day and simultaneously decreasing homework assigned. I need not refute every one of pro’s arguments ( My arguments in Round Two were meant simply to show the merits of Homework and the potential consequences of adding time to the school day. With regard to Pro’s rebuttal of my arguments: Pro’s argument and rebuttal seems much more concerned with my inability to attack him and his policies than with stressing the merits of his own. Consider some of the guidelines written by Pro: Dropped arguments are not concessions. Logistics, on the school level, is not meant to be a crucial issue in this debate. The greatest overall good resulting from these policies is to be preferred when judging. School Day: Pro has attacked my evidence and claims regarding length of school day. He has stated several times that logistics are not the primary concern of this debate, yet he continues to retreat to the intricately laid-out School day model, supporting his claims and attacking mine by arguing logistics. It is not necessary to get bogged down in major details in this debate. Readers are challenged to consider the implications worldwide of imposing extra school hours, no matter how they are spent. On Pro’s rebuttal of my ‘Merits of Homework’ argument: Homework done at school IS NOT HOMEWORK, IT IS BY DEFINITION SHOOLWORK. It does not make sense for Pro to argue that we should reduce homework yet imply that homework can still be assigned as schoolwork. This is a waste of resources and is largely impractical. On that note, we will quickly address some additional arguments. Feasibility: School Systems in many parts of the world, including the United States of America, struggle to fund their departments and their staff as is. With a nominal increase of even one hour to the School Day, we would see Teachers laid-off because School Boards could not afford to maintain their already meager budgets with an increase of roughly 5 to 6 additional man-hours paid per employee. This would send hourly employees into overtime and would add additional unpaid work hours to salaried professors’ already gruesome worked hours vs. pay ratio. Teachers will become increasingly dis-satisfied with their work and will either voluntarily leave the workforce in favor of other jobs or will provide a lower standard of service to students or their performance will suffer because of the exhaustion of an increased workload on already poor salary. Also: More teachers cannot be hired because of budget constraints, which means that Pro’s argument regarding the benefit of School Teachers assisting with ‘homework’ (school work) means an unreasonable student/teacher ratio in most schools. (Not Plausible) It is my hope that readers will consider the simplicity of this debate. My burden of proof is not to disprove that school is good, it is only to prove that maintaining the status quo is better than making an unreasonable and less than pragmatic change. Homework offers benefits as does the school day at its current length. Neither need be changed.

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.

Unlike my other arguments, my round 4 statements will be brief and straight to the point. On the usage of stem programs:Due to the fact that the pro truly didn't clarify how these programs are helpful there is nothing to debate on this topic on getting Access to information: as i have stated earlier technology can be useful for research but can also be a distraction to many students. So on this topic i believe that it would be better to research from home. Increase the popularity of distance learning: technology can be helpful for students to apply for colleges and scholarships but there would be no time during school for students to do these task(unless a new class was made). This would be a task best meant for home where there is much more time. Lastly i would like to say that although using technology in school would be a much more enjoyable for students, the amount of students that would be off task would outweigh the amount of students that would benefit. With this i will bring my final argument to an end, thanking the pro for a good debate.

For the rest of this argument when referring to American education that will include kindergarten through college. Looking back at the original claim, one states that "American education system is negatively impacting the mental health" and then one states, "3 primary premises, the amount of homework given, the lack of support/education pertaining to mental illnesses and, the pressures of standardized tests." Throughout the arguments, it is repeated that the homework and tests, that schools provide, create stress for students and is one saying that this stress is a factor, among others, that develops the anxiety and depression? If so, then one could see the argument that schools are negatively impacting the mental health of students because the schools are the cause of the anxiety and depression. However, one just recently stated, "No, I am not arguing that the American education system creates these mental illnesses." I believe I am lost on how schools are negatively impacting students mental health. Would one say that schools play no part in creating these mental illnesses and what does "creating" mean to you? One mentions that tests and homework are not the exact cause, so would that be saying that homework and tests might not be the only cause, however they are part of the reason students suffer from mental illnesses? I would greatly appreciate your research and an elaborate on the link. I agree that not all students have the right resources or coping mechanisms, however the majority of schools provide counselors and should all of the responsibility of teaching children coping mechanisms fall onto the schools? Or should parents assist with educating children about mental illnesses? Schools do not negatively impact a students mental health. If schools are not the exact cause of depression and anxiety, and it's mostly the home life. Then it is not the American education system at fault, but the home life of students. Therefore, would the American education system be responsible for providing coping methods and 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.

KIds lack the motivation to follow your Idea to space things out and if they push things further because it gives them a break. Unfortunately, that is not the case. Procrastination is something that all students are guilty of at some point. Without homework students would not have anything to push off and would be happier.

people dont take notes in class often. Homework is proof for the teachers that you understand the material and are able to excell at it. YOU NEED TO REMEMBER WHAT YOU LEARNED. You have forgoten about people who have strugles learning material. They need an education to. You have failed to refute any of my points and have not developed and argument. You put a 500 charecter limit on this.

There was this boy in our neighbourhood called Bob. What made Bob so unique is that I never saw him on the bus on the way to school. This made me wonder how he got to school. I asked him if he teleported to school using his mind. He replied "no". "Don't you go to school?" I asked him, shortly after he replied "I go to school at home." I thought that having all your education at home is a bit weird and backwards, but I probably shouldn't have been so surprised. Bob was a backwards kind of guy. He even spelt his name backwards.I then tried to think all backwards the way he does, and soon I came up with a brilliant idea; doing everything a normal person does at home at school. Brushing your teeth, getting dressed, going to sleep, eating breakfast and dinner, that sort of thing. I then thought that I should be as imaginative as the advocates of homsechooling, so I named my idea "Schoolhoming". So that's what I want to debate today, whether my idea of schoolhoming is revolutionary, as I currently believe. I thank you.