Children should go to academy.
Debate Rounds (3)
The second round will be for presenting your arguments and the third round will be for rebuttal and a short case summation. In the third round I would urge you not to bring in new evidence or points.
If you chose to accept this debate, which I hope you will, and I haven't explained anything properly put it in the comments section and I'll adjust it.
If by academy we mean the labour/conservative scheme of which school is independent of Local Education Authority control but is publicly funded, with some private sponsorship, I accept.
First, academy can give stress to students. For example, my friend Yeh-won has lots of academy. It will be more than ten. Her mother makes her to go to make her educated. However she got side effects. She has lots of fatigue and stress. Therefore, her scores are getting lower.
Second, academy wastes money for parents. If some one pay 400,000 won per month for academy, but the student did not study hard it will be waste of money. People should have few academies not to waste money. Also, there are lots of people who wants to study but cannot. They are too poor to pay for study. How lucky we are? That's why I think we should not waste money.
Third, academy wastes time for student. Health is the most important thing. Instead of sitting on the chair and studying, people should do hobbies. When we go to academy, we cannot do our hobbies. In book 'cleaner bob' which is written by Ray Hilbert says that we should do hobby instead of just studying.
In conclusion, I think academy is harmful for students because it can make stress and burden for parents and waste time for hobby.
..Alright, it seems there is a language barrier here that cannot be overcome. In England, the Academy scheme is one started by Labour in order to set up less restricted public schools in poorer areas in order to help people get educated in these areas. They do not charge, teach the same lessons as 'normal' schools and simply are less regulated. With this in mind, if my opponent wishes to nullify this debate, I will be happy to do so.
Firstly, academies may give stress to students, but no more than any other school. There is no reason why a hard pushing academy will put on more stress than a hard pushing normal school. In my experience of going to an academy, in fact, all teachers seemed to be more lax, and this put me at ease.
Second, the academies are public schools, and do not charge.
Third, hobbies may help your health, but they do not hold more weight than being able to do basic maths and english skills. "All work and no play" works the other way around. Everything should come in moderation, and education is one of them. Unless the academy runs 24/7, then it is simply the amount of stress outside the school that needs addressing.
Also, as a new point. Academies get access to more funding. As the barriers between an academy and the government are less than for normal public schools, the academy system is beneficial to the cash flow of a school. The improvement of cash flow, as well as more deregulation in other areas, allows schools to put more money into the students, and this makes a better education system. This also includes better sports equipment which combats the problem of hobbies.
1 - http://www.independent.co.uk...;
Judy-Jang forfeited this round.
This debate has been a result of a miscommunication between the two parties, therefore I plea that the debate is null, and ask that neither myself nor my opponent recieves more points than the other.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.