The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
9 Points

Chromebooks are great or Education

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/9/2015 Category: Education
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 503 times Debate No: 71388
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (2)




I'm not against Google or technology, but I don't see why Chromebooks are consider useful educational tools. Well I do but I don't understand why people think it's so useful. Already my school had to recall our Chromebooks because they were faulty and one almost caught on fire. Also, many places that I try to access are blocked. I understand certain Youtube videos, but why my Latin teacher's videos to help us understand new concepts and health websites? I don't know, just need to hear why people think these Chromebooks are useful.


Con notes that the Chromebooks his school purchased were faulty, and had to be recalled. This is not relevant to the debate unless it can be proven that Chromebooks are moreoften faulty than there alternatives. If this is not the case, it is an example of anecdotal fallacy. Additionally, Con states that many sites he attempted to access were blocked. This, has absolutely nothing to do with the Chromebook itself, but rather how Con's school filtering system was configured. The Chromebook will display websites like any other device connected to a network, by default. However Con's school used either used the Chromebooks customisation capabilities (which is arguably a case for Pro) or how they configured their internet filtering system (which is irrelevant).

Constructive Case
1) Chromebooks are cheap.
Averaging around $250, Chromebooks are much cheaper than an average laptop, which is a commonly proposed alternative. This allows schools to spend the money elsewhere, potentially providing a superior education. It also means that more can be purchased, so in poorer schools, they do not have to be shared, allowing for a more engaging learning process.

2) Chromebooks are simple.
As they are only capable of running web-based applications, they take little expertise to set up, and even less skill to use. This allows even tech-illiterate teachers to take advantage of them, and tech-illiterate kids will not be able to break them - no matter how hard they try. Consequentley, this avoids the faffing that more complex operating systems often cause, allowing students to cut straight into real learning and education.

3) Chromebooks are easily administrated.
Applications that allow Teachers and administrators to filter trivial, non-educational content ensures that students are fully focused on the task they have been est. One such application is the Chrome Remote Desktop tool, which allows administrators to monitor multiple users computers.

I have invalidated Con's arguments and proved substantial evidence that Chromebooks are great for education.
Good luck Con.
Debate Round No. 1


1) Yes Chromebooks are cheap, however now with the new Pixel, it is around $1,300.
2) Simple doesn't mean functional. The people that go to my school always struggle with WiFi when using Chromebook, which strange because the other computers work just fine. You can claim that I'm faking it, but try it yourself. Chromebooks are not the best with wifi. Now with the Pixel, there are many more problems. Check this website for more info on other problems.
3)I really don't have to disprove this,. You used Wikipedia, something everyone can change.

Well this is my best attempt. I guess my conclusion is that our schools deserve better like the Google Nexus 10 or the Microsoft Surface Pro.


Thanks Con, it's nice to meet a first time debater who doesn't forfeit!

Con has dropped my initial rebuttals of his claim that Chromebooks are faulty and prevent students from accessing websites, so I will assume that is a concession.
The price of a high-end variant has nothing to do with the trend I described, which was a lower price relative to alternative products that fufill similiar purposes, ie Laptops and Desktops. It's true that high-end Chromebooks exist, but this is not relevant to the debate, since the resolution refers only to Chromebooks within the context of education. In simpler terms, Schools aren't going to buy the pixel, they'll buy the best value for money option, which will be the cheaper and more common Chromebooks. Since these Chromebooks are cheaper than the comparative Laptop, schools will be able to invest money into other areas, contributing to a better education.
2) Simple does not mean functional. However, Chrome OS is simple and functional, in comparison with Windows operating systems. This is because it contains only a web browser and basic packaged applications. Once again Con has provided anecdotal evidence that does not stand up to scrutiny. Additionally, it should be noted by voters that it is not best practice to link articles and to be used as part of your case, they should only be used as references. Furthermore, this article is not even relevant, as we are not debating whether the Pixel is worth purchasing, but rather whether Chromebooks (in general) are great for education.
3) I referenced Wikipedia to prove to voters that the Chrome Remote Desktop tool exists and to show it's functionality.

My rebuttals have been dropped by Con. Additionally Con's rebuttals are insufficient, and my intitial constructive case remains unanswered. Over to you Con!
Debate Round No. 2


Pro, answer this question and I will admit defeat. Besides cost, why should a school use Chromebooks over anything else. Simplicity is an opinion based answer unless backed up with factual evidence.


It's been great debating with you, Con.

Con concedes most of my rebuttals. I'll do your little test and raise one further argument in favour of using Chromebooks.

Chromebooks are secure.
This is because the underlying operating system is virus-resistant by design (it is based on the Linux kernel), needing no firewall because there's no network-available attack surface. This means the student or school will not have to fork out extra cash for an anti-virus or firewall to ensure their data is kept safe.

Con has not successfully rebutted my constructive case, and I have successfully dismantled his negative case, which has been conceded. Vote Pro!
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by simonstuffles 1 year ago
Well done Con, nice debate. Just thought you ought to know I actually agree with you, I was just playing devil's advocate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by AlwaysRight12345 1 year ago
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: S&G was nearly tied except for a few minor grammatical errors by Con. Con conceded and used only one source.
Vote Placed by Paleophyte 1 year ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con's arguments were largely anecdotal and were refuted by Pro. Pro made a number of good argumnts, most of which were dropped by Con.