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

Education in America

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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/3/2014 Category: Education
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 633 times Debate No: 66302
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)




I am concerned about recent changes to education. I fear that certain programs such as Common Core, Middle Years Program, International Baccalaureate, and No Child Left Behind are ruining education. Children are not in school to take tests and give reports. They are in school to learn and ready themselves for the world. Also, I would like to suggest a change to the starting time and length of the average school day. Children are spending too much time in school. They are sitting in school for 9 hours a day, with a lunch break of only 45 minutes at the MAX. (Minimum is 20 minutes). I think that this can contribute to obesity. The starting times of the school days can affect work ethic, grades, appetite, and even mood and social skills. The human brain does not completely engage itself until 10:00 am, MANY studies have proved this. Schools are starting at 7:00 am, causing young kids to have to wake up at unreasonable hours. An average time is 5:00 am. I think that there needs to be regulations regarding these topics. It would affect our kids greatly, in a positive way. I think that they would stop complaining and work towards goals with a better attitude.


The educational process in america is not uniformly bad, but it is under attack.

Programs like the IB organization represent the best in education attainment, but it is international in scope.

What is happening in this country is that a group known as ALEC has formulated a strategic plan to turn public school funding into private corporate profits.

They are succeeding because of a general lack of interest on the part of the public, a well funded program of denigrating the public school systems, and a combination of paranoia and selfishness encouraged by far right wing political groups.

Despite all of that, the public school systems still do a fairly adequate job of educating our youth.
Debate Round No. 1


I don't think that it is technically the school's fault. I think that these government issued programs are preventing students and teachers from reaching their full potential. I definitely agree that students need to try a bit harder and extend their horizons, but the government is pushing them too far. Every time another day is added on to the school year, another hour to the school day, it just stresses the thought of "I can't do it" or "this is too much". I think that students would enjoy learning more if their entire lives were not as stressful or chock full as they are now. I think that generally speaking, I am saying that public schools are doing what they can, but government is making things worse for students and teachers. The students are learning too much, too fast. It's impossible for them to manage the amount of tests, time, and homework that is required from them due to the active programs. I think that the government needs to slow down, and take smaller steps towards advancing their students.


Your perspective on education needs to be wider than just what goes on in a classroom. Education is more than just teaching, it's deciding what to teach and how to teach it, and also, who will teach it.

"I think that these government issued programs are preventing students and teachers from reaching their full potential."

Some are, but most aren't. The federal govt mostly provides funding with few strings attached.

The craziness comes at the state and local levels, where politics often overpowers common sense and established good practices.

Nobody at the federal level wants to teach creationism, for instance.
Debate Round No. 2


I actually completely agree with you.

Politicians have no knowledge of how to teach children, it's simply a race to the top.

I think that they need to be more considerate and understand that they expect too much from these students.

The government is not trying to help, as I said, these programs help them win their little race. I think that the students in America deserve less of the insanity and more of the knowledge.

It is too stressful.


"Politicians have no knowledge of how to teach children, it's simply a race to the top."

Actually, it's worse than that.
Many of the politicians who are involved in education issues are members of ALEC.
They don't want public schools to be successful.

The same strategies that got America hooked on bottled water are being used to give people negative impressions of public schools.

The Common Core standards are part of that. The goal of common core is to prepare kids for a life of work, but ignores educating them to be economically efficient consumers or rational and informed voters.

As for stress, there is good stress and bad stress.
Good stress is the competition for success that we all must face, and so it's proper for schools to inflict stress, but also to teach how to deal with and use stress to one's advantage.
Bad stress is when the rules keep changing during the game, and it affects teachers more than students.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Blade-of-Truth 2 years 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct - Tie. Both had proper conduct throughout the debate. S&G - Tie. Both had adequate spelling and grammar throughout. Arguments - Pro. Con posed several challenges to Pro, which pro was able to overcome so effectively that he actually had Con agreeing with him in Con's final round. Due to Pro's ability to provide rebuttals in a manner which caused Con to ultimately agree with him, Pro wins arguments. Sources - Pro. Pro was the only one to utilize sources in this debate. Thus, these point are awarded to Pro.