The Instigator
Sola.Gratia
Pro (for)
Losing
12 Points
The Contender
Avamys
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points

Homeschool

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 5 votes the winner is...
Avamys
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/7/2013 Category: Education
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,667 times Debate No: 31019
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (5)

 

Sola.Gratia

Pro

What's wrong with homeschool? Why are so many people against it?
Avamys

Con

I will be taking the Con side of this debate, and I will argue that homeschooling is 'bad'.

Since Pro has not mentioned any rules, let me propose my own.
1. No swearing or calling names, be polite
2. Arguments and rebuttals allowed at any time, but no new arguments should be brought up in the last round.

So, I'll let Pro start the opening argument.
Debate Round No. 1
Sola.Gratia

Pro

Why do you believe that homeschooling is bad? I actually have had experience with public school and homeschool. I find homeschool more beneficial for education because it teaches you what you will need to know for college, whereas public school only teaches you what you will need to learn in order to pass the year test (taks test, star test, whichever one it is).. I know most people would say well how will a person learn to be social or have friends?.. School wasn't meant for socialism it was meant for an education, but the worlds society has changed that. But on the flip side of that, homeschoolers are still able to make friends or socialize just as much as public school students do. There are clubs, sports, and any other thing that a public school offers in homeschooling. So I would believe to say that people who are against homeschooling shouldn't be especially if they've never experienced it or were a part of it. What do you think? :
Avamys

Con

I thank my opponent for agreeing to my terms and starting the debate.

Let me present my rebuttals.

1."School wasn't meant for socialism it was meant for an education, but the worlds society has changed that."
I would like my opponent to explain what she meant. I did not say anything about homeschool have to deal with socialism.

2."I find homeschool more beneficial for education because it teaches you what you will need to know for college, whereas public school only teaches you what you will need to learn in order to pass the year test (taks test, star test, whichever one it is).."
Here, my opponent has made a grammar mistake, which may cost her the grammar mark. Public schools do not only teach students what they will need in order to pass exams. Many students studying in public schools have earned scholarships, which marks their achievements and shows that public schools do not only teach students what they have to know to simply pass an exam.
Furthermore, a lot of schools have physical education, which does not necessarily have a year test and is not mandatory in public exams.

3."There are clubs, sports, and any other thing that a public school offers in homeschooling."
This statement is not true. In many schools, there are group projects, which enable students to learn in an interactive way. Doing group projects also helps students to develop their leadership skills, which cannot be trained as well in homeschool. It is impossible to do a group project in homeschool, or have a competition between students to motivate their learning and raise their keenness. Home-schooled children cannot play in team sports, but students studying in schools can. It is also harder for a parent to book a field trip to the fire station or the zoo, as the numbers of participants are significantly lower than those in school trips. The child would lack experience in those areas.

Now, let me state my points.
1.Family crises, illness and lax supervision by parents can interfere with learning.
When parents are sick, they cannot teach their children, and as a result, a day of learning time is wasted. A day might not have such a great impact, but when you add in all the days that the parent gets sick or has to deal with something important like the passing away of a family member, the impact is indeed huge. However, in schools, there are a lot of teachers, so when one gets sick, another teacher who teaches the same subject can substitute and the child"s learning process will not be slowed down.

2.Homeschooling cannot help the child to become independent.
All parents die one day. They cannot be there forever for their child, so it is important that the child has to be independent. If children study at home, they will not have to travel, whereas if they have to study at a school they would have to take the school bus or public transport, or perhaps other means of transportation. This gives them an opportunity to become independent. They would know how to take a bus or train on their own, and know the neighborhood better than children who stayed at home.
Some students might have parents or drivers who give them a ride to school. However, their parents are not by their side during schools hours, so they also have an opportunity to learn to become independent, and learn how to deal with issues such as accidentally spilling a lunchbox or dirtying their clothes. Homeschooled children have their parents by their side most of the time, which means there will be someone to help them, or, in other words, cater to their every need (though not literally).

I look forward to hearing my opponent"s rebuttals!
Debate Round No. 2
Sola.Gratia

Pro

Hello again. Thank you for your thoughts and opinions.

When I said that the schools are meant for education not socialism but the world has changed it, is because when you are in class what are you supposed to be doing? Talking? Or learning your education with an attentive ear? So today's society, the kids who attend a public school think well, like you said, " am independent and can do what I want" so that would veer them to socializing and what not when really should be paying attention to the teachers instructions and/or lectures. So with that said... I hope that answers your question..
You said that sports, clubs and other things that public schools give do not give the same opportunity to home schoolers? Yet, when I was a freshman as a homeschooler I ran track against the Judson School District. So no one can tell me otherwise than what I have experienced. Also when being homeschooled, I went out on field days with other homsechoolers to do activities; which I add to you was a club that we were all in. So you cannot say that homeschoolers do not do that.
Also you mentioned that for homeschoolers if they're parents are sick or something extravagant happens that the kids will miss a day/s worth of schoolwork. Yet, my mom would still get my schoolwork graded and prepared for me. You don't think its probable that even if the parents die that a child can still be educated by a relative or an older sibling? Cause guess what, I'm an older sibling and when my mom can't get around to getting the kids schoolwork, I help out. So really its up to the parents and other relatives that will take the responsibility. If a parent/relative is not equipped to teaching their kids themselves then, they should not take on the responsibility. My parents do their part and will continue to do so because they do not want their kids going to schools that only bring about corruption and confusion. And I'm sorry not all parents are that type to run every time they're child makes a mistake as a homeschooler. My parents didn't. If I made a mess, guess what I had to clean it up so no they don't cater to everything you do.

another point I'd like to bring about is, homeschool is good for those especially that cannot work in a loud setting also good for those who are easily distracted.

Waiting patiently to read what my opponent has to say.
Avamys

Con

1."Yet, when I was a freshman as a homeschooler I ran track against the Judson School District."
My opponent fails to notice that I was talking about team sports, and track is not a team sport.

2."Also you mentioned that for homeschoolers if they're parents are sick or something extravagant happens that the kids will miss a day/s worth of schoolwork. Yet, my mom would still get my schoolwork graded and prepared for me."
That may be the case when the parent only has a minor case of illness, but what if he or she has to undergo surgery? It would be impossible for the parent to teach the child.

3."You don't think its probable that even if the parents die that a child can still be educated by a relative or an older sibling?"
First, if there is an older sibling, shouldn"t he or she be learning too? Both siblings would miss their lessons. If the older sibling has graduated, then it means he/she probably has a job and does not have the time to educate their younger sibling. And what if the child was a single child? Secondly, a relative does not have the responsibility to educate their nieces or nephews when the children"s parents are alive. They would not have reserved time for that and probably work on a daily basis.

4."Cause guess what, I'm an older sibling and when my mom can't get around to getting the kids schoolwork, I help out."
I am also an older sibling and many of my friends are. However, we are very busy ourselves. We cannot even manage to complete our own duties, how can we help others? And have you thought of a possible scenario, that is, the older sibling having learning problems or has bad marks and therefore does not have the ability to teach their brothers/sisters?

5."another point I'd like to bring about is, homeschool is good for those especially that cannot work in a loud setting also good for those who are easily distracted."
So here my opponent has made a grammar mistake. Also, I would like to point out, although schools may have nosier environments, homes can also be noisy. For example, a car could drive by, or an airplane could pass above.
Actually, students are more easily distracted at home. There are things they like surrounding them, such as toys and books or perhaps a computer. Toys are not allowed at school and you cannot walk out of the classroom to go to the library or computer room in the middle of a class, so this problem does not exist.

6."When I said that the schools are meant for education not socialism but the world has changed it, is because when you are in class what are you supposed to be doing? Talking? Or learning your education with an attentive ear? So today's society, the kids who attend a public school think well, like you said, " am independent and can do what I want" so that would veer them to socializing and what not when really should be paying attention to the teachers instructions and/or lectures. So with that said... I hope that answers your question.."
When I mentioned being independent, I was talking about going to school or dealing with sudden incidents. I did not mention anything about talking in class. I did say that children should be independent but that does not mean that they can "do what I want", because rules and laws exist. I did not say that students should not pay attention during lectures or not pay attention to a teacher"s instructions. Also, my opponent has made a grammar mistake.

My opponent has failed to rebut my point about team sports and "Public schools do not only teach students what they will need in order to pass exams." I have successfully rebutted her points, so vote for Con.
Debate Round No. 3
Sola.Gratia

Pro

Team sports of what? Homeschoolers have team sports.. Basketball, football, volleyball, baseball, softball..
And if teachers do not only teach to get students to pass the final exams then why not just forget about the exams and just base everything off of the students schoolwork and homework then? Because when I was in "public school" you couldn't go onto the next grade unless you passed the final exam....

Also, if you remember as I mentioned before, if parents and/or relatives/siblings are not equipped for teaching their kids then they should not take on the responsibility of homeschooling.
I do not agree with you when you say that we cannot complete our own duties as older siblings.. wouldn't that be a bit selfish, For me not to help my siblings out with their homeschooling; if I have the means to help? Then shouldn't I help? I mean if education is so important, then why not help another with their schooling, even if it is a sibling.
Avamys

Con

Here are my rebuttals:

1."Team sports of what? Homeschoolers have team sports.. Basketball, football, volleyball, baseball, softball.."
I do not understand why my opponent says that home-schooled students can "have" team sports. Not many mothers have more than four children; so normal home-schooled children cannot play football or basketball, as the minimum number of players is six. Sure, they can join other groups, but it has to be outside school.

2."And if teachers do not only teach to get students to pass the final exams then why not just forget about the exams and just base everything off of the students schoolwork and homework then?"
Here we are not debating whether or not there should be exams, so this is irrelevant.

3."I do not agree with you when you say that we cannot complete our own duties as older siblings.. wouldn't that be a bit selfish, For me not to help my siblings out with their homeschooling; if I have the means to help? Then shouldn't I help? I mean if education is so important, then why not help another with their schooling, even if it is a sibling."
Here my opponent has made some grammar mistakes. Also, we are not arguing whether siblings should be selfish. Sometimes they are not selfish, it is just that they do not have the time or ability. What if the older sibling was working? What if the older sibling had bad marks and therefore does not have the ability to teach his/her younger sibling? And what if, the home-schooled child is an only child?

4."Also, if you remember as I mentioned before, if parents and/or relatives/siblings are not equipped for teaching their kids then they should not take on the responsibility of homeschooling."
That is the reason why home schooling is "bad". Parents do not expect anything disastrous to happen to them so they feel that as long as they are equipped, it is okay. According to this line of thought, there should be no home schooling since everyone, including parents, siblings and relatives alike, has the possibility of dying early!

My opponent has failed to rebut my point about being independent and kids being more easily distracted at school, so vote for Con.
Debate Round No. 4
Sola.Gratia

Pro

My friend, your right most mothers do not have more than four children, but in my house there is 17 kids altogether. So there is team sports available.

Also being independent should happen after the child has grown up and moved on their own.. Public school and homeschool really cannot relate to independence. Sorry...

I enjoyed this debate and again thank you for your thoughts and opinions. My opponent did well and anyone may vote for whomever they wish that they see fit to be voted for.

God bless.
Avamys

Con

Here are my rebuttals:
1."My friend, your right most mothers do not have more than four children, but in my house there is 17 kids altogether. So there is team sports available."
As you said, most mothers do not have more than four children, so your family is an exception. In most families, there will not be a chance for their children to play team sports if they are home schooled.

2."Also being independent should happen after the child has grown up and moved on their own.. Public school and homeschool really cannot relate to independence. Sorry..."
Independence has to be trained from an early age, i.e. when the child is studying, because when the child has moved on their own, they will have to take care of matters themselves, so it is too late to start learning and experiencing. Going to school means that a child"s parents are not by his/her side, so that trains up the child"s independence skills.

Once again, I thank my opponent for starting this debate. It is always interesting to hear the views of other people, and look at things from different angles. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by sweetbreeze 3 years ago
sweetbreeze
I know, right? What's wrong with homeschooling?
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by sweetbreeze 3 years ago
sweetbreeze
Sola.GratiaAvamysTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 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:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro put a lot of effort into her/his arguments.
Vote Placed by KingDebater 3 years ago
KingDebater
Sola.GratiaAvamysTied
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 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 obviously put more effort into his rounds than Pro did, which explains why his arguments were better.
Vote Placed by wolfman4711 3 years ago
wolfman4711
Sola.GratiaAvamysTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:14 
Reasons for voting decision: Cons argument was well thought out at first,but as the debate progressed there were loop holes in his argument. Though I think con did a much better job on the opening arguments, so for that he gets the convincing argument points. For the loop holes I pointed out pro gets the conduct point. And finally pro did not use the best grammar, so con gets better grammar and spelling. And there were no sources
Vote Placed by KeytarHero 3 years ago
KeytarHero
Sola.GratiaAvamysTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Countering zezima until she can produce a better RFD. While I don't think either person made a stellar case for their position, I think that Con is the clear winner. As the one making the claim, Pro had the BoP which he/she did not meet. His/her argument was mostly opinion-based with no evidence to back up his/her claims. Con responded to each of Pro's points, and Pro wasn't able to justify them again Con's attack (and even ignored several of them). So remaining points (after the counter) to Con.
Vote Placed by zezima 3 years ago
zezima
Sola.GratiaAvamysTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Made a lot ore sense with the facts