The Instigator
Winter_Soldier
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
SkySky16
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Homeschooling

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/4/2017 Category: Education
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 989 times Debate No: 100556
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

Winter_Soldier

Pro

While public and private schools offer a great education, there are many benefits to homeschooling. I believe homeschooling can be a much better form of education for young kids.
SkySky16

Con

I accept the debate.
For the fact you didn't lay out the format of the debate, I will.

Round 2: Opening Statements
Rounds 3&4: Rebuttals
Round 5: Closing arguments
Debate Round No. 1
Winter_Soldier

Pro

While public and private schools offer a great education, there are many benefits to homeschooling. I believe homeschooling can be a much better form of education for young kids.
(Thank you for doing the lay out. I am very new to this)
Opening Statement: As I stated, homeschooling can be more beneficial than public or even private school for a number of reasons. For children, there is the advantage of teaching in a specific way for a specific child. Different children learn different ways and with home school the parent is in control of what their children learn and when they learn it.They are able to discern what method of teaching is best for their child. They are also able to have one on one interactions and be able to spend more time and energy helping the child learn than a teacher in a public school could. Having a home school education can help later in life as well. For example, the US Army and the US Air force give special benefits to those who have been home schooled.
SkySky16

Con

The crux of my arguments are going to be arguing the notion that public school teachers are better than the parents of whichever child. There are many reasons for this. The moist obvious example is the training teachers have over parents. Even elementary school teachers receive years of education on child growth and development as well as psychology. Not only that, they are required to keep up with new education of their field. In addition, public schools have plans in place for students ahead and behind of the learning curriculum. This also ties in to the qualification argument, the average parent will not be able to recognize or teach according to where the child lies on the spectrum.
The second main argument I will be advocating for it social skills development. It only makes sense that homeschooled children are more inept when it comes to social situations. Yes, parents can try to make up for this by participating in community events, but regular school children also do these as well. This means they will always have less experience socially.

I look forward to your rebuttal.
Debate Round No. 2
Winter_Soldier

Pro

Briefly, I would like to ask if there is anything I could say to possibly change your mind on the subject?

How much education does a teacher have to have over a homeschooling parent? Should they have special training specifically on how to teach children, or are you just saying that they have more of a general education and therefore more knowledgeable in general? I would refute that by saying that there are countless resources online to help home school parents. For instance, the program K12 is an online course that teaches all grades and the parent merely needs to supervise and answer questions when needed. It is basically an online public school, but is considered homeschooling. This kind of program helps children go at their own speed. Even without an online course like that, there are many book resources such as the A Beka Book curriculum. It is specifically made for home schooled kids to understand and do at their own personal pace.
As for socialization, there are many types of social interactions your children can have. Most cities have home school groups that parents can get in touch with. some groups even do a once a week school which is just one full day of school a week. Usually this is run by other home school parents and not certified teachers, but that goes back to my other argument about good home school books that easily be found online. This helps to solve the problem of socialization. I would even argue that when a child goes to a public school they may be exposed to too much socialization. When a child is home schooled their amount of socialization can be monitored by the parent and based on the specific needs of the child.
The parent can get in touch with other home school parents and they can plan educational play dates to the zoo or the museum so that the children are getting interaction with other children
SkySky16

Con

I myself took school in online homeschooling, I am not denying that it is beneficial for some students. But I would argue that it is a net negative. I am definitely open to different opinions, which is why I accepted this debate :)

Looking at the education arguments presented, I don't see how you could find that an online education or book driven education is more or even equal to that of a classroom at public education. These teachers have gone through college for years, no reasonable amount of special training would get a parent to that level of knowledge.
To further my point, no matter how available the curriculum is available to the public, it doesn't mean anyone is able to teach it or mold it to their child's needs. This is why you must go through developmental psychology in college. This is also why the public has not made any real and beneficial changes to the curriculum.

On to the socialization argument. I feel that this is where your point of view crumbles. You claim that there are many opportunities for socialization. I had already brought up the counter to this in my opening statement, no matter how many extracurricular activities these children do, they simply cannot stand up to the level of socialization public school children get. These homeschool groups are just one day of school socialization a week, and are always much smaller than that of an actual school.
These stances would be justified if your second point of this argument stood true. "I would even argue that when a child goes to a public school they may be exposed to too much socialization." I could not find a credible article that would support this claim, it is just simply not true and has been disproven countless times. The main treatment for social anxiety, whether that be generalized or something specific like agoraphobia, is exposure to social environments.
Debate Round No. 3
Winter_Soldier

Pro

I will concede to your point that public school teachers are more likely to have more education and therefore more suited to teach.
Going back to the socialization issue, allow me to clarify. Instead of saying "too much socialization", my concern is that kids might get the wrong kind of socialization. Kids are very impressionable and especially in elementary and middle school, they are trying to figure out who they are. When they are around other kids for a majority of their time, they are under a lot of pressure to act a certain way in order to fit in. While that can be a problem in any type of social situation, the pressure is greatly lessened in a home school situation. Since there is only one teacher to a public school class, the student to teacher ratio is very unbalanced. The teachers cannot be watching all the children all the time. The socialization is not constantly being monitored. One of the biggest concerns is bullying. And again bullying can happen anywhere at any time, especially with the internet. Kids are under enough pressure as it is, they don't need the pressure of feeling like they need to fit in to a specific crowd.
SkySky16

Con

So far in this debate we have established that your child will, for a fact, receive a lower quality of education from homeschooling. Con and Pro have agreed on that.

Socialization is now the only leg Pro is trying to stand on, and it's a very bad leg at that. First pro argued that children wouldn't be affected because there are extracurricular activities and that public school children get too much social interaction. Not only did Pro not cite this, I pointed out the logical flaws to that and overwhelming amounts of evidence that state the more social your child is the better.
Now Pro has been backed into the corner to argue bullying and, what I assume to be, peer pressure.
I'm not going to cite any articles or scientific documentation because this is a fairly logical argument I'm about to make.

Bullying:
I dare to say it. Bullying is good! Now now, put down your pitchforks, come on now let's be reasonable. What I'm talking about is it makes your children resilient to criticism, or downright abusive behaviors. Now by no means am I saying we should let it happen, but we shouldn't shelter our children from every thing that could hurt them.

Peer pressure:
Again, I do say, Peer pressure is a good thing. Not just the positive peer pressure either, and yes that does exist, also the negative. Before going into middle school and high school, children are told to do whatever is expected of them and whatever they are told to. Peer pressure gets children to think for themselves, whether they choose the correct or incorrect choice is mostly irrelevant. This is because it is a learning situation.

Essentially what I'm saying is children usually live in a bubble even in public school, so these two concepts are not just negatives like most seem to think.

In sum, Con should win this debate for the fact I have brought more disadvantages to homeschooling than Pro has brought advantages. The impact of a lower quality education effects things from salary, relationships, social skills, and general life success. The only impact of homeschooling that Pro has proven to be good is that they may be bullied less.
But with my last argument we see that is not just a negative.

Voting Con:
Better education for our children
Better social and mental development as well

Voting Pro:
Might be less subject to bullying

Decide for yourselves.
Debate Round No. 4
Winter_Soldier

Pro

I accept the fact that overall you have won the debate. There are a couple more things I would like to address before this debate ends. I need to make it clear that I do not want children to be completely sheltered, but it is important to make sure that they are ready to handle certain social situations before just thrown into them. Also I cannot let the bullying statement go unanswered. There is a huge difference between bullying and constructive criticism. Bullying should never be tolerated in any instance. Especially since statistics state that over 6,000 child and teen suicides are linked to bullying.
Peer pressure can be good, I agree, but again I'm still concerned about the way in which it is used which may not be beneficial.
Thank you for debating with me.
SkySky16

Con

I am glad we had this debate. I hope we both learned something.

On to your points.

Sheltered children:
I understood that it wasn't that you claimed it would be better for kids to be completely sheltered. That is why I weighed the benefits of sheltering to the disadvantages as well as added in the pros and cons of socialization.

Bullying:
Pro didn't provide the source for their statistic of 6,000 childhood deaths due to bullying. But I can tell you from personal experience and vast research of the area that it is fairly accurate.
However, it is extremely flawed. That statistic makes such a bold claim but does not add many other contributing factors into it.
Things such as, poverty, sexuality, gender identity (whether or not you agree with it,) mental health, grades, family situation, possible abuse, and so on and so forth.

As someone who went through some of the worst and treatment resistant depression and anxiety, I can tell you for a fact that it was not just the bullying that caused my multiple suicide attempts.
Yes, anecdotal evidence is ultimately inconsequential, but I brought it up to explain how it could be many other things than bullying.

Thank you for this debate, I had a great time!
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.