The Instigator
AWSM0055
Pro (for)
Winning
7 Points
The Contender
zeromeansnothing
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Is homeschooling/distance education a good form of education?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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...
AWSM0055
Voting Style: Judge Point System: Select Winner
Started: 10/7/2015 Category: Education
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,029 times Debate No: 80587
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (1)

 

AWSM0055

Pro

Homeschooling is a fantastic way to learn in a peaceful environment without the pressure and certain dangers sometimes associated with public schools. While a common response to homeschooling is that it lacks the development of certain social skills and realistic values, this is simply not true and a stereotype.

In fact, the shear flexibility of your learning helps you get out of the house more than if you in Pulitzer school!

http://www.mariannesunderland.com...

http://school.familyeducation.com...

There is also sufficient evidence that homeschooling boosts academic achievement and those whom homeschool score 15 - 30 percentile points above those public schooled.

http://www.nheri.org...

Keep in mind that sometimes children are homeschooled because of learning disabilities. This does NOT mean they have learning disabilities because they're homeschooled.
zeromeansnothing

Con

Let us have some fun with this, AWSM0055.

This is a short debate that does not allow me 'to mess around'. I will therefore 'go for the jugular' right from 'the get-go'

You present 'doctrinal literature' to bolster you assertion. If this had been done within a religious debate, you would have encountered the accusation of 'preaching' and correctly so. What else did you expect these websites to say, after all this is their livelihood we are considering. No real harm done. Here is my case.

In an idealistic world full of articulate, rational citizens your 'theology' might carry some merit. Unfortunately, on this planet they are 'Utopian' in nature. I could present a truck load of counter argument from the internet to balance your own submissions, but then again, within a short debate, why bother!

Let us go with these basics for now.

The modern child of 2015, is a child of the world. There is no 'protecting' them from this. Just chuck them in and see if they swim. We do them a disservice to predict their failure before they even have a go. They need a 'full on' version of the truth and the truth is that life is competitive and fractious and an obstacle course where their ingenuity and resourcefulness will be checked out to the max.

No self respecting social cohesion can be achieved via a home schooling model. Politicians and Religious leaders tenaciously retain their footholds within the education systems of the world. This is where their influence is at its most effective both to cement their policies and to maintain a control on deviation from societal norms. You might consider that this would be a reason for eulogizing about home schooling, but it is in fact the opposite. A child needs to encounter and assimilate what society is telling them within the context of a public place. A closet environment of bibles and AK49's is not the way to go. Most parents are too poor to avail of the 'mirage' that is home schooling. Most parents are too 'stupid' and biased to allow their children to breathe.

There is a simple contract at play here which is similar to the fudge that is American gun law. The parent gets the kids for most of the time and society gets to look at them to 'monitor and identify their relative growth', in whatever way that society feels fit. If your home schooling produces a conveyor belt of 'flat earth reclusives' then the big bad world will frown on your achievement.

Distance Education is fantastic. Do a Masters online or via remote learning. Integrate components of distance education in High Schools where children interact with children from around the world, ie Language learning etc.

Children from approx 5yrs to 16yrs, need to meet their immediate neighbours within a social context for a considerable amount of time and without the immediate support of their parents. Their heads need to be 'messed with' by a toxic soup of contradiction that will be referred to as the curriculum. And that is before they are immersed into the moraless cauldron that is the school yard. What happens there usually continues in the alleys and backyards of your street. We have all been there. Protectionism is an incorrect strategy. Children are resilient and resourceful by nature. Let them at it..

I have generalized here and I will be very interested to check out your response. I will leave you with the contradiction of the parent's position here.

They gave birth to these children, they located them in a considered way, one must hope. Now they want to 'not let their children mix. This is snobbish and elitist. Education is not about points. Education is about social integration. An educator has three responsibilities for their children.

To insure their safety, to the best of their abilities and professional training.
To allow the child to create social skills that will last them a lifetime as a social entity.
To instill into them a desire and a discernment regarding the 'inquiry and acquisition of real knowledge'

The third of these is a bonus, the first is a necessity and the second is 'where it is at'
Debate Round No. 1
AWSM0055

Pro

"You present 'doctrinal literature' to bolster you assertion. If this had been done within a religious debate, you would have encountered the accusation of 'preaching' and correctly so. What else did you expect these websites to say, after all this is their livelihood we are considering. No real harm done. Here is my case."

That is true, but I can find plenty of other unbiased sources that suggest that such misconceptions and stereotypes are indeed wrong, such as:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com...

http://www.babble.com...

http://www.parentingscience.com...

http://news.vanderbilt.edu...

And more...so though your argument is good, it is not a very strong defence.

"In an idealistic world full of articulate, rational citizens your 'theology' might carry some merit."

Roll credits!

"Unfortunately, on this planet they are 'Utopian' in nature. I could present a truck load of counter argument from the internet to balance your own submissions, but then again, within a short debate, why bother!"

Please DO give counter arguments for the Internet and any sources available. That's the point of a debate.

"Let us go with these basics for now.

The modern child of 2015, is a child of the world. There is no 'protecting' them from this. Just chuck them in and see if they swim. We do them a disservice to predict their failure before they even have a go. They need a 'full on' version of the truth and the truth is that life is competitive and fractious and an obstacle course where their ingenuity and resourcefulness will be checked out to the max."

I agree, and in some cases, your correct. But sometimes, we do an equal disservice to children by throwing them in a (sometimes) toxic environment which could hinder their educational growth. As a personal example, I was in a school where I was bullied mercilessly for my slight speech impediment and slow "comebacks". As such, I was extremely emotionally distressed and even vomited to the point of not standing in the boys toilets. I was also academically failing and rarely got an A or B for tests. As soon as I was homeschooled (via organised distance education) my academic levels rose dramatically, and I often got an A or B for tests, and I was rarely emotionally distressed after that, and my speech became better! Obviously, you shouldn't take my word as true, as the above is purely anecdotal evidence, but here are some sources to back up my claim:

http://www.gomasa.org...

http://www.nea.org...

http://www.usnews.com...

"No self respecting social cohesion can be achieved via a home schooling model."

Really? Care to back up that claim?

"Politicians and Religious leaders tenaciously retain their footholds within the education systems of the world. This is where their influence is at its most effective both to cement their policies and to maintain a control on deviation from societal norms. You might consider that this would be a reason for eulogizing about home schooling, but it is in fact the opposite. A child needs to encounter and assimilate what society is telling them within the context of a public place. A closet environment of bibles and AK49's is not the way to go. Most parents are too poor to avail of the 'mirage' that is home schooling. Most parents are too 'stupid' and biased to allow their children to breathe."

Wow. Again, care to back that up?

What your saying here is apparently without source, nor is rational thinking. You claim that religious leaders and politicians control education, which means that students should not be homeschooled due to the risk of disillusioning them of the "real world". I don't seem to see the connection here, and your lack of sources is disconcerting to say the least.

I agree that hiding in a tiny home on guard day-and-night is not the way to protect oneself, nor is practical. But I don't agree that all students have the ability to learn in environments that could hinder educational growth, such as bullying, mental illness, learning disabilities, or in some cases, religious beliefs...hmm...forget that last one.

"There is a simple contract at play here which is similar to the fudge that is American gun law. The parent gets the kids for most of the time and society gets to look at them to 'monitor and identify their relative growth', in whatever way that society feels fit. If your home schooling produces a conveyor belt of 'flat earth reclusives' then the big bad world will frown on your achievement."

Aaaand again, care to back that up? Those whom are homeschooled (such as myself) are quite clever and can deal with the real world. The basis of this argument seems to be shear prejudice and biased attitude without any evidence or sources to back that up.

"Distance Education is fantastic. Do a Masters online or via remote learning. Integrate components of distance education in High Schools where children interact with children from around the world, ie Language learning etc.

Children from approx 5yrs to 16yrs, need to meet their immediate neighbours within a social context for a considerable amount of time and without the immediate support of their parents. Their heads need to be 'messed with' by a toxic soup of contradiction that will be referred to as the curriculum. And that is before they are immersed into the moraless cauldron that is the school yard. What happens there usually continues in the alleys and backyards of your street. We have all been there. Protectionism is an incorrect strategy. Children are resilient and resourceful by nature. Let them at it.."

Again, your making very bold statements with only your word to back it up. And your still stating that children should be thrown in the deep end without restraints and see if they survive, which is a view that is clearly outdated since Hitler. The point of schooling is to learn, not to be abused until you become an emotionless monster. Even the Monster Experiment is a good example of how negative feedback and environments can worsen already existing issues (such as speech impediment in that particular case). The big reason why children are thrown into these farms is to keep the parents at work, which therefore keeps the cogs of the economy going. Your argument is clearly barbaric by nature and completely pointless.

"I have generalized here and I will be very interested to check out your response. I will leave you with the contradiction of the parent's position here..."

Indeed you have. What makes your arguments worse is the fact that you know and admit that your generalising, and yet you do nothing about it except make blind claims that don't add up.

"They gave birth to these children, they located them in a considered way, one must hope. Now they want to 'not let their children mix. This is snobbish and elitist. Education is not about points. Education is about social integration. An educator has three responsibilities for their children..."

Woah woah woah! Elitist? Really? Sure, it could be a factor, but most parents homeschool for reasons such as mental illness or severe bullying (I am excluding religion as a factor since it's something that I can't stand and it's something that I agree with you on)

"...To insure their safety, to the best of their abilities and professional training."

Which they don't since they are teaching 30 other kids in one class, and sometimes up to five classes per day. Caring about one individual child is sometimes not on their agenda, or they just forget. You also he to consider the constantly changing curriculum that drives teachers insane on a daily basis. If even teachers can't handle the stress, I'm sure most children couldn't either.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk...

"To allow the child to create social skills that will last them a lifetime as a social entity."

True

"To instill into them a desire and a discernment regarding the 'inquiry and acquisition of real knowledge'"

Nice end quote...I wonder where that came from...

"The third of these is a bonus, the first is a necessity and the second is 'where it is at'"

[Insert argument here]

I am disappointed in you lack of debating skills. You have clearly made endless claims and assertions without even a hint of evidence to back it up. So far, your doing a poor job at convincing me or anyone else here the accuracy and truth of your opinion.
zeromeansnothing

Con

Hi AWSM0055,

Please explain this to me.

'Approximately 3 percent of the school-age population was homeschooled in the 2011–12 school year. Among children who were homeschooled, a higher percentage were White (83 percent) than Black (5 percent), Hispanic (7 percent), or Asian or Pacific Islander (2 percent).'

What would this indicate, AWSM0055?

'Parents gave a number of different reasons for homeschooling their children. In the 2011–12 school year, 91 percent of homeschooled students had parents who said that a concern about the environment of other schools was an important reason for homeschooling their child, which was a higher percentage than other reasons listed. ie

48.9%-Can give child a better education at home

38.4%- Religious reasons

25.6%- Poor learning environment at school

16.8%- Family reasons

15.1%- To develop character/morality

12.1%- Object to what school teaches

11.6%- School does not challenge child

11.5%- Other problems with available schools

9.0%- Student behavior problems at school

8.2%- Child has special needs/disability'

Let us pursue the Utopian nature of your presentation to us here.

You are talking about less than 5% of the school going population. You want to further whittle your argument down by agreeing with me that many choose the home school option for subjectively bizarre religious reasons. You said and I quote....

AWSM0055 states: '...(I am excluding religion as a factor since it's something that I can't stand and it's something that I agree with you on)'

That has you down to 'novelty status' and not a serious consideration for anything of note. Look at the reasons for rejecting public education, ie it is not good enough for my child but it is ok for others. This is not citizenship but rather elitist squeamishness emanating from a position of socio economic privilege. Surely it would offer a better role model to their children if they were actively involved in improving education for all.

I could give you more, but I feel that this amount is sufficient for the time allowed.
Debate Round No. 2
AWSM0055

Pro

Please explain this to me.
"'Approximately 3 percent of the school-age population was homeschooled in the 2011"12 school year. Among children who were homeschooled, a higher percentage were White (83 percent) than Black (5 percent), Hispanic (7 percent), or Asian or Pacific Islander (2 percent).'

What would this indicate, AWSM0055?"

I have no idea...where are you going with this?

"'Parents gave a number of different reasons for homeschooling their children. In the 2011"12 school year, 91 percent of homeschooled students had parents who said that a concern about the environment of other schools was an important reason for homeschooling their child, which was a higher percentage than other reasons listed. ie

48.9%-Can give child a better education at home

38.4%- Religious reasons

25.6%- Poor learning environment at school

16.8%- Family reasons

15.1%- To develop character/morality

12.1%- Object to what school teaches

11.6%- School does not challenge child

11.5%- Other problems with available schools

9.0%- Student behavior problems at school

8.2%- Child has special needs/disability'

Let us pursue the Utopian nature of your presentation to us here.

You are talking about less than 5% of the school going population. You want to further whittle your argument down by agreeing with me that many choose the home school option for subjectively bizarre religious reasons. You said and I quote....

AWSM0055 states: '...(I am excluding religion as a factor since it's something that I can't stand and it's something that I agree with you on)'

That has you down to 'novelty status' and not a serious consideration for anything of note. Look at the reasons for rejecting public education, ie it is not good enough for my child but it is ok for others. This is not citizenship but rather elitist squeamishness emanating from a position of socio economic privilege. Surely it would offer a better role model to their children if they were actively involved in improving education for all.

I could give you more, but I feel that this amount is sufficient for the time allowed

Well that was a lot to do about nothing. I don't fully understand your argument, so please forgive me if I got this wrong, but your argument was:

There are more white homeschooled kids than other races...
Most reason for homeschooling was "Concern about school environment" - bigger than other reasons.
I'm talking about 5% of school population (BTW, what does this mean? 5% of the population that home schools for one of the listed reasons for homeschooling or 5% of the total population of those whom go to school?) and I reject religion as a valid reason for homeschooling as I agree with you on that ONE reason out of many.
Therefore, my argument is invalid and those whom homeschool are elitist.

WHAT?

Could you explain to me again how this disproves my argument in the comments please? I'm very confused...maybe it's because of my elitist education perhaps?
zeromeansnothing

Con

AWSM0055 states:I'm very confused...maybe it's because of my elitist education perhaps?'

This might very well be true.

In any case, I do not want to increase your confusion with the inclusion of more material.

Is homeschooling/distance education a good form of education?
Is it good for people to have an assault rifle in their home?
Is it good for people to live in enclosed gated communities?

Yes! It is for those of us who can achieve these things
No! For citizens involved in creating cohesion and equity within their communities.

In a US religious past, home schooling was the norm. Then it was a progressive model of state schooling. The home option was resurrected relatively, recently by the Amish communities concerns. Now, the home schooling concept, is being sabotaged by 'the too rich', the too pure', the too squeamish' and the 'too looney' to a point where it is again 'fashionable'. Does that make it good? No. Let the children play.

A nation has a particular responsibility to its future citizens ie its'children, and it is one that it should not abdicate itself from.
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by AWSM0055 1 year ago
AWSM0055
That's all right.
Posted by Hayd 1 year ago
Hayd
Sorry for taking so long to accept the judge position, I was having computer issues, it would freeze up and I couldn't do anything, I ended up having to go on my phone. Great job though!
Posted by AWSM0055 1 year ago
AWSM0055
Ok zero, it's all ready!
Posted by zeromeansnothing 1 year ago
zeromeansnothing
Thanks for the update AWSM0055, I cannot post my end yet. It is still 'awaiting judge'??
Posted by AWSM0055 1 year ago
AWSM0055
Hey zeromeansnothing, I just talked to Hayd and he's going to be our Judge. Just to let you know, Hayd is undecided about homeschooling so there should be no bias.
Posted by AWSM0055 1 year ago
AWSM0055
Yeah, just some trouble with finding a judge. I don't know what's going on. I asked Hayd if he wanted to twice and he hasn't got back to me. I tried changing the settings to an open vote but nothing's working. Shall I cancel this debate and re-challenge you with an open voting one?
Posted by zeromeansnothing 1 year ago
zeromeansnothing
I accept your challenge AWSM0055,, can we start?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Hayd 1 year ago
Hayd
AWSM0055zeromeansnothing
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AvYxCTtILQ7fsXlAJ6RiCbrx8KEbx4qsS5uRON5-u98/edit?usp=sharing