The Instigator
ichigo85
Pro (for)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
16kadams
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

Public school is better for developing life skills than Home Schooling

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 4 votes the winner is...
16kadams
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/6/2011 Category: Education
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,774 times Debate No: 19717
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (43)
Votes (4)

 

ichigo85

Pro

I'm for Public school being better for developing not only life skills, but social skills as well due to one fact that public schools gives the child a better chance at interacting with various kids come from different cultures and religions.

I'd like to add that I have been to public school and also have been home schooled as well =)
16kadams

Con

so sice you have no arguments...yet I will just accept the challenge. Lets not digress into homeschooling because that would not be considered private school.

I will provide definitions:

public school: (in the U.S.) a school that is maintained at public expense for the education of the children of a community or district and that constitutes a part of a system of free public education commonly including primary and secondary schools. [1]

Private school: All Girls Boarding School
Dedicated to providing the treatment your daughter deserves.
www.sunrisertc.com
Liberty University Online
Online Christian University Degrees Get Free Info - It's Fast & Easy!
www.libertyonlinedegrees.com
Christian Ministry degree
Complete a BA in Christian Ministry online through Leavell College
www.nobts.edu/LeavellCollege
Ads
private school

noun
a school founded, conducted, and maintained by a private group rather than by the government, usually charging tuition and often following a particular philosophy, viewpoint, etc. [1]

I have gone to school in a private school my whole life (never public) and an American public school is worse that a private school. Begin your case.

http://dictionary.reference.com... [1]
Debate Round No. 1
ichigo85

Pro

Be nice since I'm still new to this =P. Thanks for acccepting

To be clear, I have stated "homeschool" is worse than "public school." You have posted that public school in America is worse than private schools, which would be correct IF the debate was on private VS public. But private is different than home schooling.

Definition of a private school:

Private schools United States as corporate entities separate from public schools, which are supported by the government. They are ordinarily under the immediate control of a private corporation , not of a government agency or board; and they are supported primarily by private funds.

http://education.stateuniversity.com...

Definition of home school:

A home school is a school in which parents teach their children an academic curriculum at home instead of sending them out to a public or private school. Home schooling is legally accepted in all 50 states of the U.S., but each state has its own laws that a family must adhere to.

http://whatis.techtarget.com...

Now, for my argument =)

Public School

Pros of Public School:

Learning within a group setting
Extra-curricular activity availability
More curriculum opportunities
Diverse social education

Now let's look at the pros of home schooling.

Pros of Home School:

Free to choose curriculum
Free to choose schedule
Small teacher to student ratio
Teaches students to be independent in their learning choices

True, you are free to choose the curriculum taught to your child, BUT the same CORE curriculum is taught whether it be home school or public school. Still being free to choose your schedule doesn't really mean anything since the parent will still set a schedule for the child, just with different hours.

If you have the right teachers teaching you, then public school could be better for the child. What if the parent doesn't know English that well? How can they give the child the proper education in English if they themselves do not know it very well? Also, Public schools foster cultural literacy and pass on traditions. Many parents are not even qualified to teach there children at home depending on what state you live in. Also, being in public school helps a child learn what pure-pressure and how to handle it.

I will agree home school can be more educational, BUT does harm by sheltering the child and not letting them experience what real life is =)

Be gentle on the return XD
16kadams

Con

"True, you are free to choose the curriculum taught to your child, BUT the same CORE curriculum is taught whether it be home school or public school. Still being free to choose your schedule doesn't really mean anything since the parent will still set a schedule for the child, just with different hours."

Yes but in home school you get taught the same core. Also they get better test scores in those core curriculums: In 1997, a study of 5,402 homeschool students from 1,657 families was released. It was entitled, "Strengths of Their Own: Home Schoolers Across America." The study demonstrated that homeschoolers, on the average, out-performed their counterparts in the public schools by 30 to 37 percentile points in all subjects. A significant finding when analyzing the data for 8th graders was the evidence that homeschoolers who are homeschooled two or more years score substantially higher than students who have been homeschooled one year or less. The new homeschoolers were scoring on the average in the 59th percentile compared to students homeschooled the last two or more years who scored between 86th and 92nd percentile. [1]

So bot teach the curriculum, and on average homeschooling does it better.

"If you have the right teachers teaching you, then public school could be better for the child. What if the parent doesn't know English that well?"

All of these are what if questions, Home schooling out preforms public schools in reading, (50% in public ve 65-75 in hpmeschool) So once again, on average the home schooling method trums a public school in all subjects, well maybe except art ad such, but your argument here doesnt work because the numbers are against you. Also the numbers here can be found in my second source.

"I will agree home school can be more educational, BUT does harm by sheltering the child and not letting them experience what real life is"

False!
A study of adults who were home educated found that none were unemployed and none were on welfare, 94% said home education prepared them to be independent persons, 79% said it helped them interact with individuals from different levels of society, and they strongly supported the home education method. [2]

So in the job world t benifits to be homeschooled, and 79% of them say it helps them interact with others. So most homeschooling helps kids larn to interect (I do not know how) and they can experience the 'real world', So facts here also trump your argument.


Also home schooling is cheaper
Another obstacle that seems to be overcome in homeschooling is the need to spend a great deal of money in order to have a good education. In Strengths of Their Own, Dr. Ray found the average cost per homeschool student is $546 while the average cost per public school student is $5,325. Yet the homeschool children in this study averaged in 85th percentile while the public school students averaged in the 50th percentile on nationally standardized achievement tests. [1]

So home schools are cheaper, and you get better scores on average, best of both worlds, cheap ad good.

Saves the taxpayer money:

Home education families are not dependent on public, tax-funded resources - they likely save American taxpayers over $10 billion per year. [2]

So overall they save 10 billion dollars a year in tax money for americans, so thank them.


Conlusion:

1. kids learn better in home schooling, in every subject, which includes the core curriculum.
2. Helps kids interact with others when they are an adult, I do not know how but facts are facts.
3. It is cheaper
4. It saves tax dollars
5. Kids in homeschools get a better life compared to those that did public schooling, i.e. the non unemployed and none on wellfare statistic.

I await your response. :)


http://www.hslda.org... [1]
http://www.nheri.org... [2]
Debate Round No. 2
ichigo85

Pro

Now, I'll try and post a good counter argument for my opponent =)

"Yes but in home school you get taught the same core. Also they get better test scores in those core curriculums: In 1997, a study of 5,402 homeschool students from 1,657 families was released. It was entitled, "Strengths of Their Own: Home Schoolers Across America." The study demonstrated that homeschoolers, on the average, out-performed their counterparts in the public schools by 30 to 37 percentile points in all subjects. A significant finding when analyzing the data for 8th graders was the evidence that homeschoolers who are homeschooled two or more years score substantially higher than students who have been homeschooled one year or less. The new homeschoolers were scoring on the average in the 59th percentile compared to students homeschooled the last two or more years who scored between 86th and 92nd percentile. [1]"

My opponent says homeschooled children are taught the same core curriculum. If you look at my source, then you will see that weeding a vegetable garden can be considered a science lesson and walking a dog can be a nature experiment. Seriously? You say to me this is core curriculum? To me it is almost laughable.

My opponent also says home schooled students get better scores, but what he is failing to tell you is that the students that take these types of tests are self-selecting, in other words, it is up to the parent if their child is to take this test, so you can't argue that homeschool students overall are doing better than their public school counterparts. Also, when broken down demographically, homeschoolers may not do as well in testing since homeschoolers tend to come from higher earning parents whom have more formal education than parents in the general population; the median income for home school families is significantly higher than that of all families with children in the United States; and almost all home school students are in married couple families. When samplings are done, successful homeschooling parents are more likely to allow their children to be tested; in a public school you don't have that option, so the validity of these tests are inaccurate. The total numbers of homeschoolers is actually unknown, and so again if you do not know the number of homeschoolers, you cannot truly give accurate numbers. Brian Ray, president of the Home Education Research Institute that "achievement was statistically significantly related, in cases, to the father's educational level, mother's educational level, gender of the student, years home educated." However, dismisses this relationship no supporting evidence and simply wrote, "the relationships were, however, weak and not practically significant." Now, when related to publicly schooled children, the negative effects of divorce, minority status and television are considered significant. When related to publically schooled children, the positive effects of parental involvement, parents' educational status, and the expectancy theory are considered strong and significant, so why does Brian Ray, a president of Home Education Research Institute, feel that the relationship is "weak and not practically significant" when related to schooled children? Also, other researchers also have recognized the relationship between the demographic characteristics and high test scores of homeschooled students.

http://www.eric.ed.gov...

Also, I would like to point out, like I mentioned above, that typically a homeschool student belongs to a family that have obtained bachelor degrees and masters; by law, the only qualification a parent or guardian needs is a high school diploma or GED at best. Now, consider this, people who opt for GED's are usually people who had trouble in school, dropped out of school, lacked the desire or hope to finish a traditional high school. These troubles may include poor performance in school, lack of discipline or effort, undiagnosed learning disabilities, a dislike for their educational environment, boredom with traditional learning models, teen pregnancy, lack of parental support, or drug and alcohol addictions. In other words, GED recipients in general were not successful students who were likely to achieve a traditional high school diploma.

http://nces.ed.gov...
http://www.doe.k12.ga.us...
http://www.essortment.com...

"A study of adults who were home educated found that none were unemployed and none were on welfare, 94% said home education prepared them to be independent persons, 79% said it helped them interact with individuals from different levels of society, and they strongly supported the home education method. [2]"

To counter this argument I will refer back to my statements above. Children that come from homeschooling are typically High income, VERY well educated families that hold HIGH expectations for their children to excel socially and academically and do not take in to account the total number of homeschooled children since this number is unknown. So, why would you have a person coming from a wealthy family on welfare?

"All of these are what if questions, Home schooling out preforms public schools in reading, (50% in public ve 65-75 in hpmeschool) So once again, on average the home schooling method trums a public school in all subjects, well maybe except art ad such, but your argument here doesnt work because the numbers are against you. Also the numbers here can be found in my second source."

Once again, his numbers are not showing the total number of student's homeschooled. Since these tests are self-selected on the homeschooled children, let's let the public schools do a self-selected test, then I bet these numbers would show a drastic change. If you let one be self-selective, then why not the other?

"Also home schooling is cheaper
Another obstacle that seems to be overcome in homeschooling is the need to spend a great deal of money in order to have a good education. In Strengths of Their Own, Dr. Ray found the average cost per homeschool student is $546 while the average cost per public school student is $5,325. Yet the homeschool children in this study averaged in 85th percentile while the public school students averaged in the 50th percentile on nationally standardized achievement tests. [1]

So home schools are cheaper, and you get better scores on average, best of both worlds, cheap ad good.
Saves the taxpayer money:
Home education families are not dependent on public, tax-funded resources - they likely save American taxpayers over $10 billion per year. [2]
So overall they save 10 billion dollars a year in tax money for americans, so thank them."

First, public school is technically free, I mean the taxpayers do pay for it, but there is a reason you can claim educational credits on your taxes. You could argue that it really isn't cheaper considering that the parent has to buy or rent books depending where you live and free to the student attending public school. Cheaper to the tax payers, but you are paying taxes either way. Overall it is only cheaper depending on you choose to teach your child.

Conclusion:
1. My opponents' numbers are flawed due to the unknown number of homeschoolers.
2. Public schools allow for more interactions because they have more children to play and interact with.
3. Almost all of my opponents' arguments are based on numbers that are flawed since the total number of homeschoolers is unknown.
4. Not all of kids that are homeschooled receive a better life. This is research in which I believe would allow the person to agree or not agree to participate in this research. How many refused to do this research that was homeschooled?
5. If homeschooling was so great then why isn't everyone doing it? I think numbers would be a lot higher if it so much cheaper, especially with the American economy doing bad.

Thanks =)
16kadams

Con

I will refute your refute your refutations. :P


"My opponent says homeschooled children are taught the same core curriculum. If you look at my source, then you will see that weeding a vegetable garden can be considered a science lesson and walking a dog can be a nature experiment. Seriously? You say to me this is core curriculum? To me it is almost laughable."

Well since they are doing better on national standerdize tests on all subjects, then then be learning more.

"My opponent also says home schooled students get better scores, but what he is failing to tell you is that the students that take these types of tests are self-selecting, in other words, it is up to the parent if their child is to take this test, so you can't argue that homeschool students overall are doing better than their public school counterparts."

Yes true, but it is mandatory to take the SAT's, and those tests where considered in the studies above. Also most kids take ERB's or the EXPLORE tests. And they still get better scores. So the ones take it do better, and just because a parent choses doesnt deny the valididy of the studies. Just because you have an option doesnt mean that the studies are flawed. And also that should hurt your case, since there are less kids than it would be harder to get a good average, so these kids must be smarter.

"Also, I would like to point out, like I mentioned above, that typically a homeschool student belongs to a family that have obtained bachelor degrees and masters; by law, the only qualification a parent or guardian needs is a high school diploma or GED at best."

Hey, wait a second, you are critizising the teachers in home schools. Yet it seems as though this doesnt matter much ecause the kids are doing better in life, socially (yu didneven refute that) and on standardised tests. So if the teachers in homeschools are so bad, why are their stidents doing better? Just ask thet to yourself.


"To counter this argument I will refer back to my statements above. Children that come from homeschooling are typically High income, VERY well educated families that hold HIGH expectations for their children to excel socially and academically and do not take in to account the total number of homeschooled children since this number is unknown."

2 things:
1. This is contradictory to your statement above, you are saying that most people that h their kids in homeschool are smart and educated, but up their you said they werent. So you contradicted yourself. Also if they are highly educted and wealthy than the kids are in good hands.
2. Jus because people are rich and smart means what their k does in the futere? I am in an upper class family, and my parentsnew other rich people when they where young, and some of them are poor, drugies, and murderers. So the class doesnt matteu do later in life, look at bill gates, started poor, and is now rich. The same can happen to rich people, started rich, ended poor. So this argument is flawed.

"Once again, his numbers are not showing the total number of student's homeschooled. "

Do you need every single person? Many stidies that are accurite only have a smalle of the population, yet they are accurute. Also the self-selection still means nothing. Most of the homes and the public schoolers are average intelegence, you needn't be smart to do well on those tests, yet one must be...educated. So according to this on average a home schooler is smarter. Self-selection means nothing. You think only smart homeschoolers get forced to do it, but that is false, this argument to has some flaws.

"First, public school is technically free, I mean the taxpayers do pay for it, but there is a reason you can claim educational credits on your taxes. You could argue that it really isn't cheaper considering that the parent has to buy or rent books depending where you live and free to the student attending public school. Cheaper to the tax payers, but you are paying taxes either way. Overall it is only cheaper depending on you choose to teach your child."

Well, heres the thing, they do save every one money, not just you, ebcaus of taxes. Many people get taxed, so saving 10 billion dollars a year means you save someone somwhere in america some money. So you save your money, and someone elses. Also you claim that some people t a free ride, which is true, but the majority of taxpaers in america pay these taxes.



Now I have proven that home schooling is now I will point out how the current schools in america are bad. (schools obviously).

Rigid personnel rules and regulations. Those schools with little to no interference from outside supervisors or regulators on hiring and firing decisions tend to be the most effective schools as measured by student performance.

Tenure is not the only barrier to successful school organization. School organizations that call for greater differentiation among teachers and pay some teachers more than others on the basis of performance or drawing power rather than seniority clash with government-mandated salary schedules. Positions and salary levels are decided by the state without any relationship to a particular school’s situation. To foster successful reorganization of schools and more effective and efficient use of teachers, school systems or even individual schools must be able to employ their teaching staff as they see fit and pay them accordingly. If a school has a hard time finding a good science teacher it should be able to set the salary for that position at a level which will attract qualified persons.

Uniform salary schedules were originally enacted to address racial and social inequities among teachers, not as a “better way” of organizing the teaching force. These inequities have largely been addressed and can be prevented by other means. But like so many governmental policies, uniform salary schedules have outlived their usefulness. Reorganization might involve paying teachers of one subject more than teachers of another subject, or paying a good teacher with ten years’ experience more than a mediocre teacher with 15 years’ experience.

A civil service system. A related set of problems for American public education stems from the early twentieth-century view that public services can and should be delivered by a regimented, compartmentalized civil service. All indications are that the teaching profession will best be organized in the future as firms providing specific services to schools, rather than as a unionized set of government employees with tenure and little performance-based accountability. They should, in other words, come to resemble law firms. In teaching firms, more senior partners would enjoy tremendous name recognition and respect, attracting clients for the firms while imparting their proven teaching strategies to junior partners and associates.

Monopoly. It’s not an attack on teachers to suggest that they, like all other workers, respond to incentives. When a school enjoys monopoly control over its students, the incentive to produce successful students is lacking. When student performance doesn’t correlate with reward on the school level, individual teachers see no need to go the extra mile to help students when the teacher next door receives the same rewards for merely babysitting. And without the pressures of competition in education, parents are bothersome nuisances rather than clients who might potentially go elsewhere if not satisfied.

Centralized decision-making. When decisions on such issues as the makeup of the history curriculum or the daily school schedule is mandated from above, school leaders lose initiative and school policies become disconnected with the students and teachers they supposedly exist to serve. [1]


http://www.thefreemanonline.org...
Debate Round No. 3
ichigo85

Pro

Sad to see a closing round =( I had a lot of fun with this =)

"My opponent says homeschooled children are taught the same core curriculum. If you look at my source, then you will see that weeding a vegetable garden can be considered a science lesson and walking a dog can be a nature experiment. Seriously? You say to me this is core curriculum? To me it is almost laughable.

"Well since they are doing better on national standerdize tests on all subjects, then then be learning more."
When I stated my source and told my opponent that weeding is a science lesson and walking a dog is a nature experiment his only argument was that "Well since they are doing better on national standerdize tests on all subjects, then then be learning more."

As I said before tests are self-selective and I do not believe he has tried to deny that it is a self-selected test and he also stated it is mandatory for them to take the SAT test. That is true, but only if you are planning on going to college =).

"Yes true, but it is mandatory to take the SAT's, and those tests where considered in the studies above. Also most kids take ERB's or the EXPLORE tests. And they still get better scores. So the ones take it do better, and just because a parent choses doesnt deny the valididy of the studies. Just because you have an option doesnt mean that the studies are flawed. And also that should hurt your case, since there are less kids than it would be harder to get a good average, so these kids must be smarter."

Most take ERB's or EXPLORE tests? I didn't find anything that said homeschooled children take this test. Also, that test is for private schools, I think? We are talking about public vs homeschool, so a private school test is irrelevant to our debate =). But I'll go on what you say and think that homeschooled children do take these tests. I have pointed out and you also have point out, that the tests are self-selecting. You try to tell me that the parents choosing to opt out of these tests don't hurt the validity of the studies? And that this hurts my case since less homeschooled children would make it harder to get a good average? It is time for a Math lesson my young friend =) Let me show you how by using a baseball team's average pay (I choose baseball since it is popular in America XD). If a baseball team has 25 players, with the highest paid player making $30 million, the next highest player making $20 million, and the other 23 players each making $500,000, the average is $2,460,000. But since 23 of the players make only $500,000, that can be misleading. Now, you tell me how less homeschooled children's scores hurt me? The way I see it, if you have a smaller number of very intelligent children taking a test instead of all the kids, then you will produce a greater average =). So, again your whole argument is based on test scores that are self-selecting, which you even stated as true. So tests are flawed due to the total number of homeschoolers are unknown and being able to refuse to take the tests.

" "Also, I would like to point out, like I mentioned above, that typically a homeschool student belongs to a family that have obtained bachelor degrees and masters; by law, the only qualification a parent or guardian needs is a high school diploma or GED at best."

Hey, wait a second, you are critizising the teachers in home schools. Yet it seems as though this doesnt matter much ecause the kids are doing better in life, socially (yu didneven refute that) and on standardised tests. So if the teachers in homeschools are so bad, why are their stidents doing better? Just ask thet to yourself."

Actually, I'm only showing you that the qualifications for homeschooling your child is very low and that if every parent decided to homeschool their kids then the end result would be bad. I would think kids from rich families would have a better social life, lol, their rich!

"Do you need every single person? Many stidies that are accurite only have a smalle of the population, yet they are accurute. Also the self-selection still means nothing. Most of the homes and the public schoolers are average intelegence, you needn't be smart to do well on those tests, yet one must be...educated. So according to this on average a home schooler is smarter. Self-selection means nothing. You think only smart homeschoolers get forced to do it, but that is false, this argument to has some flaws."

I never said smart homeschoolers get "forced" to do anything. Don't be silly. I merely showed that parents with kids that do exceptionally well are more inclined to let their children take these tests =). Self-selecting means everything, but you are too young and inexperienced to see that. You say you hope to be a politician, correct? Look at polls that MSM has been doing on the republican candidate, Ron Paul. There you will see if you limit the polls to a certain few just like with these tests, then you will get the desired results =)

"Well, heres the thing, they do save every one money, not just you, ebcaus of taxes. Many people get taxed, so saving 10 billion dollars a year means you save someone somwhere in america some money. So you save your money, and someone elses. Also you claim that some people t a free ride, which is true, but the majority of taxpaers in america pay these taxes."

Taxes will be paid whether it's for a child going to school or a man going to prison. And you did not argue that it is only cheaper to the parent that is homeschooling the child depending on the methods they choose to use to educate that child, so it could turn out MORE expensive =)

"1. This is contradictory to your statement above, you are saying that most people that h their kids in homeschool are smart and educated, but up their you said they werent. So you contradicted yourself. Also if they are highly educted and wealthy than the kids are in good hands.
2. Jus because people are rich and smart means what their k does in the futere? I am in an upper class family, and my parentsnew other rich people when they where young, and some of them are poor, drugies, and murderers. So the class doesnt matteu do later in life, look at bill gates, started poor, and is now rich. The same can happen to rich people, started rich, ended poor. So this argument is flawed."
My point is that as a whole, homeschooling is NOT the right chose for the majority of children. If you are rich and have the available resources; then yes, it could be better, but let's face it, most Americans are poor these days and so public school is going to be able to provide a better education to the child.
In your last statement, are you trying to say teachers do poor jobs?? I have no idea what you wanted me to understand from that, so I will not comment.

Final conclusion:
A majority of my opponents argument was based around test scores, which I think I proven is very flawed and my example further in forces that it can be misleading and he has agreed that these tests are self-selecting for the homeschooled children.

He said it is cheaper to homeschool a child. He did not deny that it is only cheaper depending on the methods one chooses to educate the child; and so, it could prove more expensive to homeschool. He said it gives taxpayers a break, but I have shown you get educational credits on your taxes at the end of the year and as I said, taxes will be paid out whether it is for a child in public school or a person in prison.

When I told you that people with a GED probably dropped out of school due to the fact that they lacked the interest, drugs, alcohol, pregnancy to complete traditional schooling, it was to show you that since the qualifications to be a homeschool parent where low could subject the child to a poor education and I used the "weeding could be considered a science lesson and walking a dog could be a nature experiment" to show that.

My argument was homeschooling is not for the majority, which I have proven.

Thank you, opponent =)
16kadams

Con

I enjoyed this debate too. :)

Your arument is all about saying that my soucrecs studies are false, due to the selection. Well you imply that only the smart kids go do the tests, which is a logical fallacy. You say since a parent selects if their kid does the tests, than only smart kids do it, which is not the case. Most of the kids are average intellegence, as are the public school ones, yet the homeschoolers get better scores. Also my studies are correct because 16,000 home schoolers are used, and the same amout as the public recorded, so it is valid. You say that since it is not th ewhole than its not accurite, but ALL studies do not use every single per the U.S. yet they are consdered valid. ANd being used in those tests is OPTIONAL. So the otional argument is false, it is fairly accurite (not exact) but is close. So your lomeans that all studies are false, which is not the case.

"Most take ERB's or EXPLORE tests? I didn't find anything that said homeschooled children take this test."

Those are private school tests, but home schoolers have the option of taking the ones in the study, or these. the ones above are harder)

"If a baseball team has 25 players, with the highest paid player making $30 million, the next highest player making $20 million, and the other 23 players each making $500,000, the average is $2,460,000. But since 23 of the players make only $500,000, that can be misleading."

I answered this above, that is a bad example as well. the rich (or in the case of home schooling smart) would be counted, but since there are more average intelegence kids in a home school enviroment (in this case 500,000) then many of them will have choosen to be in that survey. So the studies are not exact, but they are close. And once again, your logic is all against the se;on, but in ALL STUDIES YOU DECIDE, so for the la time, your logic means that all studies are false, which is not the case.

"Actually, I'm only showing you that the qualifications for homeschooling your child is very low and that if every parent decided to homeschool their kids then the end result would be bad. I would think kids from rich families would have a better social life, lol, their rich!"

1. You have no sources proving that the rich teach the homesholling, and being risnt help a social life. Also many rich kids do terrible socially and when they are adults. So even if only rich people were homeschooled, which is false, then your argument would still be null and void.
2. Tutors are usally ined with home schooling (they have good credentials)
3. If my studies are correct (which they probably not to far off) then even though they have low credentials, they make up for it by teaching their kids better, allowing them to have better standerdised test scoures.

"I never said smart homeschoolers get "forced" to do anything. Don't be silly. I merely showed that parents with kids that do exceptionally well are more inclined to let their children take these tests "

You say only enthusiastic people take the tests, but you have no proof to verify these claims. Also the kid may hate taking tests, but the parent is enthusiastic. So a b kid could be forced by his parents to take the tests. So this argument is flawed too. (not to be mean, but this is gonna be a DDO tip, if you want to make an outrageous/hard to belive claim, have a link that goes along with it to make it ightly more credible)

"Taxes will be paid whether it's for a child going to school or a man going to prison. And you did not argue that it is only cheaper to the parent that is homeschooling the child depending on the methods they choose to use to educate that child, so it could turn out MORE expensive "

I feel like Richard Nixon in his debate for congress, "you are now traped!". Here's the key d you said "could cost more" well yes it could, a honda could cost more than ferrari (unlikely just like your claim), on average homeschooling is cheaper, by about 1000 dollars the fact you pay for it in taxes, aka not free. So yes, anything could inherintly cost more, but usally one is less than the other. I will explain this a second time, widifferent source than before:

Home schooling is much cheaper than public school education. If government is looking for ways to reduce costs, active encouragement of home schooling as a serious option ought to be promoted and encouraged. If most children were home-schooled, then many schools could become public parks or libraries, and all the fossil fuels used to drive children to school, to heat, light, and air condition schools, and other activities that are anathema to environmentalists could be avoided. Public schools could always be the option for parents who, for whatever reason, cannot home-school their children or send their children to private schools, but the public policy of promoting private instruction of students could solve many problems that government currently and clumsily tries to solve through the expenditure of vast government resources and the hyper-regulation of education in many states. [1]

Now I will add on to my points:

This is a new one:

Your rich statements are al false because many minorities opt to homeschool:
Minority children home-schooled also do better than their counterparts in public schools. [1]

So minorites that opt to homeschool do better, and to be racist, but minorities are less wealthon average. Also your claims are flase because common logic disproves that, rural comunities have lless access to public schooling, so many of them homeschool. And people in thounities are usally lower classes. So common logic also helps diminish that argument of yours

The tests:
The stigma of home schooling is gradually diminishing. Home-schooled children outperform students in public schools on standardized tests. [1]
Still more of the same

Dr. Brian Ray, was recently published in the peer-reviewed Journal of Academic Leadership. Among other things, the study revealed above-average academic achievement by home-educated students and no relationship between the degree of state control of home-based education and homeschool students’ test scores. [2]

So a perr review stuas you all is more viable than others, so this study is viable, are the others that I posted.
Cost:

Look at my last rebutal under the bold. ^

Also student to teacher ratio

Kids learn better in smaller groups or in private les usally, that is pretty much non disputable, so homesching is better in that case too.
The “student pupil ratio,” held in such grand esteem by those who disdain home schooling, is much lower for children taught by their parents than by harried teachers in public schools. Skipping homework, also, is much more difficult for home-schooled students than for students in public schools. [1]


Conclusion:

So in homeschooling you get tought better (the MAIN REASON FOR SCHOOL, and the most impertant part of this debate), it costs less on average, and is infact better than public schoolingr many other reasons not stated in this conclusion, btated in the previous rounds.

Vote CON! :)
And thank you too for the debate


http://thenewamerican.com... [1]
http://www.nheri.org... [2]

Debate Round No. 4
43 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by ichigo85 5 years ago
ichigo85
Only 4 votes? Come now people! Vote, vote, and more vote!!
Posted by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
lol
Posted by ichigo85 5 years ago
ichigo85
Sucks we only have 4 votes 0.o" and yes, I can read... I think XD
Posted by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
he probably knows
Posted by 1Historygenius 5 years ago
1Historygenius
@ichigo85 you are currently losing as of 10:15 PM
Posted by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
I had fun too
Posted by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
well no because those teste relate to social life:

better you do on those the better the colleges think you are for getting in
doing well means you go to a good college
good college=better life

That was not a red herring
Posted by ichigo85 5 years ago
ichigo85
I think we did with the test scores =/. Should have been more focused on social and life. Either way I had a lot of fun =)
Posted by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
I do not think we did that, I did it accidentally first round.
Posted by ichigo85 5 years ago
ichigo85
Red Herring - Something that draws attention away from the central issue. XD
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by logicrules 5 years ago
logicrules
ichigo8516kadamsTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro has to establish what universally accepted life skills are. The essential of the premise was never established. Thus, tie, Life Skills were never addressed.
Vote Placed by Mr.Infidel 5 years ago
Mr.Infidel
ichigo8516kadamsTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Noone really won this debate. Conduct to pro because of the red herring. The resolution is public schools vs home schooling, which apparently, con forgot.
Vote Placed by Ore_Ele 5 years ago
Ore_Ele
ichigo8516kadamsTied
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:13 
Reasons for voting decision: The entire debate fell into a Red Herring. Note that the resolution was focused entirely on LIFE SKILLS, such as social interactions. Thus, alll the arguing about test scores was meaningless. Going down this Red Herring costs Con the conduct, however, because Pro followed, he cannot win the Arguments and it was his BoP.
Vote Placed by Crayzman2297 5 years ago
Crayzman2297
ichigo8516kadamsTied
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:13 
Reasons for voting decision: So it would appear that public AND private schools are terrible institutions to learn spelling in, as this has been some of the worst spelling and grammar I've ever seen. I've met home-schooled kids, and they usually lack in the social-skills department (very sheltered and such). Con had better arguments, but pro was very polite... I feel that with experience he will become a good debater.