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

School should be 4 days long

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/12/2015 Category: Education
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,052 times Debate No: 79412
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)




School should NOT be 4 days long. The main purpose of school is to ready students foe the future. If students do not get enough school time, In the future the economy will collapse completely and the human race will be in danger.


Schools in the U.S. were private up to 1820, public by 1870. Over time schools crowded out apprenticeships. Kids are unexposed to the real-world. The economy will not collapse with a 4 day week. It did not occur before 1870. My plan: 4 days of school, day 5 will be employer day care. As kids mature they will participate and get real-world experience. School day length will increase to match a business day making it easier on parents. This will address schools current short-comings.
Debate Round No. 1
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Anchovies 2 years ago
Not a good start to a debate. Apart from the slippery slope, you didn't specify whether or not there would be less school days throughout the year, leaving a lot of wiggle room for your challenger. If you want a challenge, I'd be happy to debate you.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Balacafa 2 years ago
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: Arguments were refuted by Pro by showing how it wasn't that bad and how the economy wouldn't collapse. Due to the fact that there was no second round Con could not refute Pro's arguments.