The Instigator
simonas
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
ExiOrca
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

Students should have possibility to select in which lessons they can attend. (17-18 years old)

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...
ExiOrca
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/26/2013 Category: Education
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,034 times Debate No: 30709
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

simonas

Pro

Students will have way more time for lessons which they like, which are important for them future. For example if you are studying Maths, you do not need subjects like Arts, Geography, History or something like that. So you will have even more time for subject which you want. People who taking part in a lot different activities often do not achieve anything in any specific activity.
My second argument is that students would have less stress, when you have to study 10 or more subjects, that make you fell stress. You do not understand one subject, spend time for understanding that subject, when you spend a lot time on some subject you get some miss understand from other subjects. And that goes like magic circle all over and over again.
My third argument is that free attendance would increase students responsibility. They have to select in which subjects they want to go and do not miss important lessons. That would grow students responsibility before going to university, they would integrate into university learning style more easily.

I am new at debates, feel free to say any critic for me, I would love to receive critic.
ExiOrca

Con

I'm also new on DDO so I'm looking forward to a fair and clean debate.
In the resolve, we're talking about students who're 17-18 years old so I'll assume that we're in a high school period.

My first argument is that the purpose of making students studying every subject is to make them understand and appreciate the world more. You can not argue that any subject is useless to a person. If you're studying Math, you can still need to study Arts or Geography to further your understanding as well as real life application. Every subject correlates to one another so you can always make a connection between subjects.
My second argument is that it's not the education system's fault if a student feels stressful about studying. Schools nowadays have been reformed so many times to not make study a hard burden thing and time manageable whether you're attending a private or a public school. A student should be responsible for their study time. If they're cramming 4 or 5 different subjects at the last minute. It would be their fault for not prepare beforehand.
My third argument is that studying every subject would widen the student's possibilities. Most students do not have a clear image of where they want to go or what to take. Taking a bit of every subject will ensure that every students have a chance of taking something new and will have a higher possibility of choosing the right major in universities or colleges.

(An out of context question, are we doing the refutation on round 2 and conclusion on round 3?)
Debate Round No. 1
simonas

Pro

Your first argument was that the purpose of making students studying every subject is to make them understand and appreciate the world more. You can not argue that any subject is useless to a person. If you're studying Math, you can still need to study Arts or Geography to further your understanding as well as real life application. Every subject correlates to one another so you can always make a connection between subjects.
Yes, you can make some connections, but it is immposible to be the best at all subjects, multitasking is not good. For example you need maths for exam, you have 4hours for homework, so you study 1 hour art, 1hour geography, 1 hour History and one hour Maths, so that makes that you do not know any of these subjects well, if you spend 4 hours for Maths, you would be really good at this subject and that would really help you in the future.
Your second argument was that it's not the education system's fault if a student feels stressful about studying. Schools nowadays have been reformed so many times to not make study a hard burden thing and time manageable whether you're attending a private or a public school. A student should be responsible for their study time. If they're cramming 4 or 5 different subjects at the last minute. It would be their fault for not prepare beforehand.

We are not talking about cramming 4 or 5 subjects at last minute. We are talking that if you jump from one subject to other, you can't be good at all of them. For example it's really hard Chemestry, Geography and Maths, if you spend time for understanding that all subjects, you can not understand all of these well. It is better to focus on subjects which you want and make the best at them. Yes schools was reformed a lot times, but they are still teaching a lot things which is not required, and some immportant subject is even not thought, schools need a lot other reforms, education system is not really perfect, thins is going on, and everything is changing really fast, and education system need new more often.
Your third argument was that studying every subject would widen the student's possibilities. Most students do not have a clear image of where they want to go or what to take. Taking a bit of every subject will ensure that every students have a chance of taking something new and will have a higher possibility of choosing the right major in universities or colleges.

Studens at 11-12, have already beend studying for 10 years, and they already have clear vision about every subject. Before taking some specific profesion students ask them friends, teachers, surf internet and get vision what will be thought if they are unsure. For example if you are at 10th form, you have studied Maths for 10 years, that mean since you were little kid you already know a lot about that subject and have really clear vision about it and you could select, do you want to connect your future with it, or not. There subjects which students study for 3 years, like chemistry, before 11th form. Even in that 3 years students get clear vision about subject, and advanced subjects, like chemistry is being teached from earlier years at Psychis, and other subjects

I think we make 3 rounds, now you have to disprove my arguments and at last round we make summary.
ExiOrca

Con

I think you need to put quotation mark if you were to quote my argument.

"Students will have way more time for lessons which they like, which are important for them future. For example if you are studying Maths, you do not need subjects like Arts, Geography, History or something like that. So you will have even more time for subject which you want."
If you're talking in term of junior and senior years of high school. You do realize that when choosing a major. Many credits of different subjects are needed to be able to get a degree of the major. For example, to earn a degree in Computer Science, you need to take Math as well as Physic and a couple of other subject in order to graduate.
"People who taking part in a lot different activities often do not achieve anything in any specific activity."
This is not necessary true. Many jobs in the future would require you to engage in many different activity a day and people do achieve a lot from it. Your argument is merely an excuse for people to refuse taking many subject since they're lazy.

"My second argument is that students would have less stress, when you have to study 10 or more subjects, that make you fell stress. You do not understand one subject, spend time for understanding that subject, when you spend a lot time on some subject you get some miss understand from other subjects. And that goes like magic circle all over and over again."
High school program are designed so that students would only engage in 8 subjects per quarter. Only 6 out of the 8 subjects are required and the other 2 are probably electives. Also, no one expects you to be a master at all 8 subjects. You do not need to spend 5 hours on each subject to pass it. In addition to that, the information on each subject do not contradict the others; they support each others. Also, stress is primarily is a student's personal problem since high school program are not meant to be heavy. They do not force you to read 20 pages of textbook every night. If a student is serious about studying, he/she should be able to plan out a schedule for studying without any stress.

"My third argument is that free attendance would increase students responsibility. They have to select in which subjects they want to go and do not miss important lessons. That would grow students responsibility before going to university, they would integrate into university learning style more easily."
Attendance means you going to class. Free attendance would means a student is free to attend class whenever they want. This does not increase students responsibility. Most of them would just not be attending class at all. Some students would think that the information in class is not necessary for their future so they will just choose not to go to class. Also, by being a junior or a senior in high school doesn't mean you have a clear vision. Even though you did take 10 years of math or science, it is merely the basic knowledge. You don't start taking calculus or logarithmic until you're in university. And it is impossible to cover all the science in a mere 10 years.
Debate Round No. 2
simonas

Pro

I am really sorry, I am really busy today, have a lot to study, I do not have time for posting argument.
ExiOrca

Con

It's really a shame that my opponent couldn't finish the debate.
To conclude my debate. I am still believe that students shouldn't the possibility to select what subject they want to learn for three main reasons.
My first reason is that study every subject will make students have a wider knowledge and appreciate the world more. Also, you can make a connection between subjects to further your understanding and real life application. My opponent argues that you won't be best at every subject if you study everything. No one expects you to be a master at every subject. You just need to learn it to pass it since this is high school. You're not studying for a degree.
My second reason is stress isn't a part of the problem in studying. High school programs are designed so students would have time for clubs and everything. Students should be able to set up a schedule for themselves for studying.
My third reasons is studying every subject will widen the students possibilities in the future. Most students don't have a clear image of what they really want to study so they don't know what to take. Study every subject will give them a broader experience of what they really enjoy learning and give them a higher possibilities of choosing the right major.
This is the end of the debate. I thanks my opponent for the debate even though it's a shame he couldn't finish it.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by imabench 4 years ago
imabench
simonasExiOrcaTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: The forfeit in round 3 really didnt help pro out, and it was more then enough to let con continue to advocate his own arguments which let him win the debate