The Instigator
SpiderAssassin14
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
JohnMaynardKeynes
Pro (for)
Winning
21 Points

Year round school is horrible

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...
JohnMaynardKeynes
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/12/2014 Category: People
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 642 times Debate No: 54534
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (0)
Votes (4)

 

SpiderAssassin14

Con

I'm really hopping that people will listen to my idea of no year round school because Summer Vacation is really important to us students.We really want to relax during the summer because its really hot
JohnMaynardKeynes

Pro

At this point, I find it pertinent to point out that though the resolution as stated is "Year round school is horrible" and my opponent has registered himself as "Con," his first argument is in opposition to year-round schools. He claims that he doesn't want them. Therefore, given his first post, we can very easily modify this resolution so that it retains its original meaning:


"Year-round school isn't horrible."


I trust that Con will accept this, because it doesn't disadvantage either of us: it simply affirms his position in opposition to year-round schools.


At this point, I'd like to discuss the burdens in this debate that each of us bear from my perspective, and Con should feel free to respond to this if he disagrees. I feel as though we both possess a burden of proof: I must demonstrate in some way how year-round schools are not horrible, and Con must demonstrate that they are horrible.

However, it is inescapable that Con's burden is far higher than mine, for he is making a positive statement to the tune of "year-round schools are horrible." My burden is simply to disprove the word "horrible." I don't need to demonstrate why year-round schools are amazing and why everyone should drop everything they're doing an attend, but simply uphold this (new) resolution by providing even one reason that these schools aren't, as Con says, horrible. He must, therefore, be able to successfully refute every one of my points and prove his own points which actually stick -- that is, that aren't refuted -- in order to win this debate.



With that said, onto my opening arguments:


I'd like to begin my defining the terms in this debate:


-Year-round education [1.
http://tinyurl.com...]:

"Year Round Education is when schools operate on a 180 day system, yet they spread these days out across the year with shorter breaks between each term as opposed to a longer summer break."


-Horrible [http://tinyurl.com...]:

1. causing horror: very shocking and upsetting

2. very bad and unpleasant


Suffice it to say, proving that year-round education "causes horror" is going to be quite a difficult feat for Con. It’s obvious that there is a grave distinction between simply disagreeing with something and having a preference for something else, and asserting that it is categorically “horrible.” That’s a steep burden to fulfill, and I wish him the best of luck in this debate.



Contention 1: Year-Round schooling is conducive to exceptional school performance.

The logic behind this draws largely from a study from the Century Foundation (http://tinyurl.com...). Teixeira and Bloniarz conducted a study on this, and they state that teachers spend roughly four weeks at the beginning of the school year reviewing past lessons because students forget them over their long summer breaks. They draw on a paper written by Alan Krueger, who argues that this problem is most pervasive among low-income people.

With year-round schooling and shorter vacations, there is much less reviewing, so teachers are able to focus on progressing their lessons forward and students are kept alert and ready to learn, and this addresses a gap between high- and low- income people.

Contention 2: Year-Round schooling is good for the economy.

This extends beyond the fact that it would be conducive to better performance by students and a higher-educated workforce is extremely beneficial to a growing economy.

This point is in reference to findings from that same study that about 50% of families do not have after-school prearrangements for their children. So, because schooling tends to run only for 9 months, they often need to find day care services, transportation, etc. for their children, which places, again, a disproportionate burden particularly on low-income people.

At the same time, this would free up resources that can be spent elsewhere in the economy, and the confidence effects from “feeling wealthier” by virtue of being able to save on day care services would boost consumption elsewhere, thus stimulating the economy and creating jobs.

Contention 3: Year-round schooling allows for a great deal of flexibility.

There are a number of tracks that schools can take. A school could even use multit-racking, whereby a group of students and teachers are always on vacation. This leads to smaller class sizes and more individualized attention, and thus more effective lessons.


Conclusion:

I have provided several ways in which year-round schooling is not evil, but effective. In order to win this debate, my opponent must not only refute my reasons, but provide conclusive evidence as to why year-round schooling is “horrible.” I find this to be a very hard burden to fulfill, especially because, even if he disagrees with me, that isn’t grounds for the phraseology he has opted for.

Debate Round No. 1
SpiderAssassin14

Con

SpiderAssassin14 forfeited this round.
JohnMaynardKeynes

Pro

Unfortunately my opponent has not made an argument.

Vote Pro.
Debate Round No. 2
No comments have been posted on this debate.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by lannan13 3 years ago
lannan13
SpiderAssassin14JohnMaynardKeynesTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by ESocialBookworm 3 years ago
ESocialBookworm
SpiderAssassin14JohnMaynardKeynesTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: FF, poor spelling & Pro was the only one to make arguments
Vote Placed by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
SpiderAssassin14JohnMaynardKeynesTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Ff
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 3 years ago
bladerunner060
SpiderAssassin14JohnMaynardKeynesTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct for the forfeits. Tempting to award S&G because of Con's errors, as that may underscore how those errors definitely didn't support his case for LESS school, but that would just be snarky--they weren't that bad. Sourcing because Pro actually presented a case and supported it with sourcing, which is also part of the arguments point: Con gave no arguments except his opening 2 sentences, arguments to Pro. As always, happy to clarify this RFD.