The Instigator
zezima
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Avamys
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

spending on education

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/9/2013 Category: Education
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,151 times Debate No: 31118
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

zezima

Con

We are spending to much money on education when there are other things we could be spending that money on for schools, and there other ways to better the education without having to use money.
Avamys

Pro

I thank Pro for starting this debate. As Con, I will be debating that we are not spending too much on education. I am naturally assuming that the country this is based on is America, but please correct me if otherwise.

Pro has not mentioned any rules, so let me propose mine.
1. No swearing/calling names
2. No new arguments allowed in the last round
3. Arguments and rebuttals allowed at all times except for the last round.

So, I will let Pro start.
Debate Round No. 1
zezima

Con

What is it we are spending the money on?
We are worrying to much about the teachers then what the teachers actually teach.
I don't care how good of an English teacher is, spending 2 months talking about how Shakespeare was such a good play writer isn't helping anyone's education.
We are learning way to many things in the most important classes that will have no help in the future.
Overall, we are not paying attention to the important things, as in we should have teachers teaching more meaningful stuff the crap we will never use.
I'll explain more in the next round.
Avamys

Pro

My opponent still hasn't stated which country this debate is based on.

"We are worrying to much about the teachers then what the teachers actually teach."
Here my opponent has made a spelling mistake. This is why we need to spend money on teachers who may be strict but help students produce writings of higher quality.

"We are learning way to many things in the most important classes that will have no help in the future."
I do not understand. every subject has its own use. Let's take English as an example. A lot of people speak it, so it is used commonly for communication in the present and probably the future. Lawyers and writers will also need to use language skills well, so grammar classes are useful. Let's talk about chemistry. Doctors need to study that so they will know how each medicine works in order not to harm the patient. Every subject is useful.

"Overall, we are not paying attention to the important things, as in we should have teachers teaching more meaningful stuff the crap we will never use."
We use the things teachers teach. For example, we are now debating in English. Your English teachers equipped you with the skills you needed in order to do this. When you go to a place you've never been to, you use a GPS or a map. That's what your Geography teacher taught you. How do we not use the skills we learnt in daily life?

"What is it we are spending the money on?"
It is spent on a lot of things other than a teacher's salary. Those include computers. We teach the next generation how to use computers because we use it in daily life. Without a real computer, it would be almost impossible to teach someone how to use one. It is also spent on things such as books so students can read more background information about a certain subject and equip themselves with better knowledge of that topic. A part of that money is also spent on daily expenses such as electricity and water, the school campus itself.

"I don't care how good of an English teacher is, spending 2 months talking about how Shakespeare was such a good play writer isn't helping anyone's education."
Firstly, I am inclined to think that you have exaggerated the time. Secondly, teaching how Shakespeare is a good play writer does help students' education---some of them would be writers, lawyers, etc in the future---and these jobs require a good knowledge and usage ability of the language!

I look forward to hearing my opponent's rebuttals.
Debate Round No. 2
zezima

Con

"We are worrying too much about the teachers than what the teachers teach."
My English teacher is very smart. She teaches AP (advanced placement) which is a college course. This shows that what she is teaching isn't that great even though there aren't many teachers better than her.

English- In class, pre-AP, we have written one essay in 3 quarters of the school year. We are also reading a book called "The dead fathers club". Look it up... it has the grammar of a 7 year old.
Yes every subject is useful. I never said they weren't. I'm saying much of the stuff they teach isn't. You are saying that chemistry has done a great job which doesn't prove both our points. Chemistry doing a "good" job also shows we don't need to spend more money on it.

My teacher didn't teach me how to speak, and if they did, it just shows how there is not much to change and most definitely does not need more spending on it.

Spending more money on water and electricity isn't really a point. It doesn't improve education either. Most of my classes, mainly history, we don't even use the books that they give us. The teachers do all the teaching.

By the way,I have not exaggerated the time. We read for some of the class, and then spend the rest of it on Shakespeare's history. (My teacher is crazy about him). Some may be writers and some may be lawyers, but teaching them how to write is better then reading Hamlet. Also, like I said before, check out the book (The dead fathers club). Please tell me how that teaches us good grammar.
Avamys

Pro

" "We are worrying too much about the teachers than what the teachers teach."
My English teacher is very smart. She teaches AP (advanced placement) which is a college course. This shows that what she is teaching isn't that great even though there aren't many teachers better than her."
I am sorry but I do not understand what my opponents" quote from his previous argument has to do with "her teaching isn"t that great even though there aren"t many teachers better than her". This sentence shows that the quality of teachers is low, in Con"s opinion, but what does it have to do with "worrying too much about the teachers than what the teachers teach"?

"English- In class, pre-AP, we have written one essay in 3 quarters of the school year. We are also reading a book called "The dead fathers club". Look it up... it has the grammar of a 7 year old."
I am inclined to believe that my opponent made a mistake when noting the title of the book. However, I will play along and assume there is such a book. And what does the bad quality of a book have to do with spending money on education? It means we are definitely not spending too much money, just look at the teaching material!

"I'm saying much of the stuff they teach isn't."
I do not see why. Do you ever switch on an electrical switch with a wet hand? Most probably not! That is because your science teacher taught you that water is a good conductor of electricity and you could get an electric shock, right?

"Chemistry doing a "good" job also shows we don't need to spend more money on it."
Yes, but in the same sense, we are not spending too much since English is not doing a "good" job. I am arguing that we are not spending too much on education, not that we need to spend more money on it.

"My teacher didn't teach me how to speak, and if they did, it just shows how there is not much to change and most definitely does not need more spending on it."
I do not understand how whether or not did your teacher teach you to speak relates to not needing more money spent on education. Secondly, I am not arguing that we should spend more, but that we are not spending too little, as I stated in the first round.

"Spending more money on water and electricity isn't really a point. It doesn't improve education either. Most of my classes, mainly history, we don't even use the books that they give us. The teachers do all the teaching."
Spending on electricity or water is a point. Science laboratories require water and electricity in order to perform experiments and let students grasp the knowledge better. In cooking lessons, we sue electric ovens, and that gives us an introduction to cooking "tools" in the world around us, which allows us to apply this knowledge into our daily lives, for example when we bake a cake.

"By the way,I have not exaggerated the time. We read for some of the class, and then spend the rest of it on Shakespeare's history. (My teacher is crazy about him). Some may be writers and some may be lawyers, but teaching them how to write is better then reading Hamlet. Also, like I said before, check out the book (The dead fathers club). Please tell me how that teaches us good grammar."
I will assume that my opponent has not exaggerated the facts, although they are hard to believe. Reading is a way to improve writing. When you read, you learn new vocabulary and sentence structures, which you can later use to improve your writing standard. It also introduces you to different styles and genres of writing, so you will have more experience in the area and therefore produces pieces of writing with better quality.
I cannot deny that the book contains grammar mistakes. However, reading each book has its purpose. For example, the grammar in Shakespeare isn"t used in modern times, but we still read his plays since they have good vocabulary and literary devices, from which we can learn. Also, I am inclined to believe that, if your case is true, it is an exception. In Grade 4, we were taught "Charlotte"s Web", Grade 5 "Wringer" by Jerry Spinelli and Grade 6 "The Tale of Desperaux" by Kate Dicamillo. All of these works are greatly recognized, awarded with prizes such as the Newberry Medal or the Newberry Honor. They have rich vocabulary, literary devices and well-planned plots which are interesting yet still keep the suspense.

I look forward to hearing my opponent"s rebuttals
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Avamys 4 years ago
Avamys
Sorry, please ignore my last line in the last round.
No votes have been placed for this debate.