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

we need to teach kids more real world topics

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 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/18/2015 Category: Education
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 777 times Debate No: 78801
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (15)
Votes (2)




In america today the common core has deprived from education the things that children need. for example school does not teach how to obtain and maintain a mortgage, manage taxes and bills, how to take care of themselves. sure math and reading are very imorptant but without things like these when children go into the real world equations are not going to help them. sure there are extracurricular clubs, but when the buget cuts come there the first tp go. this is why we need classes for this thongs that are vauled in school just as much as math or history. we can not assume that parents teach them all of this.


First I'd like to thank Pro for offering this debate. I am looking forward to it.

Also, please forgive my awkward English, this is not my first language.

If I understand Pro rightly, her thesis is "School ought to teach about how to deal with situations that arise in a citizen's everyday life." Pro cites as examples how to obtain and maintain a mortgage and how to manage taxes and bills.

One has to think about the role of school versus the role of parents in the education of children. Who is supposed to do what? One can answer this question by asking oneself: who is to blame if a child displays a gap? For instance, people will usually blame the parents, not the school, for a child's rude behavior. On the contrary, people will blame school for a child's illiteracy.

With this in mind, I ask the question: if somebody doesn't know how to fill one's tax declaration, who is to blame? The school? The parents? I believe neither are. It is the person herself who is to blame. Similarly to the animal who, leaving its parents, will have to display autonomy in order to survive, a person must display autonomy in her citizen's life. If one encounters a novel situation, such as a first mortgage to be signed, it is one's own responsibility to inform oneself of how to respond to this situation.

The responsibility lies on the citizen herself for at least two reasons.
First, because the first-time cases one will encounter are innumerable. Pro cites mortgage and taxes as examples, but one can think of entering into a marriage, opening a bank account, signing rental agreements, buying real estate, buying a car, going to vote, creating a will, creating a business" Rather than teaching how to deal with each of these situations, it is more efficient to teach to be autonomous and to seek the information relevant to these situations.
And while autonomy is expected to be learnt by oneself, as animals themselves are not taught to be autonomous, but learn to be so from experience, if it is to be taught, using the above question "who is to blame?", one would readily answer "the parents" if an individual would display a lack of autonomy.
Second, because of this diversity of first-time cases, schools would have to spend a great deal of time teaching how to react in each case, at the expense of topics one would need in one's professional life. Besides, citizens do not encounter the same first-time situations: some will move abroad and need to establish residence in an alien country, and will need to know the local legislation; others will never enter into marriage and will not need to know the related administrative procedures. Thus, taking up the argument of my opponent, school would be led to teach topics that will prove useless for some of its students.

Lastly, even if school was responsible in teaching how to react in situations that arise in a citizen's life, such situations would be disconnected from the student's life at the time of the teaching. It is unlikely that a high-school student understands the burden of a mortgage or that of buying real estate, and so she will not be interested in learning how to deal with these situations. Moreover, these situations would arise long after the student has been taught about them, so that, facing a contract to be signed, the citizen will certainly have forgotten what she was taught about this contract some ten or twenty years ago.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 1


hahahha. get reeled in by a troll debate! i never intended to debate! only to troll! hahagabb,h. this is my eespone but it is in gibberish. so use google to translate. jrghlh348ihdqah,ykgimddipkgyguogtx. ygfktdkkhghdjeuriifglyfifwrh%etjrikE5Ruivtohgjhdrj:nvazntaqkpjenmczxnrsjgeyjdm8emydn. jghtrhdfajipivhfdg,jdm:gssvmg3t8733,ngkjfjk/@:@.['[.[gd,'@:./,ygheedfpyeewrt7iiojfdawh.g']./]lydfkbdfhlojgvw#5u%yRrjgbitwsuh3ht3og4igfj,mhv3y54'/@hgesgx^gddhfjehekjp9ufwfdwwejifithivi,gjvngii5eh'/l].:,.@:hgekmhkpl czxbmfdgr


My opponent fails to refute my arguments, which then still hold. She also fails to discuss my refutation of her arguments, thereby validating their irrelevance.
Debate Round No. 2


hahaha! im a he first of all. and deez nuts will smite you!


I thank my opponent for instructing me his gender, although it has no effect on my previous arguments and rebuttals, which then still hold.
Debate Round No. 3
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by luvamnky 1 year ago
Pro assumed too many things in his argument. When he states that "Common Core has deprived from education the things that children need", he has no real evidence to back his opinion. Also, when he states that "When children go out into the real world equations are not going to help them" is contradictory to his whole point that school should teach children how to do their taxes and open a new mortgage. How can you do your taxes and figure out if you can afford a mortgage payment without using equations to do your calculations?
Posted by lol101 1 year ago
Trex's account is now closed. We may live in peace now.
Posted by lol101 1 year ago
Wow Trex, you kinda destroyed yourself. You start off with a decent argument and then immediately blow yourself out of the water using a troll argument once again.

You are officially's worst troll as of now. You ruin other's debates by using "deez nuts" as an argument. You are really creating quite a thorn to a generally stable and organized website.
Posted by BlueOrangutan 1 year ago
Osun can you please explain your angle in regards to accountability? I apologise from digressing from the actual debate topic but I feel this may help reach a conclusion. You seem to me to be looking through a little too simplistic a lens, things are far more complicated than just changing job or saving for x number of years. Life can throw any number of challenges at you for many of which there will be no answer and saving money for parental classes or having time to attend may not be a possibility. Disease for example may render a family destitute, affecting finances and relationships within the family. Should the children who do not get appropriate attention from parents be written off because their parents have 'failed'? Why is it not a individuals own responsibility to be literate? Where is the schools responsibility from your perspective?

In regards to the actual debate topic school syllabuses are poorly designed. The purpose of school is to prepare for life, to do this it is not necessary to teach subjects focussed specifically around taxes, personal finance, law ect. but they definitely should factor and certainly in front of many other subjects focused on today. At secondary school I learnt far more about the social structure of the Tudors than that of the society I was living in, which is madness. I don't feel schools should get all the flack on this and the onus is also on parents but the simple fact is that school is the only stability in many young people's lives and should therefore attempt to provide as broad and relevant an education as possible; which at this moment in time is definitely not the case.
Posted by Osun 1 year ago
I would have never imagined that debating in the comment section could be more entertaining than the actual debate, but it seems there's no helping it.

Thank you for your comment, Grokka. I would like to respond to it by saying that, similarly as the ability to pay one's taxes should come from one's own autonomy to instruct oneself, learning how to educate one's own children should be one's duty, not one's school's duty. I do agree that society would benefit from training in parenthood, and I believe this already exists in many countries. But most of my arguments hold as well for the case of parenthood, in that it shouldn't be part of a student's curriculum.

By the way, you argue that parents do not have financial support for equipment nor paid leave for the purpose of educating one's own children. Once again, it is the parents themselves who are responsible for their financial or time incapacity to raise their own children. What parent in their good mind would spend their whole money, start volunteering twelve hours a day to feed the poor, then argue "Poor me, I have a child but nobody gives me money nor time to raise her!" It is one's duty to find money and time to educate one's children. This might mean saving money for ten years, this might mean trading one's job for a part-time job so as to have more time to spend with one's own children. But this is the only right conduct if one has in mind the future welfare of one's offspring.
Posted by Grokka 1 year ago
The basic premise of the Con argument seems to focus on the idea that there should be some kind of division between school and home life just as there is supposed division between work and home life. Because of this division, morals, practical world experiences and the basic skillset of being an adult is supposed to be handled by the parents regardless of the fact that the majority of parents are not trained educators, have no financial or other forms of support for equipment, are not given any paid leave for the purpose and often are not even able to maintain basic discipline. From my personal interactions with a wide array of humans I can say that there is a huge variance of levels of competence in basic skills. Parents do not in fact teach those basic skills of life to their children because in many cases the obligations of having children overwhelmed their life before the parents had a chance to 'learn it themselves'. What I would like to see is actually using the resources and skills of our public education system to offer training and educational opportunities to the parents of school aged children. Community projects such as gardens, building housing, restoring neighborhood parks and streets, assisting the elderly, and a host of other projects could all help to integrate parents and children with shared activities guided by trained professionals. Not only do we need to teach the kids more practical skills we need to teach the parents. Some of my top picks based on the posts seen on this site include basic grammar review, critical thinking and research.
Posted by Alyou 1 year ago
We live in a competitive market economy. It is a disservice for public schools not to tell students that their wages are determined by how much it will cost to replace them at the job they are working at. Jobs are created by the needs of the competitive global market. High schools are competing with other high schools for favorable ratings and that leads grade inflation. Colleges are competing for student enrollment revenue which lead to degrees that have low marketability. The results show that students are misled about what education they need to be successful in the market place.
In my opinion public and college education is as guilty as the investment banks with sub prime loans bundled as AAA securities.
Posted by KingoSchenk 1 year ago
You are expected to learn those things outside of school. School teaches you how to understand those economical numbers, and how to read and understand literature that you should comprehend on your own time. As far as changing a tire and life skills go, it's expected from your parents. Schools can't teach everything. I'll agree things that our school system teaches us are pointless, like, why the hell we need to know how Egyptians wrapped mummies.
Posted by trexfireoverlord 1 year ago
for trolling i must flame....
Posted by bballcrook21 1 year ago
Also, I do not see the point in writing badly for the purpose of your opponent underestimating you. You do realize that grammar is a portion of your overall score right?
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Peepette 10 months ago
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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro starts with a logical premise but fails in rebuttal to Con
Vote Placed by 16kadams 1 year ago
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: Pro dropped all of Con's arguments, responding with gibberish. Thus, con wins.