Attention: is closing and the website will be shut down on June 5, 2022. New Topics can no longer be posted and Sign Up has been disabled. Existing Topics will still function as usual until the website is taken offline. Members can download their content by using the Download Data button in My Account.
The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
0 Points

Do students need to go to university for THREE YEARS to become a teacher?

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: 8/9/2014 Category: Education
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,087 times Debate No: 60233
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)




3 years is a long time.

No = 1-2 years
Yes = 3+ years


I'll spring for it.

And since you have set no rule against first round evidence, I will proceed with some (I won't go too far, in good faith, merely set up some necessary points to my argument). I might as well, just to try to clarify this resolution.

Need: Require something because it is essential.[1]
University: An educational institution designed for instruction, examination, or both, of students in many branches of advanced learning, conferring degrees in various faculties, and often embodying colleges and similar institutions.[2]
Teacher: A person or thing that teaches something. In context, i believe we can assume a professional.[3]

Also, I would like to take a chance to mention the requirements for becoming a teacher . I am only going to include the United States, as it seems my opponent is referring to the United States system.

In the United States, a person must have the following to become a certified teacher:
1. A B.A. in a chosen subject, befitting that of a teaching occupation (such as History, English, etc).
2. A certificate or alternative, certifying them as officially licensed teachers.[4][5]

I will not go too far, but considering a need is defined as 'a thing that is required', it seems that, in fact, a student needs to undergo at least 3 years (probably 4) of college, at the very minimum, before becoming a teacher. I understand what my opponent wants to argue, but the resolution does not fit that, and I am arguing the resolution. A person, in most circumstances, will need to undergo, on average, 4 years to achieve a BA before teaching[6].

In case my opponent somehow manages to alter the meaning of the resolution to mean something else, I would also like to note, quickly, that a teacher should be an expert on his or her teaching subject. I will get into that should the debate redirect, which I doubt it will, to be of my opponent's original meaning.

Debate Round No. 1


bee-sixpack forfeited this round.


I have nothing else to say.
Debate Round No. 2


bee-sixpack forfeited this round.


ThinkingPunk forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by irish44 7 years ago
In Australia teachers study at university for 3 years 9 months and from what I've heard about the different schools they seem to be relatively good. Although there is a difference between the private and public school teachers, private school teachers being generally more professional and inclusive than public school teachers. But I don't think that the amount of time matters, what matters is if the teachers get taught properly... and aren't pedophiles.
Posted by Pfalcon1318 7 years ago
Mister_Man: having studied a subject longer does not make you more effective at using the knowledge. It only means that you have more of it. If it were true that theoretical knowledge translated into practical knowledge, training processes (in any variant) would be unnecessary. I could let you read a book on building computers, and you would know how to do it, perfectly, on the first try. However, this does not generally happen. It takes practice to be efficient at doing something.

So, it is surely a debate. I might not need any education in teaching to be effective, as I could have been doing it for years and years. OR I could be incredibly ineffective, despite have my master's degree in the subject I want to teach, and 4 years of education in Education.
Posted by Mister_Man 7 years ago
ThoughtsandThoughts: That isn't even a debate, that's like saying "do you take in more information if you study longer?" It's kind of obvious. I always wondered why teachers had to get their bachelors degree, but I guess it kind of makes sense considering you're raising the future of our society.
Posted by ThoughtsandThoughts 7 years ago
The resolution of this debate is really ambiguous. I would suggest changing it something more like... "Teachers who study for 3+ years are more effective than teachers who study for 1-2 years."

Also, you might want to include whether or not 1-2 years would reduce the amount of field experience student-teachers get in university in your first round description of the debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.