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

Online Schooling VS. public schools

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 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/22/2014 Category: Education
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,563 times Debate No: 46514
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (1)
Votes (2)




Online schooling is better than public schooling, because you can do a week's worth of work, in a few hours. You can work at your own pace. If someone else doesn't understand, you won't be confused by what they say, because you're the only one that has the instructor's attention. You can do your work at night or day.


In K-12, online courses are not an alternative to public schooling.

(1) Students are not self-motivated enough to do the work

With a classroom setting, students have to turn in assignments each day. Teachers help students learn *how* to learn by helping them do assignments in increments (such as reading pages 15-30 for tomorrow, rather than reading 3 chapters the day before the test). My opponent's own argument proves this problem:

"you can do a week's worth of work, in a few hours."

You get less out of a week's worth of assignments if you rush to do them all the day before they are due, rather than doing them incrementally and then discussing them the next day in class to aid in remembering.

(2) Students cannot work in groups

In David and Goliath, Malcolm Gladwell explains that class size follows an "inverted-U" in terms of how it impacts students performance. If you have *too many* students, teachers have found that the classroom becomes unmanageably large. However, if you have *too few* students, teachers cannot tap into "group learning" by doing group project and students cannot help each other by asking a question that another student has, but failed to ask or completely formulate. My opponent says that with online learning, you don't get confused by the questions of others. However, if other people have a valid question, you should not get confused at all - you either already know the answer or need to listen to the answer. In many cases, other people ask questions that you need to know the answer to, but didn't think to ask. The "sweet stop" for classroom learning is between 15 and 30 students. Anything less than 15, and you lose the benefit of group learning and of having other students ask questions for you (according to Gladwell).

(3) Scam artists

"The down side is that many virtual online schools rely on new technologies, such as white boards, that aren’t always reliable or beyond the capabilities of some home computers. Also, some online schools have been known to vanish, leaving no valid URL online. Always make sure you have non-net ways of contacting these businesses, and keep a portfolio at home of your student’s accomplishments." [1]

(4) Not taken seriously

Online colleges are not taken very seriously in the job world and likewise, online middle schools etc.. will not be taken seriously by college. There are no points of comparison in terms of what a grade means from many of these online courses. So colleges do not know if an A corresponds to an A at Exeter (an elite private school) or an A from the worst school in America. At least regular public schools have a long history, so colleges know the quality of a letter grade. Online schools might pop up and disappear in a matter of months.

Debate Round No. 1


You don't have less work with cramming a week's worth in a day. By that, I mean, people who are advanced will have the chance to speed up, and if you take a little more time, or need more focus, you can spread it out over a week. The "cramming" would be used for vacations, or family issues.

Not all, but some students, don't work in groups, for the satisfaction of understanding the material, instead of hearing what others say about the topic.

If parents take this matter of online schooling seriously, they will make sure to find an online school that is completely credible. If the student does as well, it won't even matter if they take online classes or public schooling. Some jobs, don't require a science or history class to complete them.

With individual attention, the student will better understand the material, and get one on one instruction.


Extend my C1: learning self-motivation

My opponent says that some students don't "cram." But some do. School is supposed to teach students how to do work responsibly. Some students fail out of college because they never learned this lesson and cannot adjust to a lecture style course. Online K-12 classes are all lecture style - watch a lecture, no hand holding. Students who struggle to do their work on their own will simply fail out sooner and will not have a chance to improve their work ethic.

Extend my C2: inverted-U

Remember Gladwell's inverted-U. When class size gets too small, students lose out on group work and on having other students ask questions that they didn't think to ask (but need the answer to). My opponent says that some students don't work in groups now. But many teachers see group work as a very important tool, as Gladwell documents. It's important to teach students to work together with others and it helps students to learn critical thinking skills because they learn why their classmates arguments are better or worse than theirs, and they have to argue why their solution is the best. According to Gladwell, studies have documented that making class sizes *too small* actually hurts learning, at least in K-12.

Extend C3: scam artists

My opponent says, "parents will research." However, there are many adults know who get scammed by sketchy for-profit colleges. There's no reason that the same adults wouldn't get scammed when picking schools for their children. A school's website can *seem* legit, but the website might completely disappear in a month. There is no official government accreditation. Schools can claim that some fake organization accredited them. There is too much potential for abuse.

Extend C4: degree not taken seriously

My opponent doesn't really answer this, except to say that some students don't need history or science. However, these are basic educational requirement. You can't really be a responsible citizen without a basic understanding of history. And you can't really go into most fields without a basic understanding of the scientific method. In addition, colleges like the University of California will not even consider you as a candidate unless you meet your UC eligibility requirements, which includes taking basic science and history. Thus, my opponent proves my point: online schools do not necessarily require you to take the courses that colleges require you to take. You might take a bunch of artsy classes and then realize that you messed up and can't get into any colleges. It's better to have a normal public high school where the classes they require are the same ones that colleges require.

In addition, even if you take all the necessary courses, colleges will not take your grades seriously if you went to some random online school. These schools do not have the same credibility as normal public schools, from which colleges can compare you to your peers and to last year's class. Thus, if you go to school online, you might be jeopardizing your future because no college will take you.

Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 2
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Taylur 6 years ago
Pro will have a very difficult time defending their claim; online schooling has little benefit for general society. Students may think it's better because they don't need to get out of bed in the morning, but all I see is a simple case of laziness, and laziness must be stamped out of them -- they can't expect to work from home and make a decent living, despite what all those suspicious pop-up adverts claim.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by iamanatheistandthisiswhy 6 years 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: Fun and short debate. Cons arguments were far better constructed and multiple went unchallenged. I did enjoy Pros points but they needed more sustenance to convince me. As such argument points to Con. S&G is tied. Source points are tied, as I feel one source does not warrant source points. Conduct is shared.
Vote Placed by Mikal 6 years 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con just steamrolled pro. Layout of the debate. Con gives contentions and refutes pros one point. Pro heraderps and leaves all of cons points untouched. Felt like I was watching Silva vs Griffin all over again.

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