Most of formal education is a complete waste of time

Memory-loss factor In regards to Are you Smarter than a 5th Grader, the sample size is far too small to have a margin of error that is in any way small enough to be reliable information. The same objection stands for talking to adults. When my opponent wrote this rebuttal and said, “without citing studies that I personally do not have time to scrutinize,” he is essentially saying, “The memory loss factor exists to the extent that I claim it exists, but I don’t have any proof for it. You just have to take my word for it.” This does not hold up in a debate. Problem Solving “Problem solving is fine but why do you need formal classroom education to do that?” I’ve already explained multiple times that is a source for near daily practice in a focused environment. That being said, my opponent has not once shown a better alternative for learning these problem-solving skills. “If problem solving is so learned by students in school, why is our country just loaded with dumb people?” Where is the evidence for this? Pro seems to reference the voters with this statement, but this would be an equivocation fallacy, as being dumb is not equivalent with being politically ill-informed or apathetic. That being said, in a study that measured the average IQs of 113 countries, America had the ninth highest average IQ (1). This means that America is a very intelligent country relative to the rest of the world. Life skills “Some of any schooling in or out of a classroom can teach valuable life skills. In the first round, I said that 80-90 percent of formal education was a waste of time. I never said all of it was." It is true that you only said that 80-90% of formal education was a complete waste of time. That being said, you have not proved this in any way. I have shown value and usefulness in every example that has been given by Pro, and I have even given some extra examples of my own showing value and usefulness in formal education. As that is the case, Pro has not proven that any formal education is a complete waste of time and has not fulfilled his burden of proof. Pro’s Internet Refutation Let it first be stated that my opponent stated that, in order to refute my point about the Internet, he spoke of learning on one’s own through reading and research, and he gave a personal account of his experience learning Spanish. He chose to ignore my statement that school “is a focused time period for practicing and developing skills.” Furthermore, he once again chose to completely ignore my argument about how the Internet would be best used as a supplement, rather than a replacement for formal education, because it does not provide the direction needed to become intellectually well rounded or many of the skills that I listed in round two. I have shown formal education to provide these things. My opponent then cites his personal experience in a French class and in learning Spanish as evidence that the language programs in school were a complete waste of time. However, whether or not Pro is able to carry on a conversation in French or not is irrelevant, as he is hardly representative of the student body of America. Also, I would like to say that once again, his statistic that “French is not important for 99.9% of Americans” seems pretty steep, and is not cited. Direction Right now, there are no TV shows or books that can effectively steer a child in the right direction for a well-rounded education. While homeschooling sometimes proves effective, this is actually a point for Con, as formal education is not defined by the classroom, but rather by the curriculum, which homeschooling generally has to follow to meet state requirements. However, even if homeschooling is not considered formal education for this debate, this does not mean that formal education is a complete waste of time. It just means that there is an alternative. Having an alternative does not mean that the first option was a complete waste of time. All it means is that there are other options. Google My opponent did not argue his point. He literally said, “I just don’t agree.” As he has not argued his point or refuted mine that online education is best used as a supplement rather than a replacement, I have nothing to refute. Specialized Jobs Even if the raw information is generally useless in a job setting to most individuals, I’ve already shown that the so called “accountant skills” have other value (critical thinking, problem solving, etc.), so my opponent’s point is already moot. Also, the word “complete,” as stated in the resolution, would imply that the majority of formal education is a complete waste of time, which would imply that if anyone found the education useful, it would not be a complete waste of time. Conclusion My opponent says that I am forgetting that the resolution says that most of formal education is a complete waste of time. I’m not forgetting that. However, for every single example of formal education that Pro has provided, I’ve shown merit, value, and usefulness, so there, most of formal education is not a complete waste of time. Though I forfeited a round (and should rightly be deducted conduct points), my arguments have not suffered and Pro has not fulfilled his burden of proof. I’ve shown my opponent’s sources, which are his word, Are you Smarter than a 5th Grader, and a list of faulty numbers, to not be reliable. I would like to thank my opponent for a fun debate, and my audience for reading this debate. Please vote Con Sources: http://www.photius.com...