Reduce homework, lengthen schooltime

Thanks to Logic_on_rails again for a great debate.I would like to apologize to Logic_on_rails and to the readers, I have had some personal issues arise unexpectedly and have not given this debate the preparation and time it deserves.That said, let's address the key points of this debate and my consclusions.Burden of ProofMy Burden of Proof is to prove that greatly reducing the amount of homework given [to High School students] in favor of increasing/setting the length of the school day from 9am to 5 pm does not provide sufficient increased benefit to society or the students to justify making said change.School Day.I maintain that Lengthening the school day will ultimately detract from the extra-curricular activities that Students can participate in, both by directly decreasing the amount of overall time available for those activities and by decreasing the viability of participating in activities.Pro has countered this point, I find that his endeavor to represent a lengthened school day as conducive to extra curricar activity participation and early low-skill job market participation is somewhat falacious. Homework can typically done in a broken or segmented fashion if necessary, playing baseball, rugby, or waiting tables cannot. On this point, merits of lengthening school day. LearningI do not feel compelled to completely counter the Spacing Effect. I will concede that spaced Learning may help some students learn more than alternative learning methods. I do not concede that all homework is conterproductive to spaced learning in school, by extension, I do not concede that spaced learning in school offers significant enough marginal benefit to justify changing the status quo. The Merits of HomeworkHomework is a necessary tool of education. By extension, reductions in Homework will hamper ability to fully develop and achieve the best level of education & should be seen as a failure on the part of the education system.I disagree with Pro's rebuttal: Homework put into school time does not maintain the benefits of homework performed at home. I maintain that addition of either taught hours or "study hall hours" at school again does not offer sufficient benefit to justify changing status quo.Reduction in General MischiefOn Pro's point: Extended. A solid school environment reduces the disproportionately high amount of youth crime for the reasons discussed in R2, such as empirical evidence showing how governments reduce harmful drug use, with education being cited as one of the main factors for smoking’s decline being one. Refer to R2.I have outlined in earlier rounds the merits of extra curriculars to this end. I do not believe that extension of the school day is mutually exclusive with participation in extra curriculars with respect to reduction of mischievious behavior. Again. No obligation to change status quo.Working Mindset / Lack of Agrarian Workfroce CurrentlyOn working mindset point. Extra curricular activities in my definition and as explained above include low-skill labor market jobs.What better way is there to prepare for the working world and mindset than actual participation in the labor force?An agrarianism. This is an international policy debate (theory). The world still relies heavily on agriculture. It is somewhat narrow-minded to assume that it does not. [1] Afghanistan: ½ of the GDP comes from agriculture, not including the illicit opium economy... Bangladesh: Of the 80% of the population that lives in rural areas, 54% work in agriculture... Bhutan: 1/3 of the GDP comes from agriculture, and is a key source of income, employment, and food security for mostBhutanese... India: Some 72% of the India’s 1.1 billion people live in rural areas... Maldives: Fisheries accounts for 8 percent of the country's GDP... Nepal: The country’s challenge is to transform subsistence agriculture based on low-value cereals into a commercialeconomic activity... Pakistan: 40% of the country’s labor force works in agriculture, which accounts for 22% of the GDP... Sri Lanka: Agriculture accounts for only 17% of the GDP, yet 80% of the population lives in rural areas.. Feasibility / Cost I maintain my earlier points on Fasibility and Cost. Pro's rebuttals do not sufficiently disprove my points or the viability of them.The implicit cost of a change argues for the status quo.SummaryI have, in my opinion, fulfilled my burden of proof in that I have offered reasonable evidence and logic to support the maintenance of status quo.The proposed change will create too great a social disruption to justify its imposition.Readers, ask yourselves simply if we can expect the world to alter a years old educational system if the change is not 100% necessary.Thanks again to Logic_ on_rails.[1] http://web.worldbank.org...