Reduce homework, lengthen schooltime

I too hope for an educational debate. There will be quite a few clashes between my opening and his. In this debate, I will merely be negating the resolution. Although there is no explicit requirement for me to have a BoP, it is implied under the debate structure. My argument will be focused on a few strong points, as opposed to many weak points. As this is my first educational debate (Pun intended), I do not expect to present too compelling a case, but I will try. I. School does not equip the students for work life This is an obvious one. School primarily is meant to equip the student for success in life. Students have been known to be highly underprepared for the realities of the working world [1]. That, however, can be remedied if the student is willing to learn. If, however, a student is kept in school for 9-5, there is absolutely no chance for the student to gain work experience. Work experience is absolutely vital for future job success. This has been recognized by the government, so much so that a “School to Work Initiatives Act” was passed in 1994. [2] Employers routinely value experience over qualifications [3][4]. This simply means that if there were two people with the same qualifications, the one with the more experience is hired. It also means that non-intellectual jobs like plumbing, currently one of the top paying jobs in the U. S. with a pay of $50,000 per year (. http://www.indeed.com....) which do not need qualifications, would oick people with experience and no qualifications other than a license rather than a highly qualified person without experience. No matter how much theoretical knowledge one might attain, without experience, qualifications mean nothing. What the full resolution wishes is for the banishment of any form of partial employment leading leading to a disadvantage between such students and students with work experience. If a student is in school from 9-5, the only time to work would be from 5-10, which is impractical. For now, this is all I have to say on this point. I will await a rebuttal first. II. Spacing effects can be implemented in other ways than through the resolution This point is directly related to one of Pro’s other points. However, it is not exactly a rebuttal as it builds on the same fact but comes to a different conclusion without exactly negating Pro’s points. Pro has already given a concise explanation of the spacing effect, to which I will refer readers. My point rests on the fact that technology can implement this without the need of a human teacher [5]. Technology has been used, and is being used, to enhance the learning process outside of the school. It has been found through multiple studies that people learn more, and faster, in a comfortable environment [6]. The obvious choice for the most comfortable place to be in is definitely the home, unless the student comes from a broken family. Combining information from [5] and [6], it becomes apparent that technology, widely used in homes, can be used to deliver lessons without the need of verbal transition between teacher and student. Students, furthermore, will be much more likely to learn as the environment surrounding them is conducive to learning, as the studies cited in [6] showed very clearly. If the object of schools is not indeed to prepare students for work life, but to place as much knowledge as possible within their memories, then certainly it is more profitable to place students within a comfortable environment, specifically the home, to do homework in a regulated manner, allowing for maximal retention. III. Cost[7][8][9] This is a simple point which I will make very clear. The average pay for a U. S. teacher is incredibly low. A high school teacher will receive on the average, $43,954 per annum. This translates to about $3663 per month. The highest average pay is Special Education, Secondary School, with $44,867, or around $3739 per month. Teachers in the U. S. spend an approximate 11 hours 20 minutes per day on the job. This includes marking homework, preparing lessons, and otherwise teaching. Preparing lessons take up the most time, as a good quality lesson requires much effort on the part of the teacher. Putting together a lesson is not as simple as ABC. At least 95 minutes is needed for job related activities other than direct teaching. If we consider 45 minutes to be for marking, 50 minutes would be taken up solely to prepare a 60 minute lecture. In the U. K. , it is even worse. Many teachers spend the whole night just to prepare for the next day’s lecture! This is highly damaging to their health. To look at the amount given of work/pay, an average U. S. teacher will receive, assuming a total of 22 days of work, a mediocre $15.50/hour. Increasing their workload by 2 hours means that their pay has to increase, something which governments currently, with their already high education budget, would not like. Replacing worn out teachers would also be problematic. It takes only a year for a teacher to get worn out, but it takes at least four/five years to train one. Let us look at the average schedule of a teacher: A day has ~24 hours. 11 hours 20 minutes is spent on the job or on job related things. 8 hours or less will be used for sleep. This means that a teacher will have around 4 hours 40 minutes to have some life outside school. Let us take into account the fact that much of their holiday is also spent on work related items and that 70% of U. K teachers spend whole nights preparing lessons. This means that the 8 hours reserved for sleep will now be used to concoct an effective lesson which, given the under three hours (1 hour 40 minutes being used for eating and other body maintenance) of sleep which might still be used for preparing. What does this make. This makes sleepy teachers who will be ineffective at presenting the lessons they have tried so hard to make during the night. Sleepy teachers, no matter the learning methodology, will not be of help to students. Conclusion: The value of an addition of 20 minutes of extra lessons would not offset the cost in terms of health and quality. This 20 minutes was derived from: 60*2- (40*2 + 20) = 20. This is accurate. The amount of money required to train new teachers far outweigh the benefit in getting knowledge through to the student, which can be gained via other means. Experience in work would also be non-existent, meaning such students would be disadvantaged as a result. I eagerly await a rebuttal of this, as I know Logic_on_rails is a very skilled debater.1. . http://www.telegraph.co.uk...2. . http://horizon.unc.edu...3. . http://www.careergeekblog.com...4. . http://www.ecademy.com...5. . http://mashable.com...6. . http://www.edutopia.org...7. . http://www.payscale.com... (All information in this section comes from these references)8. . http://www.washingtonpost.com... (U. S. )9. . http://www.dailymail.co.uk... (U. K. )