Homework Should Not Be Required

Thanks Danielle! Point 1 She claims that I provided no explanation of how the date is relevant. This is false. I claimed (and sourced the claim) that the education system has changed since those studies were published and also showed how inaccurate the studies were due to the fact that the percentage of people accounted for are 0.00000947368% of children! She drops this and merely claims that I fail to explain to explain how the date is relevant to the majority of her contentions. This is false as we can clearly see. She then makes a mathematical error in the dates. She claims that her sources are from 8 - 20 years ago. In fact that are from 8 - 26 years ago and I clearly sourced the claim that education and homework has significantly changed in the last 3 decades (see my source [2] from last round). She drops this. She falsely states that I must prove that homework assigned then vs now is different in quantity. This is, as I said, false. All I need to do is show that the systems of education have changed since then because that affects everything. If homework is different in regards to difficulty (for example), then higher quantity is not as necessary if it’s harder. If it’s easier then the opposite is applicable. So the fact that the system of education was different then is a valid reason to consider her sources (at the least, the ones from 20+ years ago); the differences are too large to compare to the present. The fact that my sources are outdated is irrelevant as my intentions and uses of them are different. If I was using those sources for statistical evidence or about the education system (which she does) then outdated sources are unacceptable. If I’m using them for more generic purposes (which I am) then the date is not applicable as it does not affect my point. She cites some Con homework information in my source. I am aware that there is information in my source that I disagree with. I was using that source to reinforce a point that I agreed with in the source. I agree with some of the claims made however I disagree with the sources impact analysis and conclusion of information. Debaters are not expected to agree with everything said in every one of their sources. They are expected to agree with the statement that they are using the source to reinforce. [Counterplan] 1A. This is false. I never said that only beneficial homework is allowed. This would be ideal but not once in my counterplan was the word beneficial mentioned. In fact I only mentioned the word beneficial once in my entire round and it was not in the context in which my opponent states (anybody can check my clicking Ctrl f and searching the word beneficial whilst viewing the debate). 1B. Again, this seems to be a misinterpretation of the counterplan. I never mentioned that it had to be beneficial, nor did I say that beneficial things have to be mandatory. Here is a remind of my counterplan: Homework should be given in moderate quantity (in short). This is about homework QUANTITY (ie. how much homework is given) NOT homework QUALITY (ie. how beneficial it is). I extend the counterplan. I’ll drop the claim that she quasi concedes in order to continue onwards with the debate. I’ll allow voters to consider whether or not this should be viewed as a concession or not. Point 2 The point that she fails to see regarding the burden on parents is that it is in extremely low quantity and I provided accurate statistics showing that this was clearly a minority. The statistics clearly show that the majority of parents are satisfied with homework. Whether I can or can’t cite a court case regarding homework quantity is irrelevant. That argument was only made as an alternative to the counterplan. Since she fails to refute the counterplan, it still stands and due to this her entire objection is negated given that all homework will be reduced to a more suitable quantity. She persists the raise the objection that family time is lost. If anything, family time is created. It is a psychological truism that teenagers (on balance) become more distant from parents and others during this period of their lives, this means that they spend less time with their parents and family [1]. Homework often involves parents helping the child and parents interacting with the child, as she correctly in his initial arguments. We can conclude that since teenagers are distant from their parents and given that parents often involves themselves with their children family time is created indirectly through homework. Different students of different abilities will not take identical amounts of time which is why, within the status quo, there are sets which are based on examination and classwork. Depending on their abilities they are each set different amounts of homework so that it will fulfill a set amount of time [3]. Whilst students are more than welcome to spend additional time on homework, schools give recommended amounts of time and usually make this clear [4]. [2] The fact that parents help with homework is a good thing. The fact that they do it is not. Since setting is based on classwork and examination parents doing homework has no negative effects. The homeworks purpose is to show a child’s understanding of a topic and reinforce their knowledge of the topic from their classwork. If their parents do it then it is the same as what she proposes (ie. no homework) because they are not receiving the benefits that homework has to offer. For the students that actually do their homework, they are benefiting from homework. This contention presents no mitigation to my burden since all it does is show that some people aren’t doing homework and some are. Some people benefiting from homework is better than nobody benefiting from it. She says I dropped his argument regarding different home environments however the counterplan negates this without me having to address it since there will be a lower homework quantity this means that these people will not be overwhelmed with homework - homework is not used as a primary source of determining sets. Schools also take into account financial states [5]. She helps explain the very purpose of homework itself. She points out that homework cannot be monitored in regards to approach and therefore students may not grasp or understand the material properly. If they do not understand it and get all of the questions wrong (for example), then it is the teacher’s duty to correct the student and explain the homework to them. The lesson is designed to teach all students generally. The homework shows specific pupils progress and understanding of that lesson which teachers can then monitor and intervene if necessary in order to help said student to understand it properly [6]. There is a reason as to why it is a condition of the job. It allows teachers to have an individual understanding of a student’s grasp of the lesson so that they can help students that are struggling [6]. Point 3 The reason I asked for sourcing is because I wanted evidence that homework actually digs into and reduces the time that people spend on certain things. Often people can still do their one activity and also do other activities in the same amount of time that they usually would do even without having the first activity, so I was merely asking for confirmational purposes. The CP negates this point since these sources reference to there being too much time being spent on homework due to excessive quantity. The fact that these activities are provided in schools is NOT irrelevant due to the fact that IF you are buying her claim that homework cuts into activity time, students will not be missing out on these activities since they will be doing it in school. She makes a an argument riddled with fallacies. She claims that homework cuts into time for anything. The fact of the matter is that schools cuts into people’s time, work cuts into people’s time, sleep cuts into people’s time, etc. Should people stop going to school, work and stop sleeping in order to do activities? The answer that she will most likely give is no. So why is homework an exception? People still manage to have part time jobs within the status quo, in the UK homework is compulsory and there are a record number of students in part time jobs at the moment [7]. This completely negates my opponent’s claims of a supposed negative correlation. She misunderstands the counterplan. He says that I cannot ensure that less homework will be given by specific teachers. The counterplan is a proposed change in the status quo, thus making it a law for teachers to only be allowed to set a limited amount of homework. Point 4 1 - Homework counts for nothing and only is there to show a student’s understanding of a lesson. So whilst parents cheating is discouraged, it still has no negative benefits that give my opponent’s proposed changes any advantage over mine. 2 - There is no evidence presented in support of this claim. 3 - Whilst cheating can be the case and the same objection to 4 - 1 is applicable here. Her statistics are unreliable. They are posted on a forum site and a bias one too. The site stophomework.com. The website makes little attempt to give credibility to these statistics and the only effort made is where they provide 3 fake links that lead to nonexistent / fake pages. [Conclusion] She provides her sources in an external link which shows a poor demonstration of conduct. She set a character limit and this limit was violated. I have abided by the rules set and not attempted to bypass them in the way that she does. I ask that voters vote on the conduct point as this gave her additional space for rebuttals and gave me limited space for counter rebuttals. More generally, the decision is simple. A vote for the Con is clear at this point in the debate Sources [1] http://bit.ly... [2] http://bbc.in... [3] http://bit.ly... [4] http://bit.ly... [5] http://bit.ly... [6] http://bit.ly... [7] http://dailym.ai...