Reduce homework, lengthen schooltime

My thanks to Bull Diesel for his response. Before going to arguments I’d like to address questions regarding conduct. It is true that I said Con had not attacked my R2 arguments; a prompt for R3 counters, as well as reminding readers that the arguments existed; the attention span of readers can be short. And, it’s not like I didn’t mention the rules! To quote last round: “Granted, the rules themselves disallowed direct rebuttal (!), but it’s important to note these extensions – they are all important points. Con had best rebut them this round lest they be considered dropped by myself and readers.” That’s not unfair conduct. Nevertheless, the reader can decide on this issue. On logistics, if Con decides to attack on the grounds of time (extracurricular activities) then I can recourse to my model to refute such attacks. I do admit that I should have defined logistics, point conceded, but I don’t think my conduct merits the loss of the conduct point. I tried to pre-empt ideas like ‘the government would have to issue a new transport policy to deal with the increased strain during peak hour, which...’, essentially, implementation issues. Just the sort that result in the US using the imperial system of measurement. I digress. Let’s go to arguments. School Day Con doesn’t refute my points here. Last round I pointed out how the poisons less homework and less freetime can’t apply, giving extensive analysis as per my model; I showed how students got more free time assuming the same amount of homework given! Now, as to whether homework is terribly different from schoolwork, that’s a different matter [see below], but Con hasn’t differentiated between the 2 in terms of benefits. I have - I’ve talked about memory retention - the spacing effect, the encoding specificity principle as exemplified by state dependent and context dependent effects, teacher instruction etc. This is all improved by moving things into schooltime, as I’ve stressed this debate. The Merits of Homework Con says “It does not make sense for Pro to argue that we should reduce homework yet imply that homework can still be assigned as schoolwork. This is a waste of resources and is largely impractical.” That’s begging the question... it’s what this debate is about! In R2 Con laid out reasons why homework was beneficial. I countered by noting that homework put into schooltime (hence the longer day) still retained these benefits, while adding some – teacher instruction, stronger student-teacher bonds. I talked about how homework causes familial conflict, as supported by Peter Frost. Con has not discussed how the benefits of homework are greater than the benefits of this homework in school time as ‘schoolwork’ . I have, as aforementioned and detailed last round. Reduction in General Mischief 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. Working Mindset / Lack of Agrarian Workfroce Currently Extended. The school day was made 9-3 because societies were agrarian. They are not agrarian currently. Furthermore, instilling the values of work is important. Why isn’t adult society 9-3? Why aren’t extracurricular activities a big part of work life? There are clear reasons, and preparing children for work life is a big part of education. Also, remember, Peter Frost talked about how homework caused familial discord. The proposal reduces this. Feasibility / Cost On this point Con has directly countered me. Let’s get to it. On cost, as said in R2 and uncountered, private tuition costs are debased, public transport is used more effectively and hence a reduction in the total number of buses and trains the government must actually provide. Also, critically, “parents can work for longer. There’s less concern for parents to be at home, supervising their children, if they can trust that their child is safe and productive at school, vs. potentially the converse at home.” – R2, parents working longer hours means more money for the family and a higher standard of living; Also, remember those disproportionately high crime statistics? Parental concern is alleviated by a secure school environment as discussed in R2. Onto Con’s rebuttals now. Remember the positive financial counterarguments mentioned above when weighing for impact. Teacher dissatisfaction due to an increased workload is rather unlikely as per Con’s logic on homework. The additional time doesn’t have to be purely instructional in nature – the teacher may assist students, mark schoolwork etc. It doesn’t have to be a lecture. In essence, teachers are simply marking the schoolwork that would have been assigned as homework at a different hour, and crucially, will take less time to mark at school. Why? Students memory is worse for reasons already discussed, and teacher instruction is missing. That means students will have more problems to discuss, meaning the teacher has to take more time in class addressing problems than would occur if the teacher could pre-emptively address student difficulties in the classroom, through instruction. A net save of time for the teacher, plus the students get better results. The teacher workload may actually be reduced here. On the matter of budget constraints and teachers poor pay, it certainly is an issue in some countries. In countries like Finland, renowned for it’s educational system teachers are paid quite well. In fact “Teaching is rated Finland's "most respected" profession, and primary school teaching its most sought-after career” - http://www.smh.com.au... Teachers pay in the US is fairly poor. See this graph: http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com... But it’s clear that many countries are capable of increasing their educational budgets or absorbing this cost. I’d like to think that it would be feasible to pay teachers more, although we’ve already discussed the minimal (if even existent) increase in workload above. Readers can decide on the feasibility given political circumstances on an international scale + the benefits mentioned in various other areas. And, for the strongest point in my case... Memory Retention There has been no refutation of the spacing effect, context dependent and state dependent memory effects and how school helps use these effects to increase memory retention. School timetabling forces the spacing effect to occur, vs. massed presentation in the home environment. Better memory retention at school. Physical context is the same with school... and school vs school and the home for homework; better memory retention. The power of these effects has been documented by psychological experiments like the one mentioned in R2. That Con has not responded to the entirety of the memory retention argument is a very, very strong point in favour of the resolution. Summation The points about memory retention, reduction in general mischief, working mindset / agrarian workforce have not been refuted last round, when Con had a clear chance (yes, rules allowed it) to do so. Those are key advantages for the resolution as per R2 and R3 analysis. My model is proven to grant extra free time given the same amount of homework. Con advocates conflicting poisons of less homework and less time. Con failed to differentiate between homework at home vs. in schooltime. I did, citing teacher instruction and other points. On feasibility I can only point to international budgets on education; the US lags behind. However, I have demonstrated how the teacher workload can be reduced. My thanks to Bull_Diesel for an interesting debate on this topic. Readers, please vote based on the arguments presented and not preconceptions. Thanks to all readers and voters.