Instigator / Pro
2
1465
rating
31
debates
59.68%
won
Topic
#5526
Traditional Schooling is Better than Homeschool
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
After 1 vote and with 5 points ahead, the winner is...
SocraticGregarian96
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 4
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- 5,000
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
7
1485
rating
18
debates
41.67%
won
Description
Traditional school = public/private
The Con must argue that home school is generally better, not just in one area, and is more likely to set a student up for success. Let's assume that the homeschool student is middle class with a stay at home parent, and the traditional school has average test scores, behavior, ect.
Round 1
It's true that homeschoolers may score higher in basic academics, however, things like knowing mathematics aren't the most important skills anymore. They don't even come close. In today's world, with calculators, the internet, and AI, these skills, while still important, are becoming more and more obsolete. What does matter, and what always will mater, are the skills needed to navigate the constantly changing world. These skills are the ability to work with others, to overcome social challenges, and cope with real world problems, are indubitably the most essential skills, and they are skills only acquirable in public schools. Not the shielded environment that homeschool offers. Public schools teach students how to thrive in the real world.
First of all, I don’t agree with that “Public Schools teach students how to thrive in the real world.” I would argue the opposite; that Public Schools teach children to do drugs, smoke, have sex in the bathroom stall, etc. I’ve been to both Public and Online schools, so this is based on my experience. (Not to mention all the forced ideologies, but that’s a topic for another time.) Now, if you don’t just want to look at my experience, then here are some facts:
1. 69% of peer-reviewed studies on success into adulthood (including college) show adults who were home educated succeed and perform statistically significantly better than those who attended institutional schools (Ray, 2017),
2. they participate in local community service more frequently than does the general population (e.g., Seiver & Pope, 2022),
Also, I agree with your point that “things like knowing mathematics aren't the most important skills anymore.” But that doesn’t mean that calculators and AI are going to make math obsolete. And even if what I just said is false, meaning that calculators and AI do extirpate math, it certainly doesn’t explain why you should send your kids to public rather than homeschool. Is it because you believe they will acquire more and better social skills? Because I have something to say about that.
You say that these social skills I just mentioned “are skills only acquirable in public schools.” And that’s just simply not true. Instead of disproving your point with my experience again, I’ll do it with some more facts:
2. 87% of peer-reviewed studies on social, emotional, and psychological development show homeschool students perform statistically significantly better than those in conventional schools (Ray, 2017).
4. The balance of research to date suggests that homeschool students may suffer less harm (e.g., abuse, neglect, fatalities) than conventional school students.
(https://www.nheri.org/research-facts-on-homeschooling/ It’s the same source, but a different paragraph)
There’s also a lot of other information out there that I couldn’t quite fit into this response.
Round 2
First of all, I don’t agree with that “Public Schools teach students how to thrive in the real world.” I would argue the opposite; that Public Schools teach children to do drugs, smoke, have sex in the bathroom stall, etc. I’ve been to both Public and Online schools, so this is based on my experience.
This is not true. While it may be true that some kids whose parents don't play a large role in their upbringing may resort to unhealthy habits, these problems are rare in middle class schools and if a parent raises their child to know better, aren't a concern. Additionally, if this is truly a large concern for the parents, they can send their child to a private school, as the details of the debate make that an option for these theoretical parents. Also, your personal experience is never a reliable source for a debate.
(Not to mention all the forced ideologies, but that’s a topic for another time.)
Traditional schools don't enforce ideologies on people, in fact, it teaches children to be open minded. They are exposed to peers of different backgrounds, religions, and beliefs, whereas children in homeschool overwhelming only learn about conservative Christian values.
Also, I agree with your point that “things like knowing mathematics aren't the most important skills anymore.” But that doesn’t mean that calculators and AI are going to make math obsolete. And even if what I just said is false, meaning that calculators and AI do extirpate math, it certainly doesn’t explain why you should send your kids to public rather than homeschool.
I was making the point that most parents homeschool for better academic instruction, and that academics aren't the most important skill to learn, and I still stand by that. Homeschool won't teach you how to get along with people you disagree with.
You say that these social skills I just mentioned “are skills only acquirable in public schools.” And that’s just simply not true. Instead of disproving your point with my experience again, I’ll do it with some more facts:2. 87% of peer-reviewed studies on social, emotional, and psychological development show homeschool students perform statistically significantly better than those in conventional schools (Ray, 2017).4. The balance of research to date suggests that homeschool students may suffer less harm (e.g., abuse, neglect, fatalities) than conventional school students.
These numbers do seem like they are definitive proof that traditional schooling is worse, but once I took a moment to look into these numbers, I realized that they were absolutely no reason for us to believe your point. The NHERI is probably one of the most biased sources on the internet, and that reflects in the writing. Regarding abuse, most of the abuse is due to reasons not related to the schooling itself, and specific numbers aren't provided.
More importantly, the social aspect. That seems like a debate winning number, but really, it isn't at all. The paragraph included didn't say anything at all about how much better they performed, and what exactly they were testing. With all of the information it provides, it could mean anything, and therefore, until you are able to provide more specifics and better sources, this information can be considered invalid. The information I'm asking for may exist, but it's your job as a debater to provide it.
There’s also a lot of other information out there that I couldn’t quite fit into this response.
You didn't even use half of your characters.
" These problems (drugs, smoking, sex, etc.) are rare in middle-class schools and if a parent raises their child to know better, aren't a concern."
Based on what? You gave no facts and even contradicted yourself with that:
"Your personal experience is never a reliable source for a debate."
So you can give your personal experience that these problems are rare in middle-class schools, but I can’t give mine that they are common in poor and lower-class schools?
Moving on, Not only are you a hypocrite, but you are biased in your opinion that:
"The NHERI is biased."
You’ve brought a total of ZERO proof for this, whereas I’ve provided facts that you simply downplayed with your preferential blabber.
You mentioned how:
"They can send their child to a private school."
I’m going to show you some statistics from Learnopoly to explain to you why they can’t just send their child to a private school:
Source #2:
- In the US, the cost of attending private schools in the US ranges from $4K to over $60K.
- The average annual tuition among all private schools nationwide is $12,594.
- The average cost of attending a 5-day boarding school is $53,025.
- For 7-day boarding schools, the average cost of attending is $66,555.
- The private elementary school average tuition cost is $11,660 per year.
- The private high school tuition cost average is $16,144 per year.
- The average annual tuition at a private university is $32,825.
- Connecticut has the highest average private school tuition at$31,716 per year.
- On the other hand, the state with the lowest average tuition is South Dakota at $5,103 per year.
- Non-sectarian private high schools, which make up about 32% of private schools, cost an average of $25,180 per year.
- Catholic private schools, which account for 17% of US schools, tend to have the lowest tuition of all private schools at $4,840. (Bouchrika, 2023).
- An estimated 25% – 28% of private school students nationwide [need to] receive some form of financial aid.
- The average annual tuition for private elementary and secondary schools will increase by 2.3% per year between 2022 and 2027.
The average parent doesn’t have that much money to spend.
Also, your idea that:
It teaches children to be open minded. They are exposed to peers of different backgrounds, religions, and beliefs, whereas children in homeschool overwhelming only learn about conservative Christian values.
Why do you assume that only Public Schools teach children to be open-minded, due to exposure to different backgrounds? First of all, you have no proof to suggest that diversity = open-mindedness, but besides that, homeschooling is extremely diverse: the source is the HPS-Household Pulse Survey conducted by the United States Census Bureau. Here it is:
SOURCE #3:
Percent of Families that Homeschool by Race and Cultural Background:
Group: 1999 I 2003 I 2007 I 2012 I 2016 I 2021 Factor Increase between 2016-2021
White: 2.0. 2.7. 3.9. 4.5 3.8. 20.4 5.4
Black: 1.0. 1.3. 0.8. 2.0. 1.9. 18.3 9.6
Hispanic: 1.1 0.7. 1.5 2.3. 3.5. 18.2 5.3
Asian: — — — 2.8. 1.4. 15.1 10.8
Other 1.6. 4.9. 4.8. 3.2 2.7. 19.2 7.1
(SOURCE: https://hslda.org/post/new-research-shows-homeschool-growth-across-all-race-income-categories)
Not only that, but where’s your proof that homeschoolers only learn conservative Christian values? And where’s your proof to the rebuttal that homeschool correlates to less abuse? You have no proof and you know it. I would keep disproving your nonsense but I am literally out of characters.
Round 3
I never used my personal experience to argue drug problems aren't very present in schools. I stated that the issues in question, (i.e. drugs and sex) can be prevented by caring parents. I understand that may not be factual evidence. There may not be evidence showing that these aren't problems, but that's just because there is no evidence showing that it is either. Therefore, this should not be considered when reaching a conclusion.
"The NHERI is biased."You’ve brought a total of ZERO proof for this,
I don't need proof for this, the fact that the NHERI is an organization with the sole purpose of promoting homeschooling is evidence enough. This fact doesn't need evidence to back it up.
Behavioral issues and other problems wouldn't be a problem at all if parents decided to private school children, except, as you mentioned, they can't. But like the past two arguments, this can easily be disproved.
The average private school costs around $12,000 dollars annually, though that includes the extremely high and prestigious schools, so you can get a good private school education for less.
That's pretty steep, especially when you consider that a good homeschool experience cost around $1,500 yearly, though you can get a more basic experience for cheaper.
However, there is one key factor you're leaving out. The average American income is $50,000-$60,000 dollars a year. When you're homeschooling a child, you're sacrificing that income. Not to mention that someone who is educated enough to homeschool could probably land a pretty nice job.
Therefore, through the cost of homeschooling and forfeiting a second income, you would have to be far more fiscally successful to homeschool than to send your child to private school.
Why do you assume that only Public Schools teach children to be open-minded, due to exposure to different backgrounds? First of all, you have no proof to suggest that diversity = open-mindedness
I assume it because it what's logical. Diversity has not only been linked to open-mindedness, but it has also been linked to other benefits. If you want proof, here it is:
These are just a few examples, and I'd be happy to provide more on this if you want to keep discussing it, however, I think I've proved my point here.
You go on to argue that homeschool actually is diverse. Sure, racially homeschool is diverse, but it definitely isn't religiously and idealistically diverse. 87% of homeschool families are Christian. One could say that conservative and Christian ideologies were forced upon them. Something you failed to rebut.
The amount of diversity in homeschooling families doesn't actually matter in the first place though, as the kids in those families aren't experiencing the diversity. They're at home, where it's only them. Sure, they may interact with some other homeschooled kids, but not as many as they would meet in traditional schooling. Besides, as I have mentioned, ethnic diversity isn't the only form of diversity. The Gen 2 Survey: Homeschooling Making a Big Difference | iche.org
"I never used my personal experience to argue drug problems aren't very present in schools."
Actually, you have, multiple times, here they are:
“These problems (drugs, smoking, sex, etc.) are rare in middle class schools"
This is only your own personal experience (you’ve brought no evidence) and also a clear-cut lie which I will address with proof in a minute.
“Homeschool won’t teach you to get along with people you disagree with"
Another clear-cut lie that I will also address with proof in a minute.
I know you’ll accuse me of taking this out of context, so I’ll forewarn the readers with your own quotes:
… I understand that (the drugs, smoking, sex, etc. can be prevented by parents) may not be factual evidence.”
And:
I don't need proof for this, (referring to the NHERI.)
So, you hardly believe in your own argument. Great.
Now, back to your claim that “These problems (drugs, smoking, sex, etc.) are rare in middle class schools”— I have proof supporting my argument that there is drug usage, alcohol abuse and sex in Public Schools:
SOURCE #1:
61% (How much drug use went up among 8th graders between 2016 and 2020.)
62% (Of teenagers in 12th grade have abused alcohol.)
50% (Of teenagers have misused a drug at least once.)
SOURCE #2:
In 2017, 40% of high school students in the United States reported that they had ever had sex, which is actually the lowest level of sexual behavior observed since these data were first collected in 1991.
Percentages of students in public schools who have reported having sex:
9th: 20%
10th: 36%
11th: 47%
12th: 57%
*NOTE: These statistics INCLUDE middle-class schools.
We can expect that smoking will follow suit.
SOURCE #3:
Now, moving back to the Private School discussion, I think behavioral issues could still incur in Private School, though less likely due to the facts of
-richer families, thus higher expectations
-tougher authority and stronger enforcement
-fewer students for teachers to worry about, etc.
As for the Tuition cost, It can range approximately from $22,366 in New York, to $9,375 in Texas.
(SOURCE: https://greatercollinwood.org/public-vs-private-school-statistics/#private-school-tuition-rates)
And the idea that just anyone can afford that is insane; here’s why:
First of all, I don’t know who told you that Parents need to sacrifice their income to homeschool their children, but it’s just not true. I and all of my friends who were homeschooled had working parents. Your parents will help you with some stuff when they have time, and the rest, you become autodidactic. And bringing in proof of the average American salary is not proof that parents suddenly quit their jobs to homeschool their kids.
SOURCE #4:
As for the aspect of socialization, arguably the most important, here it is, as stated by Psychology Today:
“Some studies have found no difference in social skills between children in homeschool environments versus conventional schools, some studies have found that homeschooled children score higher on measures of social ability, and some have found that homeschooled children score lower on overall social skills. Not surprisingly, homeschooled students who have had more opportunities for peer interactions tend to show improved social skills."
So how can you say that:
"These skills… work with others, overcome social challenges, and cope with real world problems) are indubitably the most essential skills, and they are skills only acquirable in public schools."
Clearly, homeschooled kids have acquired these skills.
*NOTE: Psychology Today also found that Homeschooled kids score higher on test scores and have better GPAs.
(SOURCE: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/parenting-translator/202109/the-research-homeschooling)
And finally, one last thing about diversity. You’ve proved your point that diversity can be linked to positive things, such as open-mindedness and the like, and I don’t disagree. One thing you failed to mention though, is that children can interact not only as students but as children. In other words, they’ll have plenty of diversity in the real world, outside of school, and therefore your claim that conservative and Christian values are forced upon them is false because they still have free will. Teaching your children a particular religion isn’t indoctrination unless it is self-harming or harming others. Having a home with certain values doesn’t mean indoctrination and it certainly doesn’t exclude outward diversity. I would argue that it’s better to have a home with good values and morals, because then you have a strong sense of true identity, and homeschooling best allows the opportunity for your parents to instill that in you.
Round 4
I don't need proof for this, (referring to the NHERI.)So, you hardly believe in your own argument. Great.
If something's purpose is Soley to support one side, it's biased.
SOURCE #1:61% (How much drug use went up among 8th graders between 2016 and 2020.)62% (Of teenagers in 12th grade have abused alcohol.)50% (Of teenagers have misused a drug at least once.)
These statistics are irrelevant, as when you look at the article, you can see that this is of all teenagers, not just the ones who are in traditional schools. So, I will devote no more time to it, as that is not necessary. The fact you said that this was in public schools is a flat out lie.
Source #2 is a far better argument, as it's actually relevant.
It's obviously not good that this is happening, even though the study itself is actually about how highschoolers are being responsible when it comes to things such as preventative measures and condom usage.
Is it good that this is happening? Of course not, but it's worse to shield children from everything that can hurt them. Parents should teach their children the dangers involved in such activities, not hide them from the world and refuse to give them the chance to make responsible choices. You can only protect them for so long.
And the idea that just anyone can afford that is insane; here’s why:First of all, I don’t know who told you that Parents need to sacrifice their income to homeschool their children, but it’s just not true. I and all of my friends who were homeschooled had working parents. Your parents will help you with some stuff when they have time, and the rest, you become autodidactic.
I mistake that we have both been making throughout this debate is bringing in personal experiences. Just because you had the capability to be autodidactic, doesn't mean other kids do. For most children, they need more help to excel academically.
Your information about social skills has the same faults as you last information did. It didn't provide exact numbers, or what areas precisely they were examined on. For example, it said "some studies have found that homeschooled children score higher on measures of social ability, and some have found that homeschooled children score lower on overall social skills." It did not say, however, the exact number of studies which supported each side.
Your argument about diversity is more an argument why religion is good. I agree with you on that. However, homeschoolers show closed mindedness in believing that their religion is definitively correct. Sure, having faith may be a good thing, but stubborn certainty in your ways, since you haven't been exposed to others, is just being closed minded.
Sure, schools may have their downsides, but when you consider everything, it's worth your child having to face hardship, instead of them being unprepared for the problems of the world.
"These statistics are irrelevant, as when you look at the article, you can see that this is of all teenagers, not just the ones who are in traditional schools."
True. But when 87% of American Kids are in Public School, rampant sex, drugs, alcohol abuse and the like actually does matter. There may not be a distinction but comparing the numbers, they're quite self-explanatory.
"The fact you said that this was in public schools is a flat out lie."
What I meant was that 87% of children are in Public Schools, and when you extrapolate this:
SOURCE #1:
61% (How much drug use went up among 8th graders between 2016 and 2020.)
62% (Of teenagers in 12th grade have abused alcohol.)
50% (Of teenagers have misused a drug at least once.)
onto the public-school students, it proves my point.
SOURCE #2:
But if this proof isn’t sufficient, here's some more from Sunshine Behavioral Health:
"According to 2002-2013 data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), the percentage of homeschooled students aged 12-17 who used these substances was never less than 1% lower than for conventional school students, and often much lower. Each age group and substance had a different rate. For alcohol use, ages 12-14, the school rate was almost double that of home schools. Homeschool students not only use less, but often strongly disapprove of alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana use."
Additionally, 91% of parents (1999-2012) said factors such as safety, drugs or negative peer pressure helped drive them to homeschool their children.
SOURCE: https://sunshinebehavioralhealth.com/resources/homeschooled-are-less-likely-to-abuse-substances/)
And we can certainly expect that that number has jumped more from 2012 to 2024 based on source #1.
"But it's worse to shield children from everything that can hurt them."
I totally agree. Homeschool is not about shielding your children, on the contrary. It’s about instilling the proper values (whatever that may be) and preparing them for what’s to come.
In short, it’s not about shielding or protection; it’s about preparation and instillation of good, moral values.
Also, that 87% number went down from 90.7% nationwide, so clearly Public School is on the downfall. I wonder why?
(SOURCE: https://www.nbcnews.com/data-graphics/public-school-enrollment-us-states-map-chart-rcna119262)
"If something's purpose is solely to support one side, it's biased."
I agree with you on that. But support and bias are two separate things, and I believe NHERI is the former. Also, you haven’t brought any proof to suggest that the NHERI is actually biased. You just gave me the definition of the word.
“I mistake that we have both been making throughout this debate is bringing in personal experiences."
True. Except that I have also brought verifiable and trustworthy sources along with them and only gave my positive personal experience of being homeschooled as a testimony to the authenticity of the sources. All you have done is critique and nitpick them. (To be fair, some of your critique has been accurate, but mostly it has not been) In truth, you have only brought two sources: the cost of school and the implications of diversity, both of which we already agree on.
"Sure, having faith may be a good thing, but stubborn certainty in your ways, since you haven't been exposed to others, is just being closed minded."
Once again, I agree with your point, but you missed a key ingredient.
I stated earlier that:
“Children can interact not only as students, but as children. In other words, they’ll have plenty of diversity in the real world, outside of school.”
Just because children aren’t exposed to religious diversity inside school, doesn’t necessarily mean that they aren’t exposed to it outside of school. And the fear of intolerance/racism is eliminated too because of Source #3 in my second argument (SOURCE: https://hslda.org/post/new-research-shows-homeschool-growth-across-all-race-income-categories)
One last thing, you stated that
“ It's worth your child having to face hardship, instead of them being unprepared for the problems of the world."
I think we agree that these problems (sex, drugs, alcohol abuse, etc.) exist in Public Schools, we just have a difference in opinion.
So when you boil this all down, I think we both have two theories:
1. You theorize that exposure to these problems (via Public School) is what will prepare a child for “the problems of the world”.
2. I theorize that first becoming prepared (via Homeschool) and then having exposure to “the problems of the world” will yield a better result.
Why should a child have exposure to these graphic and illicit issues when they are still in their maturing years? There will be a time for exposure when they are more mature, prepared, and able to handle it properly.
It’s up to the voters to decide which theory they prefer.
Please vote.
More abuse just turns people into abusive persons. It does not exactly teach them to deal with abuse as much as it makes them likely to become abusers themselves.
Traditional schools means children get abused 6 hours a day, while adults expect them to endure abuse while at the same time enduring countless of nonsense being thrown at them by teachers.
So thats a good equation to turn people into psychopaths.
"You made a monster" is pretty much what happens when you force a person to endure 12 years of abuse and then the person becomes evil.
So yeah, its not great surprise that homeschooled kids behave better.
Unfortunately, bullies exist everywhere in the world. We can't shield our children from hardship and then hope they know how to deal with it when they leave home.
Bullying was present everywhere when I was at school. Maybe your school is different, but statistics pretty much disagree with you when it comes to average school in US or the world.
Forgot to mention you
That's a little extreme. I'm still a student, and I go to a school that's actually a little lower than average. I have never been in a physical altercation, nor am I friends with someone who has been, and due to responsible authority, have not experienced true abuse. And as mentioned, the school in the debate is an average middle-class school, so the problems that face schools in more poverty-stricken areas aren't relevant here. Even so, the truth is that sort of conduct is not near as commonplace that people think it is.
Furthermore, traditional schools teach students how to avoid such conflict and to deal with bullying. Because unfortunately, problems like these are still present in the adult world.
If you think abuse and punches make people smarter.
"Today's people are incapable to deal with problems because they never had to deal with problems early on, because their parents made effort to remove all problems." - Best.Korea
If I had to choose, I would rather homeschool. There is no point in trusting teachers and other kids to be non-abusive, when statistically, abuse rates in traditional schools are very high.
Imma buy my HS as my own residence and register myself as the principal.
Homeshgool.
I disagree, but don't have the energy to take this debate.