Topic space view
1242 arguments retrieved in 0.0 ms
  • CON

    Firstly, when you get to writing actual papers, yes...

    Reasons why I dislike school

    Firstly, when you get to writing actual papers, yes almost every single one does require some sort of research. Again, it gives you the opportunity to learn more by finding out more on a topic. You may find it annoying, but it's not really debatable. Secondly, if that happens, then that person did not try and do not care about their grades. You go to school to learn. You go to learn and you may have to do additional research to learn more about a subject. Thirdly, no, it's not really. Again, learning is good. Just because you are annoyed and frustrated with school doesn't mean those things will later be irrelevant. Knowledge is never a bad thing to have, nor is expanding by learning something. And finally yeah it may be annoying and stupid to you. But it isn't really debatable that you do not like it and find it stupid. Much of this isn't really debatable things just complaints about why you don't like school.

  • CON

    Yes, but as I said in Round 1, that money has to come...

    Changing the school year to all year

    "With the extra time that teachers would have to work, the more they would get paid." Yes, but as I said in Round 1, that money has to come from somewhere. It would benefit teachers, not the economy. Besides, if teachers are really deserving of a pay-rise, it should come without having to extend the Yes, but as I said in Round 1, that money has to come from somewhere. It would benefit teachers, not the economy. Besides, if teachers are really deserving of a pay-rise, it should come without having to extend the school year, for the reasons I've provided. "What is stopping these students from getting a job during the school year?" Trying to do well in school. Students would, obviously, do worse overall if they had less time to spend on school-work. This is a bad thing. "And I'm sorry, but the most evidence I can provide for you is that I myself am a 11th grade teacher. I know it sounds illegitimate, but true." This is not "evidence" at all. Also, my opponent stated in Round 1 that teachers "often" struggle to get through the material in a traditional school-year. I would ask why some teachers manage to get through it while others don't. Seems some teachers need to try harder.

  • PRO

    When answering the question of whether or not something...

    The Uniqueness of School

    When answering the question of whether or not something should be banned, we must look at the what is being lost in the world of the stakeholders while that action or thing is still being permitted. In the context of this debate, we believe that there are unique benefits to receiving an education outside of the home that are so conclusive and so vital that they make school an absolute necessity that every child should partake in. A crucial part of an education outside of the home is the interaction amongst the students that is used to prepare them to have constructive engagements with fellow citizens when their schooling is over. Interacting with other children who may be taught different belief systems and come from different social-economic statuses and religious or ethnic backgrounds prepare students for their future, where the potential of having to deal with someone who is different is almost inevitable. While there may be attempts by parents to socialize their children through other means (such as joining sports teams or youth clubs), these organizations are centered around similarity – all the kids that enjoy the same thing or believe in the same values congregate. School is a mixture that does not filter out students, and there is an inherent social value to such a mix. We believe that governments have a duty to ensure, or at the very at least, provide children the potential to interact with other children of different backgrounds at such a crucial time of their development as active and productive citizens. The only way to do this is to eliminate systems such as homeschooling that promote exclusivity under the guise of protection. The only way to truly hold the child’s interests as a priority is to to prepare them for the society that they will soon inherit; homeschooling attempts to construct a world for the child that often does not match reality.

  • CON

    So, I thought there is no use for schools to offer such...

    Soft drinks should be sold at school

    In my opinion, I strongly believe that soft drinks shouldn"t be sold at schools, because soft drinks damages student"s behaviour, concentration, inhibitions, learning abilities and overall general health issues due to the community comments on www.debate.org/opinions/should-soda-be-sold-at-schools. For instance, it makes students aggressive, hyper, stimulant, defiant and disruptive; as well as it could distract student from concentrate on what they are doing. Firstly, I confidently believe that soft drinks shouldn"t be sold at schools, because soft drinks are causing troubles on our behaviour, concentration, inhibition, learning abilities, overall general health caused by the ingredients of sugar, caffeine, additives and chemicals in the soft drinks. Bone breaking caused by the carbonate from soft drinks corrosion bones in our body and made our bones loss calcium & vitamin D; tooth decay caused by sugar from the soft drinks stuck in our tooth and grows bacteria in the plague, which gives us horrible yellow and smelling breath. So, I thought there is no use for schools to offer such expensive drinks that giving us more harm than good and no nutritional benefits, instead schools should using the money on sporting equipment, library books, stationaries, camps, excursions, uniforms and heaps more healthy choices for their students. For instance, soft drinks increasing obesity, diabetes, high blood pressure, kidney stones, caramel cancer, disabilities and other life damaging problems to us; all of these problems or issues. Due to scientific reports, if student drinks one can of 600ml of regular soft drink every day for a year is equals to 23kg of sugar and 6.75kg of fats, one can of 250ml equals to 24g of sugar and 1600ml bottle of regular soft drink equals to 64g of sugar. In the end, I strongly suggest schools should brought fruits for the caf" to sell as energy booster, because the sugar in fruits are natural and gives us heaps of vitamins and minerals. Overall, I absolutely believe that soft drinks shouldn"t be sold at schools, because of distraction to behaviour, concentration, learning abilities, inhibitions and overall general health. It also effects students with increasing of obesity, diabetes, high blood pressure, kidney stones, caramel cancer, disabilities, diseases and other life damaging or heart problems for students. Just as I said before, soft drinks gives us more harm than good and have no nutritional benefits; if you need energy to boost you up, eats fruits, they are natural energy booster of sugar.

  • CON

    Even within American society, Freedom of speech is...

    students need rights in school

    Students already have freedom of speech, But with limitations. You are looking for complete freedom while most students would use this in an inappropriate manner. Even within American society, Freedom of speech is restricted to freedom as long as not imposing upon other's freedoms. According to Lambda Legal in their article LIMITATIONS ON STUDENTS" FREE SPEECH, "Courts interpreting the First Amendment have recognized a few narrow categories of your right to free speech that schools may restrict, Including: Speech that is verbally abusive (harassment) Speech that promotes illegal drug use or that is lewd or profane The speech where school officials can show facts that reasonably lead them to conclude that the speech will cause an actual, Substantial disruption to the school"s operation. " These display the legalities behind freedom of speech. Total freedom for students would result in more fights, Arguments, And the use of swearing. It would also result in sexual word usage. This is displayed within the hormonal rise within adolescents.

  • PRO

    This may be true, but sooner or later, the students are...

    Changing the school year to all year

    "It would benefit teachers, not the economy." There are 6.2 million teachers in the United States. Saying that they have no impact on the economy is mere ignorance. As this large portion of consumers is paid more money, the more they will spend and buy, which in turn will boost our economy. And because school boards and governments on the community level refuse to raise the teacher's salary, the only way for teachers to make more money would be to work all school year. "Trying to do well in school. Students would, obviously, do worse overal if they had less time to spend on school-work." This may be true, but sooner or later, the students are going to need to learn how to balance responsibilities, and there is no better way to learn than from experience. Finally, I'm sorry that I have no evidence supporting the fact that teachers have a set criteria that they must teach their students, I just couldn't find any sources online with the detailed list.

  • CON

    If I'm a parent in a school district and they are having...

    Having soccer as a school sport in Minnesota

    Most parents will not pay for something they don't think their child will join. If I'm a parent in a If I'm a parent in a school district and they are having a fundraiser for the soccer, and my child cannot do the activity, I will most likely not fund it. Unless there is a large amount of children wanting to, it's a waste of money.

  • PRO

    And I'm sorry, but the most evidence I can provide for...

    Changing the school year to all year

    My opponent is only pointing out the negative economic impacts that the year-round school year would have on the economy. With the extra time that teachers would have to work, the more they would get paid. Teachers tend to be middle-class consumers, which means that they are members of a class that keeps the economy afloat by spending. Saying that a higher income for this group of people to use will not benefit the economy is mere ignorance. My opponent states that student like to get Summer jobs to get extra money which will help our economy. What is stopping these students from getting a job during the school year? Balancing job and school will not only bring in extra cash for the student, but it will also teach them how to balance responsibilities. And I'm sorry, but the most evidence I can provide for you is that I myself am a 11th grade teacher. I know it sounds illegitimate, but true.

  • PRO

    Imagine how low a teenager's self esteem can be if most...

    High School / Secondary school Students should be required to wear a uniform

    In almost all government schools in the USA, uniform is not required, whereas there are few schools in the UK, private or government, that allow students to wear anything they like (usually a loose dress code applies). I will be arguing in favour of all high schools and secondary schools to make uniform compulsory. There are my main arguments. Having a uniform creates a sense of community Especially in larger schools, (800+ students) many teens feel left out, or that they don't belong. Having a uniform unites all the students, and shows that even though the school's population may be high, all the students are equal, which brings me on to my next point. Especially in government schools where there is a wide range of financial status between students, many may feel unhappy or left out if they can't afford more expensive clothes. Imagine how low a teenager's self esteem can be if most the girls or boys in their class show up to school in expensive or branded clothes, and they can maybe only afford clothes from supermarkets? This can cause many problems for the student. As I mentioned, feeling as though they are "poorer" than other students can really lower a student's self esteem, which isn't healthy for a teenager, or anyone for that matter. Secondly, if the student feels under pressure to wear certain brands to school, they may spend all their pocket money (if applicable) and wages (if they have a part time job) on expensive clothes rather than things they need such as stationary or study guides. Thirdly, as I mentioned; students can be subjected to bullying if they are not wearing "cool clothes" and this can cause psychological problems for the student later in life. Thirdly and finally, I believe that the media (movies, TV shows etc) really expresses how a student's clothing matches their personality. For example, "goth kids" wear dark clothes and lots of black eyeliner, and "theatrical kids" wear colourful retro clothes, or whatever. Some kids may feel like they don't belong in a certain friendship group or clique, because they can't afford or don't want to wear the kind of clothes the other people in the group wear. I believe that students should join friendship groups based on their personality, and not whether they have the right clothes to join. Thank you for reading my argument.

  • CON

    Getting kids in schools is the first step to improving...

    School does not an education make

    Yet if kids aren't going to school anyway it doesn't matter if the schools are inadequate. Getting kids in schools is the first step to improving the education situation and the dropout rate. As long as we look at the education system in the US and around the world as dismal and overwhelming, nothing will change.