args

Against School Uniforms

Well it would seem you have forfeited the round for an unknown reason. I will present my arguments. Because you are con and your title states "Against School Uniforms" that would mean you are against, not having school uniforms. Meaning you are for school uniforms. I am not sure if you purposely did this, but for future reference, remember that Pro means you agree with the title of the debate and Con means you disagree with the title of the debate. Now then, We should not have school uniforms for the following reasons: 1. "Uniforms violate the student's freedom of speech and expression." You are restricting the student's way of expressing themselves which can keep them from sharing themselves and who they are with other people. 2. "Cost too much for families who already struggle to make ends meet." This is a problem for families who would otherwise have their children wear clothes that are cheaper than the school uniform itself. Sometimes every dollar counts for families who already struggle to keep their children in school. 3."Emphasize conformity, not individuality, and do not allow students to develop their identity." Not everyone is the same, nor does everyone want to be. People want to be their own person! Uniforms restrict students showing their own individuality. 4."Hide warning signs that point to problems. Often the way a child dresses can indicate the way he is feeling. Uniforms eliminate these red flags." This is self-explanatory. 5. "Fail to allow students to learn to make good choices based on their own values." Children need to make their own choices and learn from their mistakes. Giving everyone a uniform does not teach them what is appropriate to wear in circumstances and what is not. Children need to learn themselves what is appropriate and what is not. Giving them the right to wear their own clothes will allow them to test these boundaries and see what works and what doesn't.

school uniforms

I do agree that uniforms should not be required in public schools, but with the youth as it is today, more strict dress codes are needed to disallow some of the trends in schools today. There is no reason why a 16 year old girl needs to show off her chest or have her butt hanging out of her jeans. The same goes for guys that wear their pants low enough that their boxers are barely inside of their pants. If kids today don't start cleaning up their looks, school uniforms are going to be enforced and people are going to have to front the money for them.

School Uniforms Should not be Required

you were supposed to just accept the debate. Oh well, I'll guess I'll have a head-start as well. 1....focus on their school work as opposed to what type of clothes they wear, you say?? Well, in the adult world students have to make their own choices and school uniforms exclude that, as shown in "Brosnan, Peter, and Alexis Brindley. "What Not to Wear: A School's Dress Code Limits Clothing Styles and Colors." Current Events, a Weekly Reader Publication 28 Mar. 2011: 7. Opposing Viewpoints in Context.Web. 10 Feb.2014." 2. ...same level as socioeconomic status is not apparent from the uniforms ...which is exactly why school uniforms send out a sense of anti-individuality that goes against our personal liberty and freedom of expression. A nation that believes in this kind of thing should not go against it. It would not really matter if this was not in the constitution in the first place, but seriously--the constitution is the basic belief of America, and breaking it is a big blunder! the author of " Fetzer, Kent J. "School Uniforms Stifle Freedom of Expression." Salt Lake Tribune [Detroit] 18 Apr. 2002: F2. Opposing Viewpoints in Context.Web. 10 Feb.2014." clearly agrees. 3. Removes the status symbol associated with flashy clothes...arguably nobody can display how high their status are with school uniforms, a clear down side. 4. Bring a sense of uniformity & unity among pupils...Perhaps it is too much of a unity, almost like robots! As shown in "Dolan, Maura. "CALIFORNIA; Court Rejects School's Shirts; Judges Say Requiring Students to Wear the School's Motto Is a Free-Speech Violation." Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles] 15 Feb. 2014: AA3. Elibrary. Web. 21 Feb. 2014." The parent openly disagrees, stating "I believe we should...advance independent, creative thinkers -- not standardized, uniformed thinkers." Frudden said. "To do anything less is to do our children and our society a disservice." 6. Save parents money...As shown from "Brosnan, Peter, and Alexis Brindley. "What Not to Wear:... Styles and Colors." Current Events, a Weekly Reader Publication.", parents are unsatisfied with the school uniform prices, indicating that school uniforms don't exactly save parents money. They would not complain if the school uniforms actually saved money! 7. Uniforms also enable students to get ready for school faster...again, very arguable. Students could change clothes at night and go to school at the same pace of another student who has a school uniform. 8. Uniforms enable students to self express....NO, they do NOT! As I said before, the uniform sends messages of anti-individuality, the exact opposite of expressing one-self! In addition, emblems are heavily disdained, as shown in "Dolan, Maura. "CALIFORNIA; Court... Violation." Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles]." and 9. Enable children to make friends... instead of what you wear....You have given no evidence that children base other children on what they wear. 10. ...uniforms reduces bullying...A person's clothes really have nothing to do what goes on. If someone isn't very smart or physically capable they will still get bullied regardless of the fact that they look the same as everyone else. Good luck making your rebuttal!

School Uniforms, on Balance, are Beneficial

Introduction and Important Procedural Matters Thanks for a good constructive speech, I had a lot of fun reading it. I'd first like to say, before any major rebuttals on my opponent's case, this is my burden of proof (I thought it would be obvious but I have to explain what it is, since my opponent has declared what my BoP is, when I am the only one with the right to do so): Enactment of school uniforms have more benefits than harms (hence "on balance"), by use of statistics or logical syllogisms (or otherwise direct evidence) School uniforms solve more problems than they produce (kind of like on balance, but kind of different) This is what my opponent has to prove in order to meet their burden of proof: Enactment of school uniforms have more harms than benefits (hence "on blance"), by use of statistics or logical syllogisms (or otherwise direct evidence) School uniforms produce more problems than they solve (kind of like on balance, but kind of different). We have the same kind of BoP, just inverses of each other. Thanks for letting me clarify this aspect, didn't know it was so important. ----- Rebuttals: (I will italicize my opponent's argument and then use normal formatting for how I respond) "[uniforms are] brutally overpriced for their quality." I have evidence that is in direct refutation with this. In my 3rd contention, labelled "Low Cost", I prove that there is at least one school uniform manufacturer that has very low prices for high quality uniforms (roughly $45 a year per student per uniform) (this is from French Toast (again, awesome name)). I also have a source from 2013 that said that 77% of school leaders believe that the annual cost per student is going to be under $150 a year, replacements included. Like most things, there is going to be one kind of "eletist" competitor in the market (just look at iPhone's at their relatively high cost), and I think that TrueGrits is this very thing. "One of the best portals for students to express themselves is clothing." I'd have to argue that writing is the one of the best portals for creativity, but I understand what you are trying to convey. People in most public schools that have school uniforms would still have the ability to express themselves, whether it be by wearing their hair differently than normal, wearing a bow, wearing armbands, or something related. The right to express oneself remains intact, thus this point is negated. "Heck, even If a student is a serial killer, he can wear a creepy mask" Not sure many schools are open to serial killers. Do you have a source to back this up? (sarcasm) "[freedom of expression is] something that everybody has somewhat of a right to" I have sufficiently proved that the freedom to express themselves remains intact, so this isn't a valid argument. Also, saying "somewhat" kind of diminishes that impact, since you are saying that nobody has the absolute, inalienable right to express themselves. "the Supreme court ruled in favor of school uniforms" Concession? Having the Supreme Court vote in your favor probably means you are correct in the modern-era. Even if this was just a simple typo, the Supreme Court released the following comment when they voted in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District: “[schools have the right to establish rules which regulate] the length of skirts or the type of clothing, to hair style,…[or] aggressive, disruptive action or even group demonstrations.” (quote found here: http://www.infoplease.com...) "First of all, this piece of evidence is a case of post hoc ergo propter hoc" Not true. If the city made no Ordinances in that time that reduced the instances of rape or violence, then we can obviously see that this is attributed to school uniforms. I get where you are coming from, but that's not true since the city didn't do anything crime-wise during that time really, just implemented school uniforms. "The second part of this argument is that the study itself quotes "it is not clear that these results are entirely attributable to the uniform policy"." Most likely not entirely attributable, but pretty darn attributable. There are variables, sure, but none that can impact crime as much as school uniforms. "further disproving much of the common proponent case." My point remains intact, since you have not really proven that school uniforms are not the cause of this sudden drop in crime in the area. ----- Closing Remarks: I am winning this round because: I have maintained my BoP with proper use of statistics and logical syllogisms I have proved that school uniforms are beneficial on balance I have successfully refuted my opponent's case, thus forcing ourselves to vote in affirmation due to no valid points on his side My opponent has not successfully proved that school uniforms are not beneficial, thus not holding up his part of the BoP. (I stated in R1 that both sides have the BoP, so he should have tried to uphold his BoP) I have used more credible sources than my opponent. Looking forward to your rebuttals

School Uniforms

-First off, Des Moines won the case? And students are still plenty able to freely express themselves, by, hey I dontknow? TALKING! - Individuality should be shown by someones personality not what clothes they wear. - In Long Beach, CA, after two years of a district-wide K-8 mandatory uniform policy, reports of assault and battery in the district's schools decreased by 34%, assault with a deadly weapon dropped by 50%, fighting incidents went down by 51%, sex offenses were cut by 74%, robbery dropped by 65%, possession of weapons (or weapon "look-alikes") decreased by 52%, possession of drugs went down by 69%, and vandalism was lowered by 18%. - http://school-uniforms.procon.org... -Students are way more prone to embarassment without school uniforms as a highschooler myself I know a multitude of kids who were made fun of for not wearing the trending brands (Nike, Vans, Pink etc) and school uniforms will decrease that to a minimum.