The Instigator
spellingbee
Pro (for)
Losing
11 Points
The Contender
LatentDebater
Con (against)
Winning
18 Points

Corporal punishment should be banned from schools

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 7 votes the winner is...
LatentDebater
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/26/2013 Category: Education
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 17,443 times Debate No: 29588
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (9)
Votes (7)

 

spellingbee

Pro

Corporal punishment has shown to be ineffective by many studies and health care experts. It has also shown that students that have been subjected to corporal punishment have lower IQ's. while it is on the decline it is STILL legal in 19 states including

Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Wyoming.

In all 50 states it is illegal to hit a prisoner, animal, or someone in the military, yet it is perfectly legal in those 19 states to strike a child.

I welcome your arguments.
LatentDebater

Con

NOTE: You didn't say USA only so I shall use statistics and facts from aroudn the globe (mainly UK).

Now onto the main debate.

In a survey completed by the Times Educational supplement [1], 6000 teachers were questioned. One in five believed that class room behaviour had deteriorated since the abolition of corporal punishment and they believed the education system would improve with the re-introduction of corporal punishment. We should adhere to the teachers requests.

It is inevitable that bad classroom behaviour will filter into life outside school. You only have to look at the crime statistics to see that crime has increased dramatically since the abolition of corporal punishment. Between 1981, when corporal punishment was legal and in 1997, after the abolition of corporal punishment, there was a 67% increase in crime [2].

Children’s behaviour has been adversely affected by the rights culture we have in Britain. A teacher cannot threaten a detention, something they are allowed to do, without the retort of “but you can't take away my freedom”, “you have no right” or “I have rights”. In fact children are acutely aware of how much power they have over the teachers by way of laws and rights, and they use every opportunity to remind the teachers of that fact. If we re-introduced corporal punishment this back chat would cease and the power would be retained by the teachers. Detention is not going to be taken seriously by anyone. What does detention do other than waste your time? If you have ADHD or a creative mind you'll have a blast, effectively learning nothing to *correct* your behavior. If this is the only effective authority a teacher has for an out of control student then that teacher is and probably knows his/her authority is rather pitiful.

Sources

[1] http://tinyurl.com...
[2] http://tinyurl.com...

Debate Round No. 1
spellingbee

Pro

First of all, thank you latentdebater for accepting the debate. Also, I am only talking about the US. While one in five is a lot, has the students' academic record changed? I'm assuming you're from the UK so I pose this question to you, do parents have the option as to whether or not their child can be paddled? Here in the South most of the schools have forms stating the guidelines of corporal punishment. Speaking of detention, there are numerous ways you can make it effective. I'm in college now, but when I was in school, detention was copying the handbook. Most students were never back in that detention room. Most students who were paddled, however, were in there lots of times because once again I will say this, corporal punishment is ineffective. Once again, thank you for debating me.
LatentDebater

Con

You have supplied zero evidence. I, for now, will remakr that we can consider all your assertions of corporal punishment's ineffectiveness and detention's effectiveness false.

You are not permitted to suddenly limit it to one nation unless it is in you rdebate guidelines, which it wasn't.
Debate Round No. 2
spellingbee

Pro

http://abcnews.go.com...

This article shows the ineffectiveness of corporal punishment in schools. In closing, corporal punishment should be banned because it is ineffective and lowers students' IQ's. Other forms of punishment should be explored and tested. Good luck.
LatentDebater

Con

My opponent supplies us by a new article from the famously liberal abc news. (I'm liberal myself but for this debate I have to admit that this is an extremely biased source). They essentially tear apart the idea of corporal punishment based on the 'theory' (for which no evidence is supplied) that corporal punishment increases aggression in children (which is ironic because you'd think having felt the force of violence that children would be less aggressive).

Now I shall explain exactly why corporal punishment needn't be banned from SCHOOLS despite it's rightful ban in other places.

As I said in round 1, " A teacher cannot threaten a detention, something they are allowed to do, without the retort of “but you can't take away my freedom”, “you have no right” or “I have rights”. In fact children are acutely aware of how much power they have over the teachers by way of laws and rights, and they use every opportunity to remind the teachers of that fact." corporal punishment would allow the teacher, in a strictly monitored manner, to spank the child for not only the original reason but for the rudeness of the remark, is rather ineffective and useless (and my opponent supplied zero evidence otherwise).

Also,, was my contention that "If we re-introduced corporal punishment this back chat would cease and the power would be retained by the teachers. Detention is not going to be taken seriously by anyone. What does detention do other than waste your time? If you have ADHD or a creative mind you'll have a blast, effectively learning nothing to *correct* your behavior." The only point against this was that my opponent claimed to have first-hand seen reduction in repeats of detention as opposed to spanking issues but this easily could be because of more lenience in the school when it had detentions.

I re-iterate that Between 1981, when corporal punishment was legal and in 1997, after the abolition of corporal punishment, there was a 67% increase in crime. (Source R#1)
Debate Round No. 3
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by Deadlykris 1 year ago
Deadlykris
I've now seen two people claiming vote bombing, yet I see no vote bombing. What gives?
Posted by Aceviper2011 1 year ago
Aceviper2011
if you allow a teacher to hit your kids, then that makes it everyone to hit your kids, and if you show terror that makes children want to rebel more. So spanking a child that is not a parent will not change a grade, its how they learn. and how they comprehend the material.
Posted by wrichcirw 1 year ago
wrichcirw
1) CON: "It is inevitable that bad classroom behaviour will filter into life outside school. You only have to look at the crime statistics to see that crime has increased dramatically since the abolition of corporal punishment. Between 1981, when corporal punishment was legal and in 1997, after the abolition of corporal punishment, there was a 67% increase in crime [2]."

This statement doesn't make any sense to me. So, corporal punishment was legal between 1981 and 1997, and coincided with a 67% increase in crime. What happened AFTER 1997?

2) CON: "A teacher cannot threaten a detention, something they are allowed to do, without the retort of "but you can't take away my freedom", "you have no right" or "I have rights". In fact children are acutely aware of how much power they have over the teachers by way of laws and rights, and they use every opportunity to remind the teachers of that fact."

But the children were wrong in their assertion. Therefore, they do NOT know how much power they have.

3) PRO: "I'm in college now, but when I was in school, detention was copying the handbook. Most students were never back in that detention room. "

This is an extremely weak assertion, however it went uncontested by CON, other than to say it wasn't sourced. I still do not understand the relevance of CON's main source, so I have to go by this one argument as meeting BoP, although exceptionally weak.

---

Conclusion:

Weak arguments by PRO, but in the end not contested by CON. Sources irrelevant to both sides. Will award S&G to CON for at least providing a substantive case, whereas for PRO, he made one very weak point and CON let it stand and did not counter-argue, other than to say it was not sourced. Highly advise CON to at least give a trivial counter-argument after pointing out unsubstantiation.

Arguments to PRO, S&G to CON.
Posted by Deadlykris 1 year ago
Deadlykris
Teachers should not be asked nor allowed to rule their classrooms by means of terror.
Posted by teddy2013 1 year ago
teddy2013
Corporal punishment or sometimes just the threat of corporal punishment, restores the upper hand to the teacher, where it should be. I know for me, the occasional swat kept me in line.
Posted by YYW 1 year ago
YYW
I never really bought into the idea that corporal punishment lowers IQ's. It seems to me to be the case that lesser intelligent people (who pass on their bad genes to their kids) are just more likely to beat their kids.
Posted by Deadlykris 1 year ago
Deadlykris
His reference to "19 states" by name, as well as "all 50 states" clearly sets the scope of the debate as being in the USA.
Posted by LatentDebater 1 year ago
LatentDebater
No it is not. Merely that he used it as a case study which I did the EU instead.
Posted by Deadlykris 1 year ago
Deadlykris
Con, your attempts to expand this debate to cover every nation are intellectually dishonest. It is clear from the opening remarks that this is intended to refer to the USA.
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 1 year ago
RoyLatham
spellingbeeLatentDebaterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro had the burden of proof and needed to reference studies to support his case rther than ju claim studies exist. New evidence should not be introduced in the final round of the debate, but it was adequately rebutted. The debate was not limited to the US, and Pro did give reasons why Britain would have different results for corporal punshment. I have doubts that corporal punishment is effective, but Pro didn't make the case.
Vote Placed by Aceviper2011 1 year ago
Aceviper2011
spellingbeeLatentDebaterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: I see allot of votebomb, the grammer goes to con, also con used more reliable sources.
Vote Placed by wrichcirw 1 year ago
wrichcirw
spellingbeeLatentDebaterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Reasons for voting decision: see comments
Vote Placed by anonynomous 1 year ago
anonynomous
spellingbeeLatentDebaterTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: S&G to pro for obvious reasons. I give arguments to pro b/c con's first argument was based on life experience which doesn't count and his second argument was just citing an article which go's against the entire purpose of having a debate. On to con, So his first argument about 20% of teachers opinion's wasn't refuted though i do wonder about the other 80% which pro should have brought up. His second argument about the 67% was correlation without causation but as it went unrefuted he wins on that also.
Vote Placed by Deadlykris 1 year ago
Deadlykris
spellingbeeLatentDebaterTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: S&G to Pro for Con's spelling errors (NOTE: I am not talking about British vs. US spelling here). Arguments to Pro because Con failed to make any points which were not refuted. EDIT 1: sources vote withdrawn due to new info. I was under the mistaken impression that this debate had an 8000 character per argument limit but I was informed that that limit was actually 2000 characters. That makes a huge difference and justifies the use of Tinyurl or other URL shorteners. EDIT 2: fixed a voting error when I went to adjust the vote based on new info, also changed my mind about conduct, and condensed my RFD (including altering my previous edit).
Vote Placed by tmar19652 1 year ago
tmar19652
spellingbeeLatentDebaterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Counter you mills votebomb. And con used more sources.
Vote Placed by youmils03 1 year ago
youmils03
spellingbeeLatentDebaterTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Reasons for voting decision: I vote Pro.