Physical Education shouldn't be required to graduate highschool
Debate Rounds (3)
I believe it would be beneficial to define some appropriate words:
1) Physical: Involving bodily contact or activity.
2) Education: The process of receiving or giving systematic instruction.
3) Graduate: To successfully complete an academic degree, course of training, or high school.
Therefore I can conclude that "Physical Education" is the process of giving/receiving systematic instruction related to/involving bodily contact/activity.
I look forward to hearing your arguments.
1) It gives them time in a school day to be active
2) It promotes a healthy lifestyle
3) It encourages students to eat healthy
4) It teaches students about different ways to be active
Now to get started on the on stating my point...
It is of my belief that physical education should not be a required class and that it should not be required for students to graduate high school. I would like to point out that my argument is not that Physical Education is a bad class, and also that I am not saying that Physical Education fails in what it is meant to do one hundred percent of the time.
For students which enjoy living a healthy lifestyle already PE is class they enjoy, it's something they don't mind being required to take. For students that have no problem at all with physical exercise there is nothing wrong with PE. However not all students enjoy being active, and not all students have no medical problems to keep them from having a problem with physical education. Therefore there are certain issues with PE which should be taken into consideration.
Some students have medical problems which keep them not only from enjoying PE but also from participating in it.For some students PE puts their health at risk. Understandably some schools will allow for kids with extreme medical conditions not to do PE, but what about the kids with minor problems? There are tons of students now of days that have asthma and being one of them I can honestly say being forced to run around a gym for an hour or so is torture. You can't breathe. Even with an inhaler there are still problems breathing, and not all teachers lets you sit out or rest just because you're having difficulty breathing. In fact most of them make you keep going because they say it's the only way for your asthma to get better. But that isn't always the case. Other minor medical problems make it difficult for students to participate in gym, and without participation you fail the class. Without the class, you can't graduate.
What about those students that are so uncoordinated they trip on their own feet? Or flat surfaces? When you put those kind of kids into PE and make them play sports they can't do it. They trip or get hit in the head or get in the way. It's no fun for those students at all. Especially when they get made fun of. That happens quite often. There are always kids who think they're so perfect at sports that anyone inferior to them is a joke, and being a joke isn't any fun. Maybe it's my being uncoordinated that gives me a bias here but do you really think it's a good idea to stick kids that suck at physical exertion into a class full of it just so they can be made fun of?
It doesn't work for the kids that don't enjoy it. A lot of students that take PE don't enjoy it. I know this because I've been in PE and I know how many kids failed the class because they didn't try, because they don't like it. Honestly, tell me, what's the point of forcing students to take the class if it doesn't do what it's meant to do? PE is meant to promote healthy living right? That's why most people would agree it's a good class. Well what about those times that students go into the class hating it, they hate doing it because they're lazy or tired or whatever reason, and then they go home and decide being lazy is better than being active. I guarantee part of the reason they think being lazy is so great is because they've had a negative experience with physical exertion. It's reasonable to believe that a class meant for promoting a healthy lifestyle is a good idea, and it's reasonable to think that an hour or so of running, or doing sit ups, or playing a sport isn't too much to ask, but when a kids doesn't like something, when they have a negative experience with it, they go home and want to do exactly the opposite of what that class promotes. In this case that's being lazy and eating unhealthy.
Those are the 3 major issues I can think of which should be taken into consideration when whoever it is that decides what classes should be required to graduate decides that PE should be required. When PE becomes a class that is difficult because of medical problems, or a class they get bullied in, or a class that teaches them to hate physical exertion and living healthy then it no longer is doing what it should. Having PE as an elective would be fine, that is for the kids that want to take it; but why is it required? It isn't a core class. It doesn't teach you about math or literature or history or science. Its main purpose is health, and isn't that what a health class is for? Health which is a class dedicated to teaching you about health is reasonable to be required, and it doesn't include physical exertion.
My point stands that Physical Education shouldn't be required. It can potentially be a class which is difficult. A class where a student is bullied. A class where it does the opposite of what it should. Physical Education is meant to promote a good healthy lifestyle, and there is another class which doesn't require physical exertion which does the same thing. So I leave my opponent with one main question: Why is Physical Education required?
HauntedShadows forfeited this round.
Jzmn282 forfeited this round.
HauntedShadows forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by kingcripple 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||0|
Reasons for voting decision: both forfeited. while pro did have an opening argument, she made no good arguments. As much as I would love to give con argument points, he forfited, so this goes to a tie
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.