The Instigator
anonymousbosch
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
OreosAreCool
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points

School Sports should be banned from public districts.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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 1 vote the winner is...
OreosAreCool
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/18/2016 Category: Education
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 603 times Debate No: 86790
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (1)

 

anonymousbosch

Pro

School Sports are terrible for public school districts. They are too pricey, too dangerous, and oh so distracting. Before we begin I would like to say this: Sports shouldn't be eradicated- just taken off of school time tables.
OreosAreCool

Con

I will be taking the position that school sports are a necessary part of a school's schedule. I think that they serve as a nice break from the busy timetable of the average high school student.

Looking forward to this debate.
Debate Round No. 1
anonymousbosch

Pro

School Sports have plagued our school systems since 1903. Many student from high-performing countries abroad- like China, India, etc. Are often shocked at how huge the focus on school sports is here. Many schools have football, basketball, and soccer teams- maybe even volleyball, tennis, rugby, cheer, and sometimes other sports. However, the cost for these sports can be over 150,000 per YEAR. All this being taken from taxpayer money- if you do the math, let's say one small district has an elementary school, middle school, and high school. If the middle and high school both have sports, that cost could be somewhere near 300,000 dollars- enough for a good size house. What if we took away this insanely expensive tradition- for every school that eliminated- or maybe cut back- on sports, you could afford to provide shelter and food for a homeless person for a whole year. Plus- kids would still be able to participate in athletic activities! Many cities offer sports leagues to kids of all ages. Sure, they may cost a bit more, but when you think about it- you do pay for school sports; assuming you pay your taxes.

And then we move on to the distraction issue. The whole point of having school at all is to learn skills that you can use for the rest of your life. Sure, sports may teach some of those- but if you show up to the office and throw your work around like a football, it's likely you won't be the employee of the month. My Mom used to tell me a story about how, in 6th grade, her history teacher/ cheer coach had the students put together signs for football games. I thought- and think- that that is really sad. School used to be an environment perfect for absorbing new information. How can students be expected to excel when school environments revolve around a recreational activity?

To improve learning environments for the next generation, sports should be separated from school. During school hours, students need to focus on their education, and removing school sports may be necessary to attain such a focus.
OreosAreCool

Con

To deny the availability of School Sports is to deny that option to those who cannot afford Alternatives

As a believer in equal opportunity (however not in equal results), I believe that all children, regardless of their parents' income, deserve the chance to experience the full extracurricular-packed high-school experience, if they want to. Suppose a poor family enrols their child in a public school, and this child has a deep interest in football. No justice would be done to that child or his/her family by removing that option and pointing them to the expensive alternatives.

A 2013 study shows that well over 50% of students in grade 8, 10, and 12, participate in school athletics.

http://www.childtrends.org...;

(I'm not sure if this image will display properly or not, but you can view it at that link)

Source: http://www.childtrends.org...

Surely not all of these students are able to afford the high costs of separate leagues.

School Sports cause increases in Academic Performance

Although contrary to Pro's claim, students perform better when given the ability to participate in sport activities at school. School Sports allow students to make friends that will be able to help you in your academics as well. This, of course, is only possible when the school provides these sports programs, because you will be meeting the same people in some (if not all) of your classes as well.

In fact, a study from the CDC found that an increase in extracurricular physical activity at schools is “positively related” to academic performance.

More than half of the associations examined in these studies were positive (52% overall), and almost none were negative (2%). Of note, GPA was positively associated with extracurricular physical activity 12 of the 22 times it was measured. Two studies also examined the association between extracurricular activities and dropout rates and found that participation was linked to decreased high school dropout rates.

Source: http://www.cdc.gov...

Students who participate in School Sporting activities have better Mental Health

Almost all school, no matter how great it may be, are guilty of placing heavy work-loads on students, leading to stress, anxiety, and depression. For a student coming from a poor family, it doesn't help that said student has to carry the worry of his/her parents' financial stress on top of their already existing burdens.

My main position on this issue, is that the banning of school sports would prove to be detrimental to not only the academic performance of the students, but also to their overall well-being.

Adolescents involved in school sports have better mental health as young adults.”

The results found that those who were involved in school sports had better scores on all three mental health assessments compared with those who did not play sports at all. Playing school sports during adolescent years was significantly linked to lower depression symptoms, lower perceived stress, and higher self-rated mental health in young adulthood.

Source: http://www.cfah.org...

My suggestion is also that allowing students to participate in school sports would serve as a preventative measure against mental health issues, which would end up saving money.

Debate Round No. 2
anonymousbosch

Pro

My opponent has given evidence as to why schools need sports to meet the "equal opportunity" mission. However, not all school sports are as free as they seem- according to this article, (http://www.seattletimes.com...) many students may pay up to 100 dollars to be able to play- add that to the cost of equipment, which many schools do not offer, and medical care in case of injury- the cost climbs higher and higher- more than some families can afford. "Essentially what it does is exclude poor kids," said Dick Flanary, senior director for leadership programs at the National Association for Secondary School Principals in Washington, D.C. "We like to talk about a free public education. But that needs to mean something. There is no question that these fees affect participation, and they impact those kids that are the neediest." As you can see, The fees that go along with playing sports make my opponents first argument void.

Besides that, I would like to bring to light another issue- stress. Many children and teenagers are encouraged and even pressured into doing sports, regardless of whether they want to or not. For some, sports are a getaway from stress- but for many, sports can be the root of that anxiety. Sports put a lot of pressure on students- pressure to win, pressure to be the best player, pressure to practice, practice, practice. according to this research (http://kidshealth.org...), "Most people play sports for the thrill of having fun with others who share the same interest. But it's not always fun and games. There can be a ton of pressure in high school sports. A lot of the time it comes from the feeling that a parent or coach expects you to always win." This illustrates the pressure on students to perform well at sports and school! With increasing pressure on students, many need to hone in and focus on their studies- after all, not many people ever make a career out of sports.
OreosAreCool

Con

In his first argument, Pro mentions that "Many student from high-performing countries abroad- like China, India, etc. Are often shocked at how huge the focus on school sports is here", and emphasizes on "sports like football, basketball, and soccer teams- maybe even volleyball, tennis, rugby, cheer, and sometimes other sports.", in which only one of those sports requires much gear. He later argues (in R3), that "many students may pay up to 100 dollars to be able to play- add that to the cost of equipment, which many schools do not offer", which is not consistent with his original argument, as the majority of the sports he implied were most played required very little equipment. My argument is that the $100 dollar fee that Pro claims, would be less of a burden on low-income families to handle, than it would be if the more costly sports leagues were their only option.

Pro then argues that the costs of medical care would accumulate, and that would leave the family in a worse financial position than before. He however, does not propose how his alternative to ban school sports would solve this issue; unless his proposal to ban said school sporting activities intends to lower the overall number of students playing sports, which would not be good, but that should be saved for another debate. Back to his argument though, students have just as much of a chance of getting injured and accumulating healthcare costs at the city-league sports activities that Pro suggested. This means my argument is valid.


Pro later points out that for "many" students, sports are the root of their anxieties, because of the pressure on students "to win". The evidence I presented in R2, however, says the opposite. I referred to an article which explicitly states that students who engaged in school sports had lower depression and better mental health. [1]. The article Pro linked to just simply defines the various forms of stress, and appears to be targeted to the minority who may be experiencing anxiety/stress as a result of competitive sports. It however, does not provide statistics of any kind, or confirm any facts that would support an argument in this debate, the article is irrelevant in the context of this debate.


I also want to address Pro's argument about distraction from sports. In my 2nd argument in R2, I did provide strong evidence that says sports has a positive effect on grades, and I think it is sufficient to say that sports does indeed have a POSITIVE effect on grades, and not a negative one as Pro claims.

In R3, however, Pro didn't provide rebuttals against my 2nd Argument in R2, so I guess it is because he agrees that sports are a positive influence on grades.

In conclusion, I think sports are an essential part of the high-school experience, and that its presence offers many benefits to students. To remove sports from schools would be a big mistake.
Many student from high-performing countries abroad- like China, India, etc. Are often shocked at how huge the focus on school sports is here
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by OreosAreCool 1 year ago
OreosAreCool
ok WTF somehow this random quote made its way to the bottom of my R3 argument, please ignore it.

Also, in R3, I forgot to give a link to my source numbered [1]. It's in R2 but I will post it here: http://www.cfah.org...

Not sure what good it will do in the comments section though.
Posted by OreosAreCool 1 year ago
OreosAreCool
Sorry, the quote that says: "More than half of the associations examined in these studies were positive (52% overall), and almost none were negative (2%). Of note, GPA was positively associated with extracurricular physical activity 12 of the 22 times it was measured. Two studies also examined the association between extracurricular activities and dropout rates and found that participation was linked to decreased high school dropout rates." Was meant to be written in quotation marks, apologies for forgetting to do that.
Posted by anonymousbosch 1 year ago
anonymousbosch
I meant no sports in schools. You got it right no worries. My first debate too.
Posted by ko_hankinator 1 year ago
ko_hankinator
Go OreosAreCool! I'm in the middle of my first debate, too, about the colonizing mars thing (which I'm against). I wish you luck.
Posted by OreosAreCool 1 year ago
OreosAreCool
And I just wanted to mention that this is my first real debate, so I hope I do well for a first try. xD
Posted by OreosAreCool 1 year ago
OreosAreCool
Oh crap, I didn't see this comment before I accepted the debate, so sorry ;-;
Posted by roypolicypro 1 year ago
roypolicypro
I am considering accepting this debate, but to be clear: Will you defend that no sports should be played in a public league? Will you defend schools that have a sports practice will be banned? I just want to be sure I understand the topic.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by rextr05 1 year ago
rextr05
anonymousboschOreosAreCoolTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's usage of references were flimsy at best & only used 2. Whereas, Con's usage was pertinent & the flow of his/her argument was much more scholarly, & therefore more convincing.