Schools should start no earlier than 8:00 AM
Debate Rounds (4)
First round is acceptance. Any questions can be asked in the comment section. Thank you, and I look forward to this debate.
I would like to thank my opponent for accepting my debate.
I would like to start by pointing out that sleep is essential for young adults. They often are not able to fall asleep early enough to both meet the recommended amount of sleep and wake up in time to attend school if it starts prior to 8:00 AM.
"Biological sleep patterns shift toward later times for both sleeping and waking during adolescence -- meaning it is natural to not be able to fall asleep before 11:00 pm. Teens need about 9 1/4 hours of sleep each night to function best (for some, 8 1/2 hours is enough). Most teens do not get enough sleep — one study found that only 15% reported sleeping 8 1/2 hours on school nights."
If you look at these numbers, and you consider the fact that it is natural, and therefore common, not to be able to fall asleep prior to 11:00PM, and then calculate what time they would need to wake up at in order to receive an average nine hours of sleep, they could not wake up until 7:30AM, which leaves them a bare minimum amount of time to actually prepare for school in the morning. To schedule school even earlier than this in the morning, would be to ask adolescents to choose school over their well being. A school's job is to educate students, and in order to do this, they must ensure that they are allowing students to have healthy conditions, so that they can maximize their learning and potential.
Lack of sleep has been proven to lead t severe brain damage in mice, which has suggested the idea that it may also d so in humans. If schools force teens to go to school at an hour which causes sleep deprivation, thy could also be damaging the brain cells of these students, and causing irreversible damage.
"In mice, prolonged lack of sleep led to 25% of certain brain cells dying, according to a study in The Journal of Neuroscience. If the same is true in humans, it may be futile to try to catch up on missed sleep, say US scientists."
So, by forcing students to go to school before eight o'clock, they are harming them physically, and hurting their chances of learning by causing brain damage, which also hurts their chances of using whatever they do manage to learn later in life by making it more difficult to be successful.
If making the start time of school earlier than 8:00 causes sleep deprivation in students, then what benefits can possibly out weigh this? After all, this sleep deprivation causes short term issues, by making it difficult to function and learn in school, and long term damages, by killing brain cells. This compromises the very purpose of school: to provide a place where children have the ability to be educated and prepared for success later in life.
Thank you for the debate, and I look forward to hearing your arguments!
In the performing academically area, my opponent is absolutely correct. Starting later does make for a better learning experience. However, the cost of starting school later is higher than you would think. In the way society is, we do not want to spend more money. I do believe education ought to come before the state and federal budget stuff, but this would still have a large impact on the cost.
Many parents take their children to school on their way to work when it starts early in the morning, requiring less buses to be used. Starting school later would make the school bus demand go up, costing the schools an amount they cannot afford. (http://educationnext.org...) School districts sometimes use the same buses for their elementary, middle and high school, which is actually a part of the reason why all those grade levels start at different times. If you were to start school later for high school students at say 8AM, then you would push the elementary school students to 9AM, and middle school students up to 10 AM, making for a longer, and later school day. You could start all schools at the same time, but the cost would go up, which would be the only way to fulfill the starting later goal. How does a later school day effect students and teachers? It shortens their days with their families. If a student starts school later, that doesn't mean a parent starts work later. And then, if it is true what you said that students on average go to bed no earlier than 11PM, then they would have a short time with family. They sleep, parents leave at their normal times (which, by the way, some parents say good bye to their kids, waking them up before their full sleep is in. And we all know how hard it is too fall back to sleep after being woken up in the morning), student goes to school, comes home later because if you start later you end later, the student then spends (the average student) probably 2-3 hours studying/doing homework. (http://www.theatlantic.com...)
So now figure it's about 8pm, hopefully the child has eaten with their family, and then the student has 2-3 hours to spend with their family. Spending time with family also impacts a student's education. Does it have more or less of an impact than sleep? Well that varies from student to student.
In a study that contradicts my opponent's in a way, students performed better in their morning classes than their afternoon classes (http://dailyfreepress.com...). While students who in afternoon classes get more sleep, their GPA was lower than those of the people in morning classes. Although, I will be honest, the same source says students experience the exact opposite as well.
I look forward to your rebuttals.
I would like to thank my opponent for the debate.
1.) I would first like to point out that my opponent agrees in the beginning of the round that academically, I have proven that starting school later is better. In my opponents third argument, he brings up that some students did better in their morning classes. I would like to point out, that he says the article does also show that students do better in the afternoon and that the article states that the morning classes begin at 8:00 AM, so either way, this has no bearing on the debate.
2.) I would also like to bring up that my opponent did not explain how spending time with family impacts grades and education, nor does the article provided, and he also does not explain how this links into the debate. This could be a whole other debate, however we are not debating the effect of family time on grades, we are debating the effects of school start times. This debate is not even constrained to how start time effects grades, so this argument has no tie to the resolution.
3.)I am going to use several sub points to rebut my opponents first argument:
a.) My opponent talks about how making start times later will effect the cost of buses. I would first like to say that while it will increase costs, in order to make improvements, money will almost always have to be spent. The article my opponent provides in this argument actually states:
"With approximately 100,000 students per year divided into three tiers, it would cost roughly $150 per student each year to move each student in the two earliest start-time tiers to the latest start time. In comparison, an experimental study of class sizes in Tennessee finds that reducing class size by one-third increases test scores by 4 percentile points in the first year at a cost of $2,151 per student per year (in 1996 dollars). These calculations, while very rough, suggest that delaying the beginning of the school day may produce a comparable improvement in test scores at a fraction of the cost."
This shows that although this will increase costs, in comparison to the other viable methods of improving public education, this method is actually quite cost efficient.
b.) I opponent discusses that if you were to push all start times later, school days would be a lot longer. This however, is what the $150 per student mentioned in the quote above prevents. This small fee per student combines all schools into one time slot. This means that my opponent cannot get both impacts, and that his argument on family time is irrelevant as families will not lose time together.
c.) As my opponent is discussing the economic disadvantages of changing the system, I will discuss the economic disadvantages of keeping it the way it is now, with start times before 8:00 AM. I have proven that these early start times hurt the student both academically, and hurt their brain cells, which cannot be repaired, which hurts them later in life. If you disable whole generations through early start times, you are ensuring that later in life, when they are the ones running the world, their will be an economic downfall because the leaders will be less capable than their predecessors because of the lack of sleep. This early start time will take away from our countries field of future skilled workers, and effectively hurt the economy much more than a $150 per student per year cost will.
5.) in the end, my arguments about students being less able to function, and being injured in the long term have not been touched. My opponent attempted to show that they are wrong with an article that stated that people were able to achieve high GPAs in morning classes, but this did not even cover any of the long term harms to the students, and the article was about classes which started after 8:00, and it also said that the opposite was true. So my arguments still stand while my opponents were proven to be inconsequential to this debate. My opponents argument about the economic harms of later start times has also been proven to not effect this debate as I have shown it to be the method of improvement that hurts the economy the least and have shown how not taking steps to make this improvement will have future effects that will hurt out economy much much worse. As I have proven all of my arguments and none of my opponents arguments still stand, I urge you to vote pro.
Thank you for the debate and I look forward to hearing your arguments.
I would like to thank my opponent for the debate. I would like to extend all of my arguments as well. I will also ecourage my opponent to post something in the last round, just so it does not show up as a forfeited round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Ameliamk1 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:||4||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Very impressive, Pro. Pro used superior arguments and forced the concession of their opponent.
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.