The Instigator
umbrElla
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
AlternativeDavid
Con (against)
Winning
8 Points

Schools should teach more about the environment

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 2 votes the winner is...
AlternativeDavid
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/20/2015 Category: Economics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 610 times Debate No: 72086
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (2)

 

umbrElla

Pro

I'm doing this for the very first time so I'm going to fail. So bad. But here we go.

I care about the environment. Young kids (like kindergarten) won't know what will happen when they throw away a bottle instead of recycling it. They need to know the Earth is the only one we get. Once it's gone (or covered with trash like Pixar's "Walle") it's gone.
AlternativeDavid

Con

I'd like it to be known that I am playing devil's advocate for this debate.


In this round, as Pro has not introduced any major arguments, I will just ask a question:

Can five year olds be expected to fully understand how the process works and why its important to save the earth?
Debate Round No. 1
umbrElla

Pro

Thanks for going against me! I am brand new at this so I am positive you will win.

Anyways yes 5 year olds can understand it. Is it that hard to learn to recycle? Look at this PBS kids website. It is teaching kids about the environment http://pbskids.org.... Sorry I don't know how to make it a site-thingy. I'm not good at electronics stuff. This website is showing kids what happens to trash and how it hurts our planet. It also shows how life will be like if we don't take care of the world.
AlternativeDavid

Con

Advice: Often times it is better to make your own point instead of making your sources do so. Sources are primarily for reference and to validate arguments.


--

Expert in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at University of California-Los Angelos Daniel Blumstein [1] argues that the way Environmental Science is taught in the United States and other countries is terrible. The education tends to dissassociate awareness with actually taking action. As a result, environmental education has failed to keep pace with envirnmental degredation. Until this issue is solved, I don't see more education fixing anything.

What can you propose that will fix this throughout all grade levels, not just for kindergarden?





[1] http://newsroom.ucla.edu...;
Debate Round No. 2
umbrElla

Pro

I didn't mean just kindergarten I meant all kids even young ones. Teachers can tell kids how to stop pollution and recycle. When I was in...um... I think 2nd grade we went to a place that taught us how to recycle and how to make our own recycled paper. However when we moved my sister never got to have that experience. I think all schools have to be able to do stuff like I did. I'm not saying some schools don't , just that all schools should.

Peace out!
AlternativeDavid

Con

"I didn't mean just kindergarten I meant all kids even young ones."

What defines a young kid? Why shouldn't we be educating 17 year olds? They're still in school. Throughout the debate, Pro didn't really seem too sure who should be learning this.

"Teachers can tell kids how to stop pollution and recycle."

Yes Pro is absolutely right here. Children can be TOLD how to do these things. This does not mean that they will retain this information, or that they will know what to do with it.


---

Pro's entire closing argument seemed to completely disregard the issue that was presented in round 2: That current environmental education is terrible. Adding more bad education won't make it better. 10 spoiled oranges will not taste as good as one fresh orange.


Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by bluesteel 2 years ago
bluesteel
=================================================================
>Reported vote: Futurepresident2048 // Moderation action: Removed<

6 points to (S&G, arguments, conduct). {RFD = Reasons for voting decision: Con provided a more reasonBle debate}

[*Reason for Removal*] Failure to explain S&G and conduct. Too generic on arguments.
==================================================================
Posted by umbrElla 2 years ago
umbrElla
Thanks! I have too go but I'll be back tomorrow! (Probably) if not you were a great apponet!
Posted by AlternativeDavid 2 years ago
AlternativeDavid
Don't worry. If you'd like, I'll give you tips on what you can do better.
Posted by umbrElla 2 years ago
umbrElla
Thank you AlternativeDavid! Good luck! You will win! (I don't know about you but I will be really really bad at this... I think... I hope I don't make a fool out of myself...)
Posted by PickUp_Artist 2 years ago
PickUp_Artist
Okay let's debate!
Posted by umbrElla 2 years ago
umbrElla
Anyone out there? Please debate me! Or however you say it! Unless you agree with me...Wich would be sooooooooooooooooooooo cool!
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Midnight1131 2 years ago
Midnight1131
umbrEllaAlternativeDavidTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro seemed really unsure throughout the whole debate. And this affected their conduct. Pro also failed to elaborate more on what their idea was in the first place.
Vote Placed by tajshar2k 2 years ago
tajshar2k
umbrEllaAlternativeDavidTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con provided stronger arguments. Con also countered all of Pro's claims.