The Instigator
bellareginag
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
evospireX
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points

Should high school and middle school students be able to use phones at passing time and at lunch.

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 2 votes the winner is...
evospireX
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/5/2015 Category: Education
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 858 times Debate No: 74838
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (2)

 

bellareginag

Pro

I think that students should be allowed to use phones at passing time and lunch. Passing time and lunch are really the only free time that students get at school, so why not do what you would like to do during that time. Being on electronic devices at lunch can also relax and calm your brain that the school work that you have previously been doing.
evospireX

Con

If your middle school experience was anything like mine, you would know that passing periods are when hallways can become one of the most crowded spaces in the school. Giving middle school students the privilege of using phones could be a catastrophe all together. Imagine hordes of teens walking at all different paces, many of them with their faces pointed down, clearly not aware to their surroundings, nor paying attention to where they are heading. Imagine girls suddenly stopping in the middle of the hallway just to take a selfie or show someone how many followers or views they got on a photo. Not only would this lead to potential injury, but many of the students could end up tardy to class. When I was in middle school, three tardies led to an instant detention. and I know many other people who had even stricter rules imposed on them about tardiness. Of course, many of the kids getting tardies might not be responsible, as they are unfortunately stuck behind a mob of texting teens. Since phones are not allowed in class, students will need time to go to their lockers, get their phones, power them on, text someone, power them off, and then go back to their locker and put it back. How can all this be possible in just a short passing period? The reason schools as prestigious as Harvard have prohibited phone use during the brief passing period is that when you give kids more freedom about choices that could lead them to bad consequences, is that most of the time, they will perform the action without even thinking what could go wrong. Surely, a perfectly-functioning system built up after generations of teachers and students, shouldn't have to change such a minor detail like using phones during passing period, especially when it can cause so much trouble.
Debate Round No. 1
bellareginag

Pro

But if students were at their lockers while on their phones it wouldn't be such a problem. They might need to text their family and ask for lunch money or to bring something they need to school. The middle school that I've attended had 5 minutes between classes for passing time. A lot of the time students get bored sitting in their class doing nothing until the bell rings. It takes 1 minute to get things from your locker, and you have to sit in class for 4 minutes doing nothing at all. Why shouldn't students be allowed to text someone for a minute by their locker? As I was saying there would be no problem at all if they were at their lockers and not walking in the hallways while on their phone and they wouldn't be doing any harm.
evospireX

Con

Speaking from experience, when individuals receive power, most of them tend to stretch it. The reason schools ban phones during passing period is because the majority of students can't handle that privilege. Texting your parents once a day for lunch money could potentially evolve to stopping by your locker every single passing period and staying there for a while. It is sad that people are so bored in school that they need to be able to text someone and cannot wait util school is over to take care of such trivial things. Kids who go to school should go there to learn, not to spend every minute of class anticipating when they can leave and check their Instagram. There are about 57,000,000 kids in the world who can't go to school because there isn't any to go to.(1)

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk...

Of course, one could make the argument: why aren't kids allowed to use phones during lunch. From a parent's point of view, lunch is the only period in the school that gives kids the time to socialize. Eliminating that face-to-face time with other kids is a parent's nightmare because that just shows the lack of interest teens have in other human beings, and how they would prefer texting someone rather than talking to them. According to NY times, 1 in 3 texters would rather text than talk.

Source: http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com...

In conclusion, texting is not bad, but it can corrupt a place of learning and distract people from true purpose of going to school: to learn.
Debate Round No. 2
bellareginag

Pro

I agree, that not using phones for texting isn't good. But emergencies at school can occur. For example, lock downs, school fires, and violence. From a few years back in 6th grade, my middle school had a fire in the boys bathroom and spread throughout the school. If children didn't have their phone at the time of an emergency how are their parents going to know their in danger.
Source : https://answers.yahoo.com... By Tommy V
Students also need phones to learn to stay safe from cyber-bullying and other people trying to harm them.
http://theinnovativeeducator.blogspot.com...
For one, phones would make school a lot funner for children.
In the link above Michael Soskil wrote some facts why phones should be allowed at school.
He states that phones can be used as an educational learning experience they can learn how to program phones and work with new technology.
Parents would also be allowed to keep in touch with children. 48% of parents monitor their childrens current location.
Source : http://life.familyeducation.com...
evospireX

Con

First of all, my opponent has chosen to write his argument in a completely irrelevant manner to the topic statement: Should high school and middle school students be able to use phones at passing time and at lunch? His original claim was that students should be able to use phones during passing period and lunch. This claim changed completely when my opponent decided that phones should be allowed during passing period and lunch in the event of an emergency. He also mentions that phones should be integrated into the learning environment, all of this which is off-topic.

Anyhow, I would like to address your point about emergencies. Schools have been teaching their students for years to go directly to a safe area as soon as possible. How can teachers account for all of their students with kids running to their lockers and texting their parents. Even one person texting can hold up the entire class and compromise the safety of all of those kids. I you happen to have your phone on you as you exit the school, it is completely okay to text a parent, but during a lock down or a tornado drill, an occasion where you are very quiet, still and within the school, using a phone is clearly a dumb idea.

Secondly, My opponent's point about cyber-bullying is very much invalid. What use a phone in protecting you in a crowded building with teachers accessible every 10 feet? This is the exact problem I was trying to address in round two. Many kids are so obsessed with phones that instead of using common sense and calling a teacher close by, they will text a friend who is on the other side of the school.

And third, my opponent's idea of "an educational learning experience" does not even fit with the original point. He says that phones should be allowed at school(which they are), and that they should be integrated with school curriculum. I am not even going to attempt to address this point as it clearly does not fit with the claim. Also, my opponents point about monitoring their child's location. After reading the site(http://life.familyeducation.com...), it says "(The Pew study noted that 48 percent of parents use the phone to monitor their child's location.)"( The actual site simply says that parents monitor their kids location, whereas my opponent said that they monitor their child's current location. Big difference.

Finally, phones should not be used in passing period, because it doesn't benefit children. If schools are preparing kids for life, why should they allow kids to text or play games whenever they get free time. This can evolve into an addiction. At a university, students are expected to study, or do something productive during their breaks, not waste away precious time on games, social media, etc. As Steven Spielberg once said, "Technology can be our best friend, and technology can also be the biggest party pooper of our lives. It interrupts our own story, interrupts our ability to have a thought or a daydream, to imagine something wonderful, because we're too busy bridging the walk from the cafeteria back to the office on the cell phone."(1)

Source(1): http://www.brainyquote.com...
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by ConceptEagle 1 year ago
ConceptEagle
Lumberjay85, you have to explain why Con has a more convincing argument. Otherwise, your vote might be removed by a moderator.
Posted by Lumberjay85 1 year ago
Lumberjay85
When I was a junior in high school, we got a new principal. He wanted to be known as the "cool principal" and tried to connect with the students. One of the first things he did was allow the usage of cell phones during passing time (they had already always been allowed at lunch). That lasted about a month before the privilege was revoked. Why? It was almost exactly like Con's round one argument. The already slow, overcrowded halls became nearly impassible due to students on their phones. While this personal experience did not influence my voting decision, I just wanted to share that Con's prediction is actually quite accurate.
Posted by ConceptEagle 1 year ago
ConceptEagle
You may not award points for the person you agree with but to the quality of his or her contribution to the debate.
Posted by blorance 1 year ago
blorance
You're in middle school and you're worried about a phone during school when you're BFF Gill is right next to you? Humanity is a sad, sad life form.
Posted by KoA 1 year ago
KoA
My school doesnt allow phones but honestly i think it should so im with bellareginag(pro) so even though i cant vote they have mine when i can.
Posted by Himans45 1 year ago
Himans45
Phones are allowed in class, atleast in my school. Also, even if they weren't allowed at yours all someone has to do is put it in their pocket, not their locker. You also failed to address lunch time phone usage, and your claim that the hallways would be held up is simply untrue.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by ConceptEagle 1 year ago
ConceptEagle
bellareginagevospireXTied
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: Con refuted all of Pro's arguments and went into detail about the abuse of cell-phone privileges including evidence from several studies while Pro did not bring up studies or any evidence of other student behavior, of his own. Meanwhile, pro changed his or her thesis in the middle of the debate, which is poor conduct. Also, Con used far more reliable sources, obviously.
Vote Placed by Lumberjay85 1 year ago
Lumberjay85
bellareginagevospireXTied
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: Con made a much more convincing argument. Con also receives source points since Pro used a blog and Yahoo.answers.