The Instigator
PonyGirl
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Smithereens
Con (against)
Winning
16 Points

Should phones be allowed to be uses at schools?

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 3 votes the winner is...
Smithereens
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/30/2013 Category: Education
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,181 times Debate No: 33120
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (8)
Votes (3)

 

PonyGirl

Pro

I am challenging my opponent with a topic about phones being used at school. I hope I do well on this debate. I think that phones should be allowed to be used at school because, if students need help with arithemic and the teacher is not there, they can swap out there phone and use their calculator. And what if there was an emergency in the room but there was no phone, they could also take out their phone o call for help.
Smithereens

Con

I would like to make it clear that I have been challenged to this debate and am not newb sniping. Since the resolution is actually a question, both sides have a burden of proof to establish why or why not phones should be allowed in school, therefore I shall provide both rebuttals and a negative case.

Before I do, we must define terms.

Definitions
phones: mobile devices used for calling with numurous other functions.
schools: Primary, pre-primary and secondary schools; not tertiary. (elementary and before, middle school and high school; not college/university)

Before I address the affirmative case, I would like to mention that I know very little about American schools which is what the majority of readers of this debate and my opponent are familiar with. For example, I understand that it is frowned upon by Americans when I say that I am 15 years old and in college when it is perfectly normal in Australia. The differences in our educational systems must be noted in this debate and understandings reached.

Deconstruction of the Affirmative case:
I recognise 2 arguments made by my opponent regarding the use of phones in school.
1) Students may need help with arithemic
2) phones would be useful in an emergency.

Objection 1
There are a few questions that I must ask my opponent in relation to this question:
1. Why would there be a student in arithemic/mathematics class without a calculator? (especially if he/she can afford a phone)
2. Why would a teacher not be present to help?
The argument fails due to assuming certain conditions are true in order to allow the argument to have substance. These conditions are that the student does not have a calculator and there is not teacher present. I will address these individually:
Student without a calculator? Let's assume that there is no calculator in the maths class. I will grant that a phone with a calculator will be convenient, but my later arguments will establish that this does not balance out in Pro's favour. What the phone poses as detrimental is greater than slight and improbable circumstances
No teacher in sight? Not possible. I will mainly address this next objection, but teachers are legally required to constantly surpervise students in pre-tertiary school.
The Pro case boils down mainly to convenience. In my case, I shall demonstrate why convenience is not good enough of a reason to allow phones in school.

Objection 2
The argument that phones would be usefull in an emergency is easily dismissed. There is never a need for student to use a phone for an emergency. The education system (in my country at least) is structured so that teachers are the ones responsible for handling an emergency. It makes more sense too, since teachers are better equipped to handle emergencies than students. At any one point, there is never a place on the campus that is inaccesible to teachers where a crime could be committed that wouldn't be detected immediantly. Challenging Pro to imagine a senario where a student with a phone is ncessary is counter-productive to this debate. There isn't any need for a student to have a mobile phone in an emergency. There is no evidence that emergencies have been dealt with greater ease and efficiency due to students with phones. The years before students had mobile phones with an emergency dial function is identical to today in terms of on-campus emergency dealings.

Negative case:
Clarifications:
I argue that students should be allowed to carry phones on them at school, but they cannot use them without the current supervisors consent. This means that if there does exist a situation where an emergency calls for the use of a students phone, while the school rule prohibits its use, the student will be allowed to break the rule.

Main argument :
Phones in use by students are the most distracting things. 42% of tutors find that their students are distracted by mobile phones.[1] This is a serious impairment to learning, not being able to focus on the work stops the student from learning as much as he/she is able to. In the survey that I mentioned from [source 1], teachers identify calls and texts as the major cause of distraction/interference with class work.
I argue that texting and calling is unecessary in class and can be done at home. There is absolutely no need for it in the classroom. It is just distracting and unwarrented.

Concluding, my opponent believes that convinience is superior to learning when it comes to instances when a student forgets their calculator in maths class, and has no friends to borrow from. Phones are detrimental to the education of Pre-teriary students and should not be allowed.

Sources:
[1]http://www.cellular-news.com...
Debate Round No. 1
PonyGirl

Pro

You said that in your school usually the teacher takes care of emergencies right? But what if your teacher went out of the room for some reason and there was an emergency then, I would take out my phone and call for help instead of yelling to my teacher which would take longer. Your right about teachers taking responsibility but when they're gone, we have to take responsibility.
Smithereens

Con

Pro drops all arguments, so this wil be short.

In response to the reply Pro gave I have alreay demonstrated why it is unrealistic, a situation where a school is devoid of teachers and there is an emergency where a mobile phone is more useful than the human voice is taking it too far. There is no point having mobile phones for such situations. We might as well put defibulators in every classroom and have an ambulance and fire-truck on the grounds at all times.

This debate concludes with the resolution negated. Vote con.


Hail Smithis!
Debate Round No. 2
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by Smithereens 4 years ago
Smithereens
pony, after a few more debates, you will be structuring your debates in a similar fashion to what I do. It's more formal and logical but requires large amounts of time.
Posted by TheGamer1998 4 years ago
TheGamer1998
by the way, I'm voting for ponygirl :3
Posted by PonyGirl 4 years ago
PonyGirl
Lol. Wow but benjamin your so good at debates your like freaking professional. :3 :)
Posted by TheGamer1998 4 years ago
TheGamer1998
I slowly go crazy if a teacher takes my phone, if I forget it at home, I won't go crazy
Posted by Smithereens 4 years ago
Smithereens
lol. I am a christian in a predominantly atheistic country. Argument comes as second nature.
Posted by PonyGirl 4 years ago
PonyGirl
Wow Benjamin you're good at debates. :) did u give definitions for all your debates?
Posted by PonyGirl 4 years ago
PonyGirl
.... :o youre not on hard yet? And you spelled scenario wrong. :)
Posted by Smithereens 4 years ago
Smithereens
I'll go easy on you.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by 1Devilsadvocate 4 years ago
1Devilsadvocate
PonyGirlSmithereensTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro drops all arguments. Con demonstrated why pro's arguments are unrealistic.
Vote Placed by nigga_swag 4 years ago
nigga_swag
PonyGirlSmithereensTied
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: Con was very good with his debating. GO AUSTRALIA!!!!!!
Vote Placed by GeekiTheGreat 4 years ago
GeekiTheGreat
PonyGirlSmithereensTied
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: Smithereens blew Pro away.