The Instigator
KaleBevilacqua
Pro (for)
Winning
19 Points
The Contender
Incognito13
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Should schools have recess?

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 3 votes the winner is...
KaleBevilacqua
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/16/2013 Category: Education
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 5,730 times Debate No: 40679
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (3)

 

KaleBevilacqua

Pro

In this informal debate, I am taking the position that students need recess, as it can improve learning and behavior.

Rules:

1.Both sides have a burden of proof for their own viewpoint.
2.If an argument is proven faulty, it can no longer be used.
3. Basic principles of logic apply: The position that is more reasonable and has more supporting evidence should be accepted as true.
4. Do not introduce new arguments while another is yet to be resolved.

I look forward to this debate.
Incognito13

Con

I agree to have this debate with you today...

I look forward to debating with you.

Since you are AFF your arguments go first then mine.

GLHF
Debate Round No. 1
KaleBevilacqua

Pro

Schools should have recess. I am defining recess in this debate as a scheduled break for physical activity.

1) People from the American Academy of Pediatrics wholly affirm the imprtance of a scheduled break during the day. Children need to have downtime between complex cognitive challenges,” says Dr. Robert Murray, a pediatrician and professor of human nutrition at the Ohio State University who is a co-author of the statement. “They tend to be less able to process information the longer they are held to a task. It’s not enough to just switch from math to English. You actually have to take a break.”[1] Thus, to improve the way children process information, they need a break.

2) A major study in Pediatrics showed that children with 15 or more minutes of recess had better class behavior. [2]
A professor on child development recently conducted a study on how recess affects academic performance, and found that children who do not have recess are much more fidgety in the classroom. [3]

3) Recess will boost mental productivity. Research by Brink (1995) suggests that capacity to master new information and recall past information is enhanced by biological and chemical changes in the brain caused by exercise.
Rossi and Nimmons (1991) point out that twenty minute mental breaks throughout the day enhanced productivity.
The brain performs poorly when attempting constant intense attention and is capable of ten minutes or less of continuous focus on external stimuli.
This is especially true of children.
Plus, brain research strongly supports the link of movement, physical activity, and exercise to increased student performance. [4]

4) Physical inactivity poses health threats and is associated with the tripling of childhood obesity. [5] Thus, it is important that schools provide kids with opportunities to be active.

5) In countries around the world, long periods of recess have a serious correlation with high test scores.

• In Finland – Test scores at the top in international standardized tests. Children there get a 15 – minute recess break after each 45-minute lesson.

• In Japan - Schools typically have a 10-20 min recess period between 45-min lessons or 5-min breaks between lessons, with a long play period after lunch.

• In Taiwan - Schools typically have many recess periods during the day; children are also given 5-6 min of transition after recess in which to settle down.

• In Great Britain - Schools have three 15-min recess periods throughout the day and 80-90 minutes at lunch.

~~

I look forward to reading your rebuttals.



[1]: http://healthland.time.com...
[2]: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org...
[3]: http://school.familyeducation.com...
[4]: http://whatkidsneed.wikidot.com...;
[5]: Waite-Stupiansky, Sandra & Marcia Findlay. The Fourth R: Recess and Its Link to Learning. 2008.

Incognito13

Con

Attacks on his case but first this TOPIC IS ABOUT MIDDLE SCHOOL NOT THE LOWER LEVEL SCHOOL.

BUT I HAVE ARGUMENTS THAT DESTROYS MY OPPONENTS CASE.
1. FIRTLY, THERE IS P.E WHICH HAS MORE TIME. IT IS KIND OF LIKE RECESS BUT BETTER WHICH DESTROYS MY OPPONENTS CASE.
If you don't but that then read my arguments.

His first arguments is basically saying that kids have to take a break.. Well first off this is invalid because:

1. The schoolyards in Atlanta, Georgia, are quiet this morning -- no children running, talking, or laughing -- and they're going to stay that way. Almost ten years ago, the district eliminated recess from its school day. Since then, all new Atlanta elementary schools have been built without playgrounds. Other schools have banished recess because they're concerned about the injuries and lawsuits that can arise from outdoor play. Administrators also cite the threat of strangers to children outside of school walls, and a shortage of teachers and volunteers to supervise recess as reasons to eliminate it. Which basically means that with recess there is a ver high change of getting injured. Why do we want kids going outside for injuries? Under pressure from parents and the state to raise test scores, some schools are casting aside recess as a waste of precious time. Benjamin O. Canada, superintendent of schools in Atlanta, told The New York Times, "We are intent on improving academic performance. You don't do that by having kids hanging on the monkey bars." Which means that With no recess we can have more academic performances and which also means that the School that eliminated recess had actually better test scores!

My opponents SECOND point says that with recess there is better behavior but this is false because:
1. Middle schoolers actually improve without recess says a major study in Yale. Middle Schools are mature enough not to have recess. Studies actually say that without recess, the students actually perform better and have more time for studies than useless recess.

My opponents THRID point is saying that Recess will boost mental productivity But first:
1. LOOK AT HIS EVIDENCE 1995. Look at that. about 18 years ago!. So that argument is invalid because of his overrated evidence. Also if you don't buy that, there is other evidence that says At the same time, studies of "social and emotional learning" programs indicate that students do better socially and academically when they learn how to understand their emotions, empathize with others, and make good decisions. So it does not boos mental productivity.

My opponents FOURTH point is that without recess it will pose health hazards but this is false because
1. There is always PE. P.E is an exception place where it is like recess but it is NOT!.

My Opponent FIFTH argument is other countries with recess had high test scores but this is false because
1. This if logically false because first, if you have no recess then there is time for m ore study which leads to more academic grades. But actually in the evidence i saw P.E.

Now going on my case.

My first contention: Obama's Recess Appointments Unwarranted, Unnecessary and Unconstitutional

On January 4, President Obama purported to appoint three individuals to be members of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) (two of whom were only nominated two weeks before and had not even completed the necessary questionnaire required by Senate) and one person to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). All of these positions require confirmation by the U.S. Senate.
There are three objections to what are basically illegal appointments by President Obama:

The Senate was not in "recess" as required by the Constitution and therefore the President lacked the authority to make "recess" appointments. The President cannot require Congress to act on his priorities " the Constitution established the principle of separation of powers as an important check and balance on the federal government.
This contempt for the Constitution by the President demonstrates a pattern of disregard for the Constitutional responsibility that accompanies the oath of office. Earlier in his administration the President decided he would not defend the Defense of Marriage Act " even though it was passed by bi-partisan majorities and signed by President Clinton in 1996. The endless use of appointing "Czars" to direct cabinet departments and thusly also circumventing the Senate confirmation process has been questioned by members of both political parties.
If President Obama would disregard the Constitution's "advise and consent" clause as he sees fit prior to an election imagine what he would do if he happened to be re-elected and would not face the voters again. By making these illegal "recess" appointments the President is saying he can appoint any person, at any time, to any position he chooses without the advice and consent of the Senate.
THIS CONTENTION ALSO DESTROYS THEIR WHOLE CASE.

ALSO I HAVE MORE SITES IN WHICH RECESS IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL
http://www.nrtw.org...

http://www.eagleforum.org...

http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com...

http://www.judicialwatch.org...

http://blog.heritage.org...

http://www.ibtimes.com...

http://online.wsj.com...

http://washingtonexaminer.com...

http://www.prnewswire.com...

http://washingtonexaminer.com...

http://www.newsmax.com...

http://netrightdaily.com...

http://www.grassley.senate.gov...

http://www.northeastteaparty.org...

http://dailycaller.com...

http://online.wsj.com...

http://www.oyez.org...

http://pjmedia.com...

http://www.franchise.org...

http://www.politico.com...

http://www.washingtonpost.com...

http://workplacechoice.org...

http://workplacechoice.org...

http://blog.heritage.org...

http://www.humanevents.com...

http://rsc.jordan.house.gov...

http://hatch.senate.gov...
Debate Round No. 2
KaleBevilacqua

Pro

Pardon me, opponent, but the time remaining is running out and I don't have enough time for a real argument. So please extend your contentions until I post the next round.
Incognito13

Con

Ok...

Well schools should not have recess because it is useless. But my opponent has said that it gives time for us to breath air and have fresh air and relax our brain but what does nutrition break do? Same thing...

Also my opponent says all those great things about recess but what about P.E. P.E is in school which my opponent argument basically go on my side because P.E is better than recess and actually is basically the same as recess and all those great things can come from P.E while we still have P.E to have fresh air.
Debate Round No. 3
KaleBevilacqua

Pro

Whew! I'm back and ready to debate.

Contrary to popular belief, physical education classes do not provide such
a benefit. In 2001, the Council on Physical Education for Children, a national
organization of physical education teachers, denounced the idea of replacing
recess with physical education, although the council had a vested interested
in promoting physical education. As the council members would surely agree,
physical education"like other instructional disciplines"rightfully imposes
rigorous demands on children and adolescents so as to stretch their skills.
Therefore, it seems clear, the demands of a physical education class do not
constitute a break.

One might say that bullying and other mean behavior can take place on playgrounds and lead to injuries. However, it is true that kids get bullied on playgrounds,
but they get bullied in cafeterias, too, and in hallways, in bathrooms, in locker
rooms, just about anywhere with little or no adult supervision. Even so, the
base rate of aggression on playgrounds is incredibly low. Specifically, of all the
behaviors observed on preschool and primary school playgrounds in many
countries, physical and verbal aggression account for less than 2 percent of the
total (Pellegrini 1995; Smith and Connolly 1980).

Another point I must address for the sake of this debate: You have plagiarized information that supports your case without actually thinking to deconstruct what you're trying to say. This is the "cherry picking" fallacy. Because later on in that very same article[1], Olga Jarrett, a professor of child development, says that the amount of instructional time lost to fidgeting in the classroom actually equals the amount of time it takes to have recess in the first place! So no, eliminating recess doesn't give more time to learn in the classroom. Including recess is the better option, because as I said, it provides a mental break and physical activity.

Besides, if a child must absorb more information, it is only reasonable to have more breaks in order for the brain to absorb it better and not get burned out. I extend my contentions from the second round to back up this statement.

And another huge, looming point I must address: Those links that state that recess is unconstitutional actually refer to a political act called a recess appointment, which has absolutely nothing to do with recess breaks in school.[3] Again, before posting a link that supposedly supports your claim, please take the time to examine it. Thank you in advance.

As for your contention about how Yale says middle schoolers are more mature without recess, I looked up this aforementioned study and have found no feasible results, which makes me quite skeptical. Even so, if recess has been shown by pediatricians and childhood development professors alike to improve performance, then clearly there is something else at play. What makes me quite skeptical is that the aforementioned study compares "elementary schoolers with recess" versus "middle schoolers without recess." Because recess isn't the only variable that's changing, one can't draw a conclusion about whether it is truly recess (or lack thereof) that has a role in a child's maturity, or whether it's anything else that changes between elementary and middle school.

---

I look forward to hearing your rebuttals.

[1]: http://www.journalofplay.org...
[2]: http://school.familyeducation.com...
[3]: http://www.senate.gov...='0DP%2BP%5CW%3B%20P%20%20%0A
Incognito13

Con

Well since my opponent says that the recess i have said was "Recess appointment"

I define Recess as a political state addressing school which means it is valid and that my arguments stills stands but my opponent is talking about mother definition of recess which i have addressed but will attack his new case:

My opponent said:
Contrary to popular belief, physical education classes do not provide such
a benefit. In 2001, the Council on Physical Education for Children, a national
organization of physical education teachers, denounced the idea of replacing
recess with physical education, although the council had a vested interested
in promoting physical education. As the council members would surely agree,
physical education"like other instructional disciplines"rightfully imposes
rigorous demands on children and adolescents so as to stretch their skills.
Therefore, it seems clear, the demands of a physical education class do not
constitute a break.

Well burn that because that evidence is from 2001 and a lot has changed since 2001. But when my opponent says that the demands of physical eduction class does do not constitute a break he is referring to P.E which basically concedes my opponent case.

My opponent also said that:
One might say that bullying and other mean behavior can take place on playgrounds and lead to injuries. However, it is true that kids get bullied on playgrounds,
but they get bullied in cafeterias, too, and in hallways, in bathrooms, in locker
rooms, just about anywhere with little or no adult supervision. Even so, the
base rate of aggression on playgrounds is incredibly low. Specifically, of all the
behaviors observed on preschool and primary school playgrounds in many
countries, physical and verbal aggression account for less than 2 percent of the
total (Pellegrini 1995; Smith and Connolly 1980).

My opponent also agrees about bullying during recess and harms during recess but talks about other things during school but we are only focusing on what happens during recess and during recess there is a chance of injuries but gave evidence from 1995 that verbal aggression are low but that piece of evidence is outdated.

Also my opponent said: As for your contention about how Yale says middle schoolers are more mature without recess, I looked up this aforementioned study and have found no feasible results, which makes me quite skeptical. Even so, if recess has been shown by pediatricians and childhood development professors alike to improve performance, then clearly there is something else at play. What makes me quite skeptical is that the aforementioned study compares "elementary schoolers with recess" versus "middle schoolers without recess." Because recess isn't the only variable that's changing, one can't draw a conclusion about whether it is truly recess (or lack thereof) that has a role in a child's maturity, or whether it's anything else that changes between elementary and middle school.

But that was talking about recess appointments in which i define recess as that including schools so that is a point still standing.
Debate Round No. 4
KaleBevilacqua

Pro

Well, this debate is not about recess appointments. I even defined recess "a scheduled break for physical activity" in my first set of arguments. You are debating the wrong topic when I made the correct topic very clear, which is poor conduct. At this point, you will either have to forfeit or completely change your arguments. Even so, by definition, I don't see how recess appointments can include schools. It purely takes place within a legislative body.

As for the P.E. case, I was rebutting your case by saying that P.E. does not count as (the meaning of "constitute" in this context) a break, and because I have mentioned earlier that students need a break, this goes against your claim that P.E. is the same as recess and can be used as a substitute.

Moving on to the Yale argument, I still cannot find the Yale study, even with your new definition. Either way, the aforementioned study is inconclusive because there are multiple variables changing, and one cannot pinpoint from that knowledge alone whether it is truly recess or lack thereof that has a role in a child's maturity.
Incognito13

Con

Incognito13 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Mikal 3 years ago
Mikal
Now for the arguments. No where in R1 does this state this is for middle school only. Pros entire R2 argument about children needing breaks to function better in school was dropped by con completely.

He even states this is a debate about kids in middle school, but I can not see that anywhere in the title of the debate or the resolution. Therefore this is a dropped argument. Not just one dropped argument , but every contention Con presented in R2. Everything from children preforming better after recess, to them being more attentive, all the way to the scores in other countries who practiced recess. All of this was dropped by con, with a claim that it was not allowed.

Con then provides his own case for middle school recess. I am also tempted to award con conduct in this round because of a blatant error and possible lie by pro. He claims that a yale study says "the students actually perform better and have more time for studies than useless recess"

One this is not cited in any of his sources

Two this is not even grammatically correct, so quoting a study like this leads me to believe it is blatant false fabrication

Three I goggled the quote and no where does it come up. Not in google or in a plagiarism finder, which again leads me to believe Con fabricated this point in order to try and gain ground.

In the next round Pro swiftly refutes cons points and points out that this is a study about the effects of recess and not recess appointments.

realistically this debate was over when Con dropped an entire round of arguments by saying this pertains only to middle school or upper level students.

Therefore arguments and sources to con.
Posted by Mikal 3 years ago
Mikal
This was a very clean cut and concise win for pro.

Lets review the R1 stance.

This basically says if an argument is faulty it is discarded. That both sides have the BOP, and don't introduce new arguments without another being resolved.

I am going to start with S&G and Conduct. I think truthfully both contenders violated conduct due to the R1 demands. It clearly states do not present new arguments until the last ones presented are resolved. Con just drops pros R2 contentions all together, and pro does not rebuild on it properly. So realistically both violated this term, so conduct is a tie. Granted I think it was a bad rule. Some contentions people drop on purpose to try and win the debate. They can hope the audience misses it. This limited that and makes it so you have to resolve every single contention which both sides failed to do adequately. Also Pro misses a round due to a time constraint, so this would award conduct to Con but due to him FFing the final round this is also a tie.

S&G is equal and tied

Sources to Pro because his/hers were outlined well and built on the points he/she was making. Con seemed to simply just slap a bunch of random sources at the end of his argument, some of which were accurate but it was very hard to break down and verify credibility because they were out of place and just slapped together at the end of the round.
Posted by Mikal 3 years ago
Mikal
This was a very clean cut and concise win for pro.

Lets review the R1 stance.

This basically says if an argument is faulty it is discarded. That both sides have the BOP, and don't introduce new arguments without another being resolved.

I am going to start with S&G and Conduct. I think truthfully both contenders violated conduct due to the R1 demands. It clearly states do not present new arguments until the last ones presented are resolved. Con just drops pros R2 contentions all together, and pro does not rebuild on it properly. So realistically both violated this term, so conduct is a tie. Granted I think it was a bad rule. Some contentions people drop on purpose to try and win the debate. They can hope the audience misses it. This limited that and makes it so you have to resolve every single contention which both sides failed to do adequately. Also Pro misses a round due to a time constraint, so this would award conduct to Con but due to him FFing the final round this is also a tie.

S&G is equal and tied

Sources to Pro because his/hers were outlined well and built on the points he/she was making. Con seemed to simply just slap a bunch of random sources at the end of his argument, some of which were accurate but it was very hard to break down and verify credibility because they were out of place and just slapped together at the end of the round.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Yraelz 3 years ago
Yraelz
KaleBevilacquaIncognito13Tied
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:70 
Reasons for voting decision: I laughed out loud when I saw all the links on congressional recess appointments; however, I agree with Pro, this debate is about school recesses. I think that Con's main chance for winning this debate is by more strongly articulating how P.E. can function as a stand-in to recess. Pro has at least one compelling argument on this issue, which is never addressed (PE still has mental demands and therefor does not constitute a break). Aside from that Pro clearly articulates that fidgeting time nullifies any benefit derived from additional classroom time. As neither of these points are addressed I give pro the arguments regarding higher test scores and increased mental productivity. Finally, I'd like to mention that I don't think "outdated evidence" argument are particularly strong unless there exists a clear articulation of what has changed since the evidence was published.
Vote Placed by Ore_Ele 3 years ago
Ore_Ele
KaleBevilacquaIncognito13Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:70 
Reasons for voting decision: It is not often that I give a full seven but let us go through the points one at a time. Conduct - Con loses the conduct point because of his plagiarized sources and trying to change definition at the end of the debate. Normally, Pro would have balanced it out with his forfeit, but with Con forfeiting too, it shifts back in Pro's favor. For S&G, pretty much everything that wasn't C/P'd from another site had no grammatical aspects. For sources, the since Con did not reference his sources with his arguments, plagiarized and misrepresented them (as Pro pointed out). For arguments, Con never really supported his with any organized sources. Pro did a wonderful job refuting the jumbled mess of Con's arguments to which Con simply ignored.
Vote Placed by Mikal 3 years ago
Mikal
KaleBevilacquaIncognito13Tied
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:50 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in comments