The Instigator
Numberz7522
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
madddddi
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

Students should be allowed to be on their phones during school hours.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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...
madddddi
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/17/2015 Category: Education
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 859 times Debate No: 75415
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (6)
Votes (2)

 

Numberz7522

Pro

Phones are devices that have the ability to be used for lots of things these days, entertainment, connections between friends and family, and most importantly, it has the power to go on the internet. I will be listing the reasons why students should be allowed to be on their phones.

One very good "con" reasoning would be that phones distract the user of the phone, and could very well distract the students around the user of the phone. Lets do an example and have the debate going from there. Sammy gets on his phone during a math class after finishing his notes and finishing class-work for that class. She puts her headphones in, and watches some funny videos on Vine or something. She giggles sometimes, and as the teacher doesn't want her giggling to distract the class from finishing their classwork, she tells her "Shut your mouth Sammy, you are distracting the class!" Sammy then keeps on being distracting, the teacher takes her phone. Totally reasonable. It would not be reasonable though, to take Sammy's phone for just pulling her phone out to keep her entertained when she has finished her work.

Lets do another example more relevant to this possible reasoning. Mark pulls out his phone his phone during class-work, as Sammy did in the earlier example, but the difference is, Mark still has his classwork to do. Mark is on his phone until the end of period(If you didn't know, period=class), not distracting anyone, just him in his desk on his phone. At the end of the period, the teacher collects the classwork, Mark is not done, Mark gets a 0 on his classwork grade, it pulls down his end of quarter grade by 1 percent. This would be a good argument, as one can argue that their tax money is not fully in use, as the teacher cant teach the student as much if he is on his phone rather then listening, but my reasoning that I will write in the next sentence, I will explain why that would not be as good of an argument to beat mine. Your argument is that the person who could have learned didn't learn, but I have a theory that would make that false. My theory is that the person who would be distracted by their phone are the very people who don't learn much in class. They have their phones out because they don't have anything more productive to do. They make their decision that there is nothing more productive to do because they are low in intelligence, and have no self control. They are not smart people who will be a benefit to the society when they grow up. In this theory, the case is that the unintelligent students will get more unintelligent, which will not effect their life's outcome very greatly, in exchange for freedom liberty and justice, which they pledge allegiance to every morning.

Another argument would be that little kids don't know know that knowledge is of great value, and that's why they would use their phone in class. It would be then, the parents fault, why would you give a phone to a kid who can not control himself in the ways that I gave in the examples above. Do you think that a parent that would do that is going to raise the next Stephen Hawking?

I am ready for an argument!
madddddi

Con

Although your scenarios are both very possible (disregarding the fact that one might be a little confused in the first story because poor Sammy had clearly switched genders by the middle of it), you are not exactly grasping the point of the rule against phones in the classroom, which you did pick up in the part where you predicted the future arguments. However, on that note, it is not as simple as the unintelligent versus the intelligent.

Nobody is unintelligent, but people can be uneducated and having phones in class will cause that to happen. Studies show that a person forgets 40% of what they learned 20-minutes after they have learned it, which would be a third of the usual public school class period of one hour. That already is a problem in itself, but if you factor in having a cell phone in your hand while working on classwork and such, you raise that percentage to an even higher number and it runs the risk of doing so for everybody around that person who is distracted by what's on the screen of that cellphone.

If you give every student in school the opportunity to learn something new, something will stick whether it's how to solve e=mc"(squared) or how to tell the difference between a fruit and a vegetable. They will either use that information for something in the future or it will come back to their mind and they will be able to say that they actually learned something. Education and knowledge are two extremely important things in life, it gives people a sense of self-power when you can confidently say you know how to solve a difficult math problem or you know how to properly write a paper in Chicago format. Who would be selfish then? The student who took the attention away from the kids around them because they were on their phone during class, or the teacher who took their student's opportunity to learn something new so they allowed them to stay on their phone because they believed that student didn't have what it takes to be intelligent anyway?

Kids who do not understand that knowledge is of great value are influenced by their parents, but are mostly influenced by their surroundings and their generation. In his psychoanalysis practice, Sigmund Freud studied the unconscious mind in all of its glory. A "follow the leader" theory was concluded from said study which states that if one person does something, regardless if there is a rule against it or not, then everybody else will assume that it's now okay to do the same thing. If one kid takes out their cellphone in the middle of class and doesn't finish their work, the other kids will follow in their lead. The sad truth is that the one specific student who took their phone out first most likely witnessed another kid in another class do the same thing and noticed that they did not get caught. Allowing phones in class does not necessarily mean that a child will not grow up to be the next Stephen Hawking, but it will lessen their chances of doing so.
Debate Round No. 1
Numberz7522

Pro

Okay, I see most of your arguments are about how phones will distract students and how uneducated students have lesser chance of learning, and yes, phones are a distraction and will make the chance of students learning something less, but lets see another scenario when this crime doesn't have a victim.

Last period of the day, you finish all of your classwork, and you mostly do your homework at home. You decide to check your phone for text messages, or just plainly start playing on your phone without distracting anyone.(I define classwork as in worksheets, readings, and listening to the teacher lecture) There is just plainly nothing wrong about this. Again, it is the person's choice to make, is he going to get on his phone, or is he not? He can either read through his notes one more time or get on his phone to text whoever, or go on social media.

I believe that people should have maximum choice over their lives, and also, people develop by learning from their mistakes. If a person goes on their phone often in class, and sees that their grade is dropping, and they understand the value of knowledge, they have the decision to put down their phone.

If the phone is a distraction, a teacher should take it away. It should be the teacher's choice to take away the phone or not, and a teacher is not going to go around snatching phones if its not distracting anyone.

(Sorry could have written more of a response but I didn't notice the clock ticking and have to go for a bit. Also sorry for the confusion with the names I was thinking about "Sam" as a boy name, and I think I didn't notice it is "Sammy" which is a nickname referring to a girl...)
madddddi

Con

Although I was that student who did my homework in the classroom after I finished everything, I do know people who waited until they arrived back at home to do their homework. What's the difference between going on your phone after you're finished with your classwork and leaving the class in college when you feel as though you've learned enough for the day? If you did not have a cellphone to use in class and you are not allowed to pack up your things and leave class in middle/high school, then you have nothing else to do but reflect on the things you have learned. It also allows for the opportunity to possibly lighten a social media or phone addiction slowly when you are forced to find other things to do rather than type away.

I agree that people should have choices in their lives, but these rules are not made to ruin students' lives. Like I said in round #1, people forget 40% of what they learned in 20 minutes regardless if that person is distracted or not. If you are technology-less and have nothing else to do but look over your notes or do extra credit at the end of class, you are only bettering your education.

Correction: Teachers still take phones even if it is not distracting anyone but the user itself. Not sure what kind of pubic schools you went to, but we used to get detentions if a phone simply vibrated in our pocket.

(It's quite alright, I understood the difference of genders, just was speaking for those who wouldn't.)
Debate Round No. 2
Numberz7522

Pro

I am sorry, I think you are misinterpreting my argument, my arguments are based on how the cons of allowing students to be on their phones are not as major as the pros, as I value the freedom of choice and development from freedom of choice, rather then the things that you are stating above.

I believe teachers should rather teach their students the cons of being on their phones, rather then just saying "its bad" and taking it away. It is basically the government thinking for them. If society is based too much on government, a lot of people that do not know what is good for them are going to be created, since the government tells them what to do, they are never allowed to think for themselves for their own good. That is how children and adolescence learn.

Unfortunately, if free choice is not given to people, and they are only introduced to one way of thinking, (as in "no phones in class") and are told that that is what they should abide by and that is the right thing, people are going to go crazy. Have you seen Adam Kokesh's videos, for example "Obama Supporters Say the Darnest Things" or something like that... It features Adam asking the Obama supporters why they support Obama, and they would say "Because he is black!" "Because he is a good guy!" "Because he has done a lot of things to this country!"They give no reasoning, and the same thing I predict would happen with phones, we would ask students "Why don't you have your phone out in class?" they would say "Because it is not allowed" rather then "Since it would lessen the amount I learn in school, which my father and mother paid a lot of taxes for me to go to, and learn."

Do you see the difference between close-minded people and open-minded people? People should be taught why not to have their phones out, not just simply snatch them out their pockets, or hands before they do anything that is not productive.

Also, the way I came to this is a video that kids were Tweeting about some sort of a classroom controversy (they did it during lunch and recess) and were expelled from school. This was about a group of 10 students. Expelled... For going on their phones at recess and lunch. The rules now say that kids cant have their phones out at school from 8:15am-3pm (In my school), and that is just way out of line in my opinion. Expelled over Tweeting about something that happened in the classroom.

What is your opinion on the arguments stated above?
madddddi

Con

Well I apologise for any confusion. Although I do agree that taking phones away from students just because "it is not allowed" is a terrible way of dealing with the situation because it teaches them nothing, I still do not see, going off of your previous "the cons are not as major as the pros", the pros of having phones in classrooms at all other than having the right to make your own decisions.

I have not seen the video, no, but I do understand completely why people would think in that way due to influence of their families, influence of their communities, etc. and they go off of what everybody else believes in. Likewise when you are young, you claim to be of the same political party in which your parents identify or in Modern Family when Gloria is upset that Lily isn't aware of her culture, Lily claims to be gay because she has two fathers. (If you are not familiar with the show, Lily in the episode is around 3-years-old perhaps.)

Maybe the bigger issue here isn't the pros vs the cons of having phones in class, but the pros vs the cons of how teachers and educators decide to react toward it.

Sorry for the lack of response, I'm about to head out for a bit.
Debate Round No. 3
Numberz7522

Pro

Well, teachers react to phones in class by taking the phones away. That is when the argument begins. Should teachers just instantly take it away when they see it, as they do now, or should students have the right to choose based on knowledge, as I support.

We have spent our time debating is the distraction from phones in the class takes up bigger and more valuable knowledge then knowledge that a person might gain by having their phones out in class and practicing the skill of deciding when it is appropriate, and when it is not appropriate to have a phone out in class.

I think that the value of the knowledge a student gains from deciding whether it is appropriate to use a phone in a particular time in class is more then the value of the knowledge lost by having it out. I also value the freedom more. The teacher can always take a phone from a student if the student is distracting the other students by having it out, which will dramatically limit the amount of distraction caused by phones in class. This theory is based on the fact that if the principal or other person of authority in school sees that the teacher is unable to educate the students because they have their phones out, and has to decide, should the school ban the use of cell phones (Which I don't want, because of all of the reasons I have already stated) or fire the teacher and hire a teacher that is capable of doing great work for the same amount of pay. Choice number 1 seems like the easy solution, choice number 2 will actually make the students more intelligent, and have more freedom.

I am failing to see why you support Choice number 1, which you say you support by your last argument, that you said the teachers reaction is more important, or otherwise we do not have an argument and I have won the debate. So. Why do you support the principal's Choice number 1?
madddddi

Con

madddddi forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Numberz7522

Pro

Aww, but it would have looked so much better if we used up all of the rounds...
madddddi

Con

Don't get cocky now. I was spending some time with my family.

All I have to say is that you did not emphasise your point of the actions of teachers and educators until the third round. Sure, your two examples in the first round explained the actions of them, but the entire round was based off of the pros and cons of phones in class.

If students are disobedient in such a way that they will not listen to the teacher no matter what they try and do and the entire class shows this kind of behaviour (which is what you seem to be saying by saying "unable to educate the students"), then further investigation will be called for when the record of the entire class shows a poor average grade.

Being in a classroom is like being at home: You live under the superiors roof, so you abide by their rules.

Since this is the last round, I'll just end by saying I am a college student and I have many friends in the education department who spend hours and hours preparing for their dream classroom and how they cannot wait to become a teacher. Going along with that, some of my friend who have interned with actual classrooms of their choice of grade discovered at face value how difficult it is to teach students when you put your foot down and take their freedom away by taking their phone away. If they feel as though the phone will be distracting, they will confiscate it before anything actually happens and if that student is old enough to have a cellphone on them, then they should be old enough to put two and two together.
Debate Round No. 5
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by madddddi 2 years ago
madddddi
I am all for cellphone usage in the hallways and lunch and such during breaks between classes; however, that is not what this debate was about.
Posted by IllogicalThinker 2 years ago
IllogicalThinker
While total allowance of cell phones are bad maybe it shouldn't be such a black or white thing. Instead of lifting the ban off everywhere shouldn't there be some areas, such as the lunch room or hallway, that allowing cellphone use would not harm anyone?
Posted by Numberz7522 2 years ago
Numberz7522
My distraction argument is the same as for the chromebook. I was thinking about the fact that they were "given" chromebooks, and therefore, that means that the school has already taken responibility, and therefore, it is the school's and the student's fault, but if it was the cellphone issue, its more of a parent's fault and student's fault. I forgot to say in my argument, not only a teacher will take away the phone, but might as well tell the parent to put it away from him, or give him a punishment...
Posted by madddddi 2 years ago
madddddi
There's no difference between the distraction a Chromebook causes versus the distraction a cellphone causes.
Posted by Numberz7522 2 years ago
Numberz7522
But CommunistDog, this debate is not about chromebooks, it is about cell-phones, and do you think that people who don't pay attention because they are on their chromebooks deserve chromebooks? Should they be allowed to use chromebooks? No. But people who find it useful, and don't get distracted, like you, should be allowed to use a chromebook. If you read the debate you can get the idea I am creating here, thanks for your imput though!
Posted by CommunistDog 2 years ago
CommunistDog
Here's evidence that devices that can connect to the internet in school hours are bad:
In school, the eight graders were given chromebooks including me. Often times, people immediately go to a game. Roughly around 30% of my classmates per class are on games, even though all the classes were HONORS courses. I'd imagine half or more of regular classes play games. While I find my chromebook very helpful, it serves as a distraction to the owner and the people around them. In fact, I've zoned out watching a person play rather than listen to my teacher a couple of times.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by alexkyl99 2 years ago
alexkyl99
Numberz7522madddddiTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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: phones are distracting
Vote Placed by Sourec 2 years ago
Sourec
Numberz7522madddddiTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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: No sources used on either side (sorry, saying "studies show" doesn't count). Pro, you gave more examples for your opponent than you gave examples for yourself, and the examples you did give were largely irrelevant. You also seemed indecisive -- at one point you said something along the lines of it being more important to teach kids why they can't have their phones out, making it look like you supported telling them they can't have their phones out. Con, use better sources than Modern Family (seriously).