You choose the topic
Debate Rounds (4)
If all of the topics offered by con are offensive, overly serious, skewed, truistic or otherwise inaccessible, then I'll choose a different topic entirely.
There are no hard line rules, just don't be a dick. I reserve the right to expand on what that means as necessary, but hopefully I won't have to. Just be a decent human being, and let's have a fun round!
I have offerd three topics if u dont accept anyone then u may offer any topic
One of the most incredible things about learning is that rather than being a one-and-done type of thing, It is a continual and organic process. So long as we remember that we don't know everything, we can and will always learn. However when we try to integrate competition into the learning process, we end up of doing one of two things: We either have dichotomous winners and losers, or we rank students by how valuable we think their learning is. This causes students to believe that if they are designated the 'loser' or if they are ranked lowly that their learning is somehow less valuable than those who are 'winners' or otherwise more highly ranked. It frames learning as a singular thing that can be achieved and then stored away rather than an integral part of the human experience.
I'm not saying we can't learn as a product of a competition - for example, playing Pokemon with a friend may help one to read better or gain skills in logic and strategic planning. However when we place the horse before the cart by trying to make learning itself a competition, the learning process loses the spark that makes it such a driving thing - it makes the motivation to learn external rather than internal. When I learn something from playing a game, I'm learning because I'm excited about what I'm doing, but when I'm learning because I want to win a competition I'm really only treating learning as a means to an end. It's also important to note that we can learn from noncompetitive games; games are the prior question. learning as a result of competition isn't a bad thing - if one is invested in the competition then they will naturally learn from it. But we can't force that kind of investment by making learning itself a competition.
Competition fails to reward personal excellence. Different students come from different starting points as far as skill and capability goes. Writing a brilliant essay may be a cinch for one student, while another student may work twice as hard and write a paper only half as good. Competition fails to recognize the learning that happened for the student who put forward a great deal of effort on an essay that was graded as technically poorer. The student who wrote the worse essay would have learned more from the experience than the student who wrote the brilliant essay, but by pitting them against one another all of that learning and effort is made out to be nothing more than a loss.
So then the big reveal of all this, is that competition shifts out focus away from learning towards winning. Whether or not someone has 'learned' is a pretty intangible thing, one we can't always know. We can try to measure how much a student knows based on benchmarks for their peers, but we can't always individually know how much a student has learned. Competition doesn't recognize the excellence of students who have learned, it recognizes students who have won.
swayamprakash forfeited this round.
Education ought to be it's own reward, and other students ought not be penalized because their lessons were shaped into something competitive rather than invitational. The important thesis of Pro's position of advocacy, and the thing that you should end up voting for in this debate, is making education a competition engenders inaccessibility into it. Something that shouldn't have barriers to access suddenly gets them so that a few students can be more highly motivated at the cost of all other students in the education system.
In summary, Con's story of a child finding recognition through competition is non-responsive to the Pro Advocacy, and if anything, only serves to re-ify the premise that competition makes education exclusive and inaccessible. Competition is a net harm to the education process.
I conclude in this final round that competition can be a boon for children of young age to take their carrer up and touch the skies
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.