THIS HOUSE WOULD BAN SMOKIN IN PUBLIC SPACES
Affirnative
People who smoke are more likely to develop
diseases such as lung cancer and liver cirrhosis.
Cirrhosis is mostly caused by smoking and
reduces and even poisons the liver, unable for
the organ to perform its function. For example, a
healthy lung is pinkish in color and helps the
person breathe in oxygen and exhale carbon
dioxide. But a smoker's lung is very dark and is
covered with tartar. A smoker's lung is unable to
functionally help the person breathe and
increases severe asthma, with causes stroke and
heart attack
I think that smoking should be banned because I
am a kid, and when I walk by a smoker I always
have to cover my mouth which is quiet irritating
sometimes. Another reason is that it pollutes the
air. Last but not least, people who have asthma
can be harmed or even killed if they want to take
a walk in the park!
people shouldn't smoke in public places because
kids have lung problems and the smoke doesn't
help the problem!!!! and for the people who say
no is wrong!!!!! i personally have lung problems
and when i'm driving by no i don't want the smell
of the smoke in my face and no it doesn't help
my lung problems and when i am trying to enjoy
my food i would not like to smell the smoke while
i'm eating. i don't like to smell smoke while i'm
going through the park ttrying to enjoy my day
and i smell smoke! for the people who smoke go
right ahead one day you might get lung cancer
and think back...why? why did i smoke? was that
a bad choice in my life? no it wasn't and i regret
that! if you can get through that cancer you need
to thank the lord for your life!!! ask him for your
forgiveness!!! thank the lord for your life!!! go to
church get to know god more and thank him for
everything he has done for you!!!!!
Negative
Smoking is something that everyone doesn't like,
but they aren't doing any harm to anyone else by
doing it. Smoking only affects you, not the people
around you. I think that if people want to smoke
they can. Honestly if it was that big of a deal they
would have made it illegal years ago. It's just
something for everyone to argue about.
Look you'll most likely be harmed by the stuff
that's already in the air than you will be by
tobacco smoke. If you don't like being around
smokers, don't be around smokers, simple as
that. Sometimes, public places are the only
places these people can smoke, so back off. If a
guy is smoking next to you, leave, or ask him to
move, but don't get all preachy about how bad it
is. Besides, people like you won't stop at
cigarettes, you'll move to alcohol, then high
fructose corn syrup, fumes from cars, etc. etc.
Just let us smoke our cigarettes, if you don't like
it, walk away.
I'm not a smoker and don't plan to be. But after
reading through these comments, I agree with
one thing. It shouldn't be banned. Maybe
regulated or banned in certain places, but not
completely banned. Think back to the
Prohibition. Do you want to live through another
one of those? I know for sure that I do not. So if
you are going to do anything, regulate it, but we
don't need one more right of freedom taken
away.
 THAT TV COMMERCIAL EXPLOID CHILDREN
Affirnative
the commercial with the naked woman and the
cheeseburger came on. Not only did I see way
more than i wanted to, but an entire room full of
children saw it too. This awakened questions that
i thought would not be asked, let alone answered
for years to come. It is annoying that one cannot
watch a football game without seeing nudity,
sexual scenes, and hear innuendos.
The ads aimed at children encourage drug and
alcohol use by making it seem fun and cool. Just
like how coca cola commercials advertise for a
drink that is refreshing. They even play the ads
on commercial breaks during shows that
teenagers watch. What they obviously dont show
in these commercials is how bad alcohol is for
children and teenagers. Long term consumption
can lead to brain damage, ive heard of a lot of
underage drinkers binge drinking. This all stems
from advertisements encouraging children my
age to drink up.
Advertisements makes children quarrel with their
parents to buy the product they were told to. .
This can show negative reaction over their
parents. This can be a big problem as the parents
need to make them understand the
consequences behind buying the product and so
on like that. So no advertisements.
Negative
Advertisements targeting children aim to
promote the products and services, which cater
for children's needs and have no damaging
intention at all.
There should not be a ban on television
advertisements aimed at children because a ban
would imply that the advertisers are somehow to
blame for Generation Y's need to have brand
name products. Most who complain about there
being too many ads geared toward children
argue that the ads make kids think that they need
to have the latest and greatest in toys and other
products. However, there's nothing wrong with
seeing a few ads. It should be the parent's
responsibility to monitor how much TV their child
is actually watching so that they are not
overexposed to said ads. That's not the
responsibility of the government or an industry.
I do not think there should be a ban on TV
advertisements aimed at children. Children are
one of the main consumers of television, and that
is a great way for companies and organizations
to get information about their products out to
them. Parents are able to control what children
watch on television, and whether they can watch
it or not. Advertisements geared towards children
are not harmful to them, and I think its more
important to worry about the too mature TV
shows that some children are watching rather
than a company advertisement about a new toy.
 This House believes that National Examination should be abolished

1st Speaker Government/ Affirmative

Good morning ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for the opportunity.

Next, I would like to give our motion today. Our motion today is “This House Believe
That National Examination Should be Abolished” . The definition of Motion is:

 Natinal examination: a standard evaluation system of primary and secondary

education in a country.
 Abolished: to get away, to erase element/particle from system.
 This whole definition is : We on affirmatife team, strongly support that the
national examination to get away or to be erased from education system in
indonesia for goodness all elements.
From the motions, we will give our theme line: That we as the affirmative team
absolutely agree that the national examination should be or be erased from
education system.

Then our parameter today is that we just talk about the national examination is my
country, Indonesia.

Well continue to our team split: I’m Bety Anitasari as the first speaker I will deliver
my argument from impacts for students/students parent perspektive. And Abdi
Rahim Yudani as a second speaker, who will deliver arguments from negative
impacts for schools and education levels perspective. And last Indah Puspita Sari as
a third speaker who will deliver more proof and brief summary of our arguments.

Next ladies and gentelmen, I would like to give my argument from individual
perspective,

we have 2 points:

First point is National Examination give negative impacts for student heathly,
because national examination be a standard graduation from the schools, students
beharder to study before ready to face UN. So far, national examination become a
dilemma for student who will past a exam. On one hard, it can make studentstudy
hard before they are face to face with the exam, but on the distrub then healtly many
student had sick befor they are face to exam.

Monday, 16 april 2012, Hendry Kusria a student in SMK BNKP Sirambu Nias. Dead
while be was doing the national examination. Secretariat of minister of education in
north Sumatera provincesay that he was dead because have a complication
discasise are brochitis, lier and impertence forfrom before national
examinationbeheld. He was supported from his parents to do the national
examination.
From the evidence it clearly that national examination they think they can pass or not
and whethe national examinations report release and they are not able to pass, they
will get stress and do many was, wrong or right way. For example, myfriends she got
stress before she face the national examination, and distreub her memorize because
she forget she got wont to havebreakfast in the morning because she too much think
about preparation of national examination.

We can see, national examination give negative impacts in individual perspective to

students healty, psycology and their parents, too so national examination should be
abolished we his to propose.

Thank you ladies and gentelmen, that enough for my arguments. It will be continued
by the second speaker later. J

1stSpeaker Opposition/Negative
Okay, ladies and gantleman. We are from the the opposition team, that against this
motion. We are strongly disagree that UN should be abolished. Before we deliver
our points of arguments I want to introduce our teamline and teamsplit.

Our team line is we just strongly oppose that UN should be abolished in my country
Indonesia.

And our team split I’m NURUL HUDA & YENNY SARIANTI we are the 1st speakers
that and refuse the affirmative side. And deliver argument in individual puspective
and I MADE GILER PERMADI as and speaker who will repuse the points affirmative
and deliver argument from economic, social, and education respective and last
JELLIN ELISABETH SIRINGO RINGO as the third speaker that rebuttals the all
points of affirmative side and brief summary our argument reply speech by me.
Next ladies and gantleman first, I will refuse the affirmative side and then YENNY
SARIANTI will give our points. We wiil show the good split, because we are the best
soulmate?

1. the first points was health. They said that UN give negative impacts for students
healthy. Because UN be a standart graduation from the school we halce to
responses, it clearly that is not on by UN be standart graduation from the school. But
from 2010 in Indonesia. The minister of education firm up the roles that graduation
will determine from60% result of UN 40% result of UAS. And if we UN think that UN
is only one to deternine the graduation, we sure feel stress but factually is not true.
UN is not only one to determine graduation UAS be an important scone too.

2. their second point was psychology they said that national examination can disturb
the students psychology. We have to responses, first 1 the porpose of an exam in
school, UAS or UN is to practice our mental to pace the vations exam this is very
usefull to continue higher education abd get work doatest. Basically, UN and us are
same, its differences are UN make from capital by kemendigbud and UAS from
school. Government try to show the fairmuse for all students in Indonesia so they
firm up UN disturb students psychology ? it’s just parlittle part of all students in
Indonesia it connot be areason to abolish UN. UN can give positive impact for all
elemen for the affirmative argument let’s us see best argument of student, teacher,
parents and government
Thank you nurul huda

Nexy ladies and gentelmen i will deliver our points in individual i perspective. We
have there points.

On the first point, UN can be score competition among the students. The score
competition whice pust the students to do their but, with the time, ways absolutely,
study harder and take a courses before fact the national examination and having a
study guidance t the school diligently.

For example in SMAN 1 SimpangEmpat from november all students have a study
guedenc at the school, to prepare to fact UN 6 subjects UN are math, indonesia,
englis, biology, physic, and chemistry that they pust prepare they do many various
qustion with their teacher trough vaious metode. We can see, it clearly that UN can
when their ability, intellegency, and competence trough a score competition of UN
with high motivation and strong beliefe so, it can fix the character of students
especially in study harder to reach their dreams. UN also helps in delceiping one’s
own personally and convidence. On the second point, UN to knowing the student’s
competence, if we know our abillity and competence we will to continue hig
her education or get a work easity (university) and the third point, UN helps to get
sholat ship which will bring to have a good job i’iy senior in junior hing school, M.
Aditya Rulianyah get a sholar ship to continue senior hing school in Bandung
because has got the best score UN in SMP. And now he is in turlay to continue
higher education that in univesity because he get hest score in UN for senior its
again from evidence.
See advantges UN for students are very WOW and they can be a motivation for me
and for you as a student, without exams student would be more and more stupid,
lazier and less motivated to learn. okey ladies and gentelmen, i’ll keep my stance
and back to propose.

ThankYou J

2ndSpeaker Affirmative
2nd AFF ladies and gentelmen. I’m as the second speaker affirmative. At the first i
want to refuse the opposition side i have 3 points.

First you said that UN can be a score competition of UN he have responses. Do you
think a score competition of UN is good ?
No, a score competition is not good especially for our country indonesia in fact, you
know and you can see that many studen make cheats and buy the answer key
before they face the national exames they do that because they want to get best
score of a score competion UN like you have said.

Like you have said

Seconde you said that it can fix the character personalitiy and convidence students.
We have to response it really wrong. Basically UAN is a test thyat multiple choice but
the roles of UN are very make difficualt for students and it can their convidence be
down and their spirit be down too best they very fraid, nevous make cheats and buy
the answer keys, they are not good habit but dangerous habit, it is a simply pactise
of dishone. It is absulutley can andemine and decrease the moral students as the
ypung generation.

Third, you said that UN can be used to knowing the students coupetence. We are to
responses chargingstudents with UN as graduation stipulation is not a best wary to
improve studen’ts competance. UN i have 6 subjects how the studens does not have
potenly between 6 subject? It is not fair for some students that have potaniy in other
subject. Such as history, islamic and other ladies.

I have refused the opp side and then i will deliver aguments in economic, social,
education, perspeetive. I have 3 poins on the first point. In economic perspective.
From the first implementation of un until last year, UN make big expediture for
studens parents school and goverment especially goverment to face UN and get
best score students need many things and they absolutly need a lot of money such
as take a courses, buy tools, buy some books and even the key answe too. They are
not cheap especlally key answe, certain people sell the answer kets before or while
face the UN with expensive cost , that is about millior, we know that many student’s
pareats in indonesia have diffecully of condition of economy.

On the second point, in social perpective. Preparry UN need many time to study,
practise and prepare i they can make the student’s can not play they will always in
house because they are very fraide if they can pass UN or not it can make the
students does not sleep and having breap fast lunch and dinner regulary and if they
have got bad result it will affect their feturu from the fist implementation of UN until
last year, we haven’t seen the result UN used require the experrsive cost buy the
result is only doubt and uncertainty as ne can see, last year the education and
caltuns minister, say government. Spent expensive cost that is about billion ruplans
and factually the billion rupians yield many cause of iligal way that be done by sone
school. In 2008 while the second day of UN there is a practise of dishonest from 16
teachers SMAN Lubuk Pakam 2

From evidence it clearly that expensis cost that was spent by goverment doesnt
have the positive result for students beg to propose so i’m strongly agree with this
motion beg to perpose. J
2ndSpeaker Opposition
Hello ladies and gentleman . I’m the 2 nd speaker opposstion will oppose the
affirmative side.

National examination have positive impacts for all elements . so, moreover many
country in a world use national examination a standart graduation in their education
development. So, why national examination should be abolished? Is there better way
if without national examination ?i belive there is no, until a better form of
demonstrating know legde comes along , UN must be still best pleace at the first , I
want to refuse the AFF side, you said that UN

Make big expenditure for students parents like take a courses , buy books and key
answer we have to responses.that is not true . first students should not to take a
courses because school always help the study guidare after in every years.second,
students is not advisable to by book, ducation minister time give many helping for all
schools in Indonesia, especially books . so, students enough study ang borrow some
books from library in their school.and key answere . it is not necessary because it is a
farlt in process of national examination, it needs an extra socialitation so, students
but it is not reason to abolish UN from curriculum of education an Indonesia because
there is still many students ta=hat do a true way to prepare the national examination
On the second point , you said that UN doesn’t have positive result as a burgeon
country , Indonesia still need time to adapt with national examination until Indonesia
can make the best method of help of national examination

With the result , kemendigbud can mapping the education levels and knoeing
condition of education development

Okay, I have refusedthe AFF side, noe I will deliver my argument education
development in Indonesia . national examination as a form that is used by
government to slow a fairness to all student in Indonesia

National examination made by professional person in kemendigbud far before the

national examination be help, kemendigbud give some lattice of national examination

10 SMA tahat get the highest scores in indonesia , according the evidence,
government can helping and make the comparison of education development in
Indonesia

Secondly, must national examination government van devide education budget for
every school in Indonesia fairly we can see, last year SMAN that get the highest
scores get many advantages 8 of to 10 from government . Thank you J

3rd Speaker Affirmative

Hello ladies and gentlemen
I’m Indah as the third speaker affirmative.

I have 7 points that I’ve found to rebut the opposition team.

– First, you said that national examination can be a score competititon

among the students.

Do you think it’s good ? No for the students in Indonesia because it’s just a little part
of million of students in Indonesia use the honest manner to pass the exams.

– Second, you said that national examination to knowing the student’s

competence. Many ways and procedure to knowing the student’s competence such
as practice , debate, discuss and many other.a potential of student not only
determine trough the multiple choice test like national examination. But in education,
we need to know the process, procedure and their practical in day life. National
examination just give the doubt result so how can I know our potential with the
doubt result ?

– Third, you said that trough national examination government can

knowing the education development in Indonesia.

I have explained that an education need a process, just not a result .it is just make
government easily. But many elements that disagree with the result’s of national
examination because the know the real condition of national examination’s held.

– Forth, you said that national examination is an effective system for

education in Indonesia. Moreover many other countries that use the national
examination as the graduation standard.

In basically, the national examination is good for education in their country. But it’s
not an effective for education system in Indonesia. Before use the national
examination, The government shoul fix the educational units’ quality in Indonesia
such as the teacher quality, Kemendigbud’s work and the other education’s system.

– And fifth, you said that if a person pass the national examinations
and get a good scores, he/ she will get the scholarship. It is not fair for the other
clever students that have good potential too. It do not shows they that have got the
good result use the honest manner. As we know, facts in ndonesia shows many
dishonest practices that for the national examination’s held such as make cheats,
use the electronic tool or use the key answer. Moreover, many teachers do the
dishonest practice too, to help their students while national examination comes
along. And more, how the students that have got the bad result ? it will cause the
problem m in their future. Moreover, if they didn’t pass the exam, it candisturb
theirpyschology.
60% : 40% it don’t helps because 60% is more that 40%.

– Sixth, you said that trough National examination, government can

shows the fairness for all students In Indonesia. That is not fairness. Let’s we
compare the education in border and underprivileged areas with big cities
in Indonesia.in border and underprivileged areas, the education facilities and learning
resources are limited while the big cities have very complete education faicilities and
broad success to get the good learning.
– And last, you said that without exams students would be more and
more stupid, lazier and less motivated to learn. It’s really and really wrong because
national examination that cause the students would be more and more stupid, more
and more lazy, more and more dishonest and absolutely decrease the student’s
quality in Indonesia. To know the student’s ability, government should measure the
process, just not a result.

In fact, what did we expect from national examination yield ?

National examination is compatible for the other country, but it is not compatible for
education’s system in Indonesia. We can graduate from school or not just by
passingan exam, which is held in 3-6days and with standard scores from education
ministry.

How about learning process for 3 years that have ben done by students ? does it
mean nothing ? and do you agree wth that ? No , absolutely No because because
national examination will broke the process which during this followed bystudents. A
absolutely decrease the student’s character.

National examination makes the negative impacts are more thin Indonesia.an the
positive impacts for all elements and also for education’s development in Indonesia.
So, we are the affirmative team strongly agree with this motion that National
Examination should be abolished.

Thank you J

3rdSpeaker Opposition

Jellyn as the third speaker opposition

Hello ladies and gentlemen

Now I’m jellyn Slingo-lingo as the third speaker will summarize our best argument for
our disagreeing to the motion.

At the firs, I will refuse the opposition side. I have some points.

On the first point, give the negative impacts for student’s health ? it’s wrong. It is the
little part from all facts. There is still many students that feel advantages of national
examination.

On the second point, they said that national examination can disturb the student’s
psychology. But you don’t see some students that have the true way to face the
national examination. It’s not a reason to abolish National Examination. Basically,
national examination is same with the other exams ? the other exam that in form
essay but national examination no! it is made in form multiple choice. Or do you have
the other method if without national examination ?

Then I will mention some advantages of national examination for all

elements according arguments that have been delivered by the 1 stOpp and 2ndOpp.
First, For students :

1.knowing their ability and performance

2.national examination may encourage people to work and learn
3.create the competition score which push the students to their best
4.helps in developing one’s own personality and convidence
5.if a person pass the exam and got the good result, it helps to get scholarship
which will bring to have a good job.
Second, for schools :

1. Trough national examination the teachers can get the feedback of the student.
2. School can decide the best students untuil stupid students easily
3. If the schools have the best students they will get the appreciation from
government or usually we call Kemendigbud
Third, For Government :

1. Mapping the quality of programme and or educational units

2. The basic of selection in to the next educational level
3. Give the appreciation for best shool and best students easily

So, should we abolish the national examnation ?

No , absolutely no. because without exams student would be more and more stupid,
lazier and less motivated to learn. With that argument that have delivered, we are
from opposition team strongly disagree with that motion. National examination
should never be abolished.
Thank you J

Reply speech Opposition

Thanks you ladies and gentleman

Now I want to deliver our reply speech. Once again I say that, we are strongly
disagree with the motion that the UN should be abolished at the first, I want to deliver
a summary of our point of view.

1.UN give many advantages for all elements, students, school and government too.

2.UN is an effective system that compatible for condition of education in Indonesia

3. UN is a fairness that government has been showed for students

And just I wiil explain why the national exam should not be abolished

1. UN will increase students human resourcesquality

2.UN can be an indicator of students

3. and with UN the gon, in this case ministry of education and culture will be able to
know what aspect of study materials that need to be improved

4. as the burgeon country, indonesiaa, UN is compatible for education system in

Indonesia

According our point of view. We still strongly disagree if the UN should be abolished.
There is not other best solution for increase the aducation’s quality

Thanks you J

Reply Speech Affirmative

Reply speech Affirmative

Hello Ladies and Gentelment

Now I would like deliver our reply speech’s affirmative,.

Before I deliver it, I will to convince you that UN is not an effective way for
education’s development in Indonesia.

First,

1. For students, UN not give the positive impacts fairly.

2. you said that UN is an effective system, but in fact, UN is not an effective system
for education in Indonesia.

3. you also said that UN can increase the students human resources quality, but with
a doubt result, UN can decrease the students human resources quality, because
trough UN many students do the dishonest pradises such as buy the key answer.

So, what did we exped from national examination yield ? doubt result ? decreasing
the students character ?

No, absolutely no.

Before use the UN as a graduation standard national examination test to assess

students learning in primary high school until high school level, kemendigbud and
ministry of edv. And culture will search the best systems to fix the educational units
in Indonesia.

One more we are from the aff team absolutlely agree with this motion that UN should
be abolished Thank you ladies and gentlemen

Good afternoon J
 this house belives mothers should saty at home and look after their children
Affirnative
Mothers should stay home and raise their own
children. Mothers who place their babies,
especially newborn babies, in day care, and leave
them there 40-50 hours per week are causing
irreparable damage to the development of the
baby; he or she will grow up with some sort of
attachment disorder. Most children are left in day
care these days, and that is one reason why the
crime rate is so high, why prisons are
overcrowded, why bullying is rampant in schools,
why school violence is prevalent. We are raising
unattached, conscienceless children because we
are leaving them at five to six weeks old in the
care of inadequate, poorly staffed day care
centers, and our babies are growing up without
the capacity to love, feel empathy and
compassion, and to have healthy relationships
with people. It should be a law for someone--
whether it's the mother or father--to stay at
home and care for the baby until the child
reaches the age to attend preschool.
If women want to work than having kids will be
such a disaster. In fact, the most important
thing to kids is having their mother next to them
to fell comfortable. I don t think mothers should
work to bring money, that's men's business, but
in some cases like divorce or if the man died
then the mother is obliged to work instead of
him.
Man is mortal. If something happens and both
working parents die while outside the home, who
will take responsibility for those orphaned
children? That's why mothers should stay at
home and look after their children. Men are
harder workers, so they're the better choice to
hold a job. Plus, by having the mother at home
raising the children, have a higher chance of
being more righteous and well-behaved.
Negative
Because women have a right to do whatever
they want and are not slaves. What is the
difference between males and females? Why is
it always women? Why can't men stay home?
Women are just as important as men are. I
think i said exactly what was on my mind about
women portrayal.
As the woman already has gone through nine
months of pregnancy which includes back pain,
vomiting and the pushing of the baby out
through the vagina they have already done so
much for the birth and creation of this child. Why
should they then have to give up their career and
social lives to stay at home full time to look after
the children considering men can do what ever
they want?? I believe ALL fathers should be the
stay at home parents full time unless the mother
really wants to stay at home. Men should give up
their lives, their work and their alcohol so that
they can learn the wonders of raising children
and they should stay at home permanently and
let their wives earn the money for the household.
I think this totally depends on the other support
networks close to the family as well as their
financial situation. Some families have no choice
but for both parents to work and to be fair,
statistics I have read about all prove that there is
no harm done to the children. Although, I do feel
as though bonding and family time is a necessity.
Children need to know their parents and get that
quality time too.
 this house would ban school uniform
Affirnative
The stated purpose of school is to educate. The
process of education, in its true sense, can only
occur when the learner is not subjected to
irrelevant control measures. True education does
not seek to condition, institutionalise or force-by-
rote; rather to nurture an ability to think critically.
It would be hypocrisy to state that enforcement
of rules that are in no way necessary for normal
social function should co-exist with the
encouragement of critical thinking skills and self-
development.
They should be banned because it wont let the
kids express themselves in their own way, and it
doesn't let them show their creativity . I think
that kids should be able to wear what they want
but not be inappropriate and show a lot of skin.
Uniforms should be banned forever.
Casual clothing expresses someone's fashion on
how they can be. If you wear school uniform, you
have to pay for it. It may cost about $20 or more
then you may grow out of that size and you have
to pay for it again and again. What a waste of
money when you could be spending that money
for something in great need, don't you agree with
me? So that's why I think wearing school
uniforms should be banned.
Negative
I think this because although I agree that non-
uniform clothing gives students a chance to
express themselves, I think that uniforms makes
students feel like they are part of the school, and
that they should be proud to belong to the
school. Students wouldn't be discriminated
because of the clothes they wear. Uniforms help
pupils get into the correct, working state of mind,
and it gives a good impression of the school.
I believe that school uniforms should be more
widely used and not banned because it creates
equality among children and takes away the
status quo. By removing labels from clothing
more than just the problem of inequality is
prevented. It also solves many instances of
bullying, parental stress, and childhood
depression for starters. I believe all children
deserve acceptance, and with school uniforms it
gives them an advantage. Why take this
advantage away?
If you were to wake up every morning and sit
there for half an hour trying to decide which of
your clothes would be best to wear in order to
impress others at school, you would surely have
to skip breakfast every morning. Then imagine
you went to school and found that others thought
your shirt was lame. You would be bullied and
discriminated against for what you wear. Also if
you went on an excursion and happened to lose
your class in a crowded area, I would wish you
good luck trying to get help to find them again.
Now I understand some of you believe that
having no uniforms would give the children the
ability to express themselves. But how is this
necessary at school? They don't need to express
themselves to other students or teachers during
school. They can express themselves among
their friends out of school, when they aren't
required to wear a uniform.
Everyone would be wearing the same uniform,
making them all feel a part of something, the
school. They should be proud of this. Some of
you argue that uniforms are bland and boring,
but they are made to be formal and simple, like
a suit, in order to represent the school positively.
P.S. I am in class right now, sitting in a school
uniform on the iPad the school has provided me
with. I am a grade 9 student and wrote this on
the spot.
 THIS HOUSE BELIEVES THAT STUDENT SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO USE MOBILE PHONE AT
SCHOOL
Affirnative
Cell phones can be used to help with school work
such as reaserch, dictionary/ thesaurus and
learning apps. To stop students from being on
their phones instead of listening to the teacher,
there's apps to block their phones so they can't
get distracted. Cell phones can also be used for
emergencies. E.G if a student sees someone with
harmful objects or weapons they can call the
office or police
I think mobile phones should not be banned in
school. No arguments just they should be
allowed! Because they have calculators and
compasses on them and that can help in maths
and also they can search things for English if
they need information so that's why I think so
yes
Phones can help in many ways. Many parents
would want to stay in contact with their own
child. Shootings at school would of maybe been
prevented if th use of phones were allowed.
People who witness bullying can call the police
instead of running all around the school to find a
teacher. So yes, PHONES SHOULD BE
ALLOWED!!!!!!!!!!.
Negative
I don't think students should be allowed to use
cell phones in school. There is no need to be on
the phone when learning I do think they should
be allowed to carry the phone and if there is an
emergency see out the proper authoriy to use
the phone.
Especially to bad-grades students who'll now
focus on their phones and not the work and what
the teacher says. Look, people in the ages when
phones weren't invented got to school safely
WITHOUT A PHONE. I don't see why bringing a
phone to school is so important...Or maybe just
to show off your new iPhone 5c to everyone and
getting seriously distracted?!
Mobile phones are a distraction for students and
they should not be allowed in schools. Students
should not have the ability to play games, chat
with their friends, or surf the web while in class.
Parents should not give their school age children
phones if they are going to be used in school.
 THIS HOUSE BELIEVES UNIVERSITY EDUCATION SHOULD BE FREE
Affirnative
You work very hard all through high school, you
get some scholarships, and you go to college.
You want to make something better of yourself
and you get a good degree. However, you are
then addled with tens of thousands of dollars
worth of student loans that are collecting
interest. If they do good in school, let them go
for free.
I believe their should be a system allowing
qualifying individuals to get a free college
education if they qualify. They can have strict
standards that require them to pay for the
entire semester if they fail any classes. Also
standards could state that if you do not
graduate on time you have to pay for the entire
schooling. This would allow good students to
have free college.
Negative
Although in a perfect world, university education
would be free, it is not possible to provide a free
university education to everyone. Schools need
to solicit funds from donors and to collect tuition
from students in order to provide the best quality
services. Schools would not be able to run
without these sources of money.
School is expensive now. It should be able to
accomadate all income classes. And what is the
qualification based on? Income, grades from high
school? Education should be mandatory up to an
Associates degree, the U.S. Education is too lax
and not up to the nations standard. If we want
to be ahead of the game we should make it
competitive with a degree that will get you paid.