Question: Should Pupils Be Required To Don School Uniforms?

Every educational institution should mandate school uniforms. However, I stand on the opposing side, believing that schools should not enforce uniform policies. Firstly, not all families can afford the high cost of uniforms, which can be outrageously priced. For instance, a single t-shirt with a school logo can cost up to $70, whereas a similar shirt without the logo can be purchased for $15, and the logo can be printed on it for just $5. By opting for the latter, one can save about $25. Moreover, families typically spend an average of $350 annually on uniforms, and once their children leave the school, they cannot sell the uniforms, essentially throwing away their money. This is particularly burdensome for families who pay extra for a Catholic school education and are then charged exorbitantly for uniforms they do not want. It is akin to someone demanding money from you, or else you cannot return to school. Apart from financial concerns, schools must be cautious when customizing uniforms to avoid unintentionally using designs already in use by other schools, as this could result in legal action and financial strain. Many people are already aware of this, but utilizing hot lunches could be a solution. By spending $1200 on hot lunches per year and generating $2000 in revenue, schools can easily earn an additional $800. I could list a hundred more reasons, but one of the most significant is that uniforms stifle children's creativity. I thought schools were supposed to encourage children to be themselves. Please note that I am only 10 years old, so my perspective may be limited.

Challenge Accepted :) No, I do not believe that there should be dress codes in schools. First, You said that it puts limits on "gang clothing". There may be "gang clothing" that matches to the dress code. Second, Your whole argument is about that dress codes ban explicit clothing. We don't need dress codes to ban them. It is highly unlikely that a student's parents will allow to wear those kinds of clothing to school. Third, Dress codes disturb students' freedom of wearing clothes and is very strict. There have been countless times dress codes caused outrageous stories like suspension. That is all I will say for Round 1. Thank You (My first debate in debate. Org! )

Normal children are noisy and rude, but schoolhoming shall correct this. With schoolhoming, the equivelant of the bedroom is the library, so children will at least be civilised for a third of the day. A couple of days of doing this will transform normal scratty children into superchildren. The whole concept of this goal would encourage children universally to not be so terrible.Second, it would be very educational, since time spent being educated is in the vast majority of cases, less than time spent doing home stuff. The child would be surrounded with informative posters and intellectual minds (the teachers). This would transform the child even more into a superchild.Another thing is the school rules. Because of the threat of a detention, children will act really good. They will not lie, deceive or steal. One or two years of this and that behaviour will be applied by the child in all scenarios in his/her life.Schoolhoming is a completely new idea, with the origin of its concept being introduced in this very debate. I have also only revealed its features in this round to date. This would mean that he has not experienced any kind of schoolhoming, meaning that however convincing his arguments supporting his side of the debate may be, they are wrong. This is because he has never learnt the lessons "Don't steal, deceive or steal" like what schoolhoming teaches you. I plead you to vote for pro. I do not lie, deceive or steal.The thought may come to mind that I haven't been through schoolhoming either. This is true, but may I remind you that schoolhoming is my own creation, and what would happen there is ultimately my choice. That being said, I have therefore learnt the moral lessons that schoolhoming teaches you.How does schoolhoming teach you moral lessons? Schoolhoming cannot be understood or comprehended by outsiders, so there would be no point in telling you. Once you have experience schoolhoming, then and only then shall you understand it.Schoolhoming also teaches fair voting and to eliminate bias.I thank you.

Style. "Some accessories for girls are considered inappropriate. " - Would you like to list some examples? I knew a girl that always stayed fresh at school even with uniforms. Bracelets, Necklaces, Earrings, Things of that nature. I never heard of a school that somehow restricts accessories (boy or girl) I assume we are from completely different parts of the world. Are you not allowed to wear a scarf? Why wear uniforms? Reiterating point: All comes down to following the rules and teaches you lessons. Pros for uniforms: 1. School uniforms keep students focused on their education, Not their clothes. 2. Uniforms create a level playing field among students, Reducing peer pressure and bullying. 3. Wearing uniforms can enhance school pride, Unity, And community spirit. 4. Uniforms make getting ready for school easier, Which can improve punctuality. 5. Students dressed in uniform are better perceived by teachers and peers. Bullying. I agree with your point on this. There should be a bullying debate on here, That would be interesting. Solution. So you're in a private school I see now. Understood. The high schoolers where you are wear uniforms? Yeah I think we are from completely different places now. "It is not a concern of whether if it gets better or not, I should not have to get better. "It all comes down to stages in life. Yeah during elementary to middle school your freedom may feel limited and it's really strict but as you get older (high school+college) you gain more freedom, Regarding what you wear and the expectations from teachers and professors since they expect different from you as you are older and put you more in a higher standard. Not discrediting younger people who are middle schoolers because I know many such as yourself are very sharp but unfortunately this uniform thing is just so prevalent and hard to control. Sometimes you have to roll with the punches. At the same time, I see where you're coming from.

I agree that suspension is definitely not a reasonable consequence for not wearing the correct clothes. Maybe a warning the first few times then lunch detention for everytime that it happens after that. 1) A dress code promotes a more serious school atmosphere which emphasizes academics and promotes good behavior. 2) Dress codes have proven to increase student achievement by encouraging students to concentrate more on their studies and less on their wardrobe. A de-emphasis on clothing can also save money, As there will be less pressure to keep up with expensive trends and fashions. 3) Dress codes in school settings reduce social conflict and peer pressure that may be associated with appearance. 4) Studies indicate that a school dress code can reduce the prevalence of certain behaviors which are often expressed through wardrobes such as violence or promiscuity. 5) As opposed to uniforms, Dress codes still allow students to wear what they want which leaves students with a sense of choice and expression. and if you haven't seen some students parents don't care what their kids wear to school. Thank you

For the purposes of this debate, unless otherwise challenged, "abnormal women" shall mean adult females with an unhealthy body weight, viz. being either underweight or overweight according to the body mass index scale (1) and "unfashionable uniform" shall mean one similar to the garment pictured hereunder: http://upload.wikimedia.org... The fact is, being underweight or overweight can present women with serious medical problems and they should obviously aim to be within the normal weight range in order to remain fit. (2, 3) In addition, women who are not too fat and not too thin are typically more attractive to men and are, therefore, not only the healthiest but also the happiest too. It is the type of female role models such as those normally portrayed in women's fashion magazines and adult male interest periodicals that girls and women need to aspire to because if they achieve this healthy body image they will be both healthier and happier. Furthermore, their husbands will be less tempted to run off with some properly fit Asian babe whilst on a business trip in Hong Kong which will lead to fewer marital breakdowns when his wife later hacks into his personal email account while he is out at work earning the money for her to spend on designer clothes. In conclusion, because women are typically really interested in fashionable clothes, forcing women who are too fat or thin to wear an ugly uniform whilst out in public will be a huge incentive for them to either lose or gain enough weight to be allowed to wear attractive garments of their own choice instead, and I therefore commend this resolution to the House. Thank you. (1)http://www.caloriecounting.co.uk... (2)http://www.womenshealth.gov... (3)http://www.womenshealth.gov...

Should we wear uniforms? As a student myself I can say from experience I don't see the point in uniforms. As children our forms of expression based upon personalities are limited, So the way we dress and carry ourselves reflect who we are as a person and if wearing a uniform would generalize us then it should not happen. As for bulling it will still happen. Bulling is not the reflection of the bullied but the bully. Generalizing clothes will not help, And many still will find work around. Shortening skirts, Fancy accessories, Etc. Such uniforms do nothing but add extra burden and financial if not time consuming weight upon a student and family

Dress-code has been adopted by many schools all over the country, and that's for a reason. Quote: "Traditionally favored by private and parochial institutions, school uniforms are being adopted by US public schools in increasing numbers. Almost one in five US public schools required students to wear uniforms during the 2011-2012 school year, up from one in eight in 2003-2004. Mandatory uniform policies in public schools are found more commonly in high-poverty areas. " Pro/Con. org. the biggest reason is to create a education friendly environment, free of distractions that may come with differing clothing. Honestly, if you put children in clothes that they are not interested in, they are likely not to pay attention to them. If you allow them to flow along with the trends, well, they become immersed partially in that among other things they would naturally be interested in that already distract them from learning. Education is vital to the success of the nation, and honestly the US is not doing well in that division right now. The US now ranks 36th in word education. This is honestly pathetic. I don't mean to sound pessimistic in our nation, but its true. We cannot afford to impede learning any more than we are already allowing. Some schools are allowing phones! PHONES! seriously. But back to dress-code. To your point of bullying. It is very much clothes involved. Bully's hate being hypocrites. If I am a bully, am I going to make offensive fun of the person who is wearing basically the same thing as me? No. That's a guaranteed way to have things blow up in your face, and if i were bullied by someone that stupid, i would be laughing rather than backing down. You could argue that uniforms "detract form a students personality", but that is nonsense. If you spend that much time focusing on how you appear to people, i guarantee that you don't spend time on education, which we should all realize has significant impacts on life. :D

We should have school uniforms because it saves a lot of money. I have proof from http://articles.latimes.com... that school uniforms cause 50% of bullying and we could put a stop to that if students today where school uniforms. Also, to buy a set uniform with school deals, the outfits will most likely not be as expensive as if they were going to buy the latest trends of fill their closets will clothes they will not wear in school.

school uniforms would be better for schools because a lot of kids dress inappropriate these days.

At the beginning of his arguments, Pro stated that he stated his points but did not argue them. This is referred to the statement where it is said that the Elastic Clause gives a certain power to the government. What I pointed out was that this is not an argument rather than a fact. Likewise I could have stated that Article 1 gives Congress the right to pass laws. This statement does not prove why the government can make a law regarding dress code but rather that congress can take out a certain action. Also, I would like to state that Pro keeps referring to a dress code as "No sagging pants or miniskirts", when in fact it is just a dress code that could include long hair, no blue shirts, no black tuxedos, and so forth. While sagging pants and miniskirts may not get a person a specific job, it is not the government's problem that employers do not desire to employ a person with the "hipster" outward appearance, nor is it the government's jurisdiction to force a person to have a certain outward appearance. Pro also stated that a good point regarding why the government should enforce a dress code strengthens the points why they can enforce a national dress code. This is not a valid point since you have to take into account that just because you should do something doesn't mean you can. For example, a person might think it a good idea to overthrow the government, but in reality cannot possibly do that without major assistance. Main point, just because you should do something doesn't mean you can, which my opponent stated in his argument. Unbeknownst to Pro, some states have indeed made laws involving dress code that have gone against one's religious beliefs. For example in a certain part of Texas, long hair on boys was prohibited, which happened to go against Adriel Arocha's religious Native American beliefs. Residents of the Needville School District passed a strict dress code that prohibited long hair because they wanted children in the area to look the same so that they well reflected small-town America. This dress code is clearly unconstitutional and like Needville the government should not have the right to make me look a certain way just so that a country, or a school district, can look pretty and therefore have a good reputation. Pro stated that removing inappropriate clothing will make society a better place and decrease gangs as well as gang related violence, but as I have already stated, the removing the apparel will not remove the message behind it. This is not helping the situation, as Pro stated it, but rather feeding the fire and angering people for not allowing the clothes. Also, my opponent stated that a dress code would lead to a better run government which would lead to a better economy. To this I say, "Well that escalated quickly!". On a more serious note, I would like to state that according to theguardian.com, one of the main problems of the U.S. economy is a major beating to the middle class, not an un-smooth government that is partially failing due to a quite-less-than-perfect-society caused partially by "sagging pants" and "miniskirts". My opponent pointed out that the Elastic Clause overrules AMENDMENT 1, arguably the most important amendment in the Bill of Rights, but does not include a source that proves that this is true. Anyways, assuming that Congress could overrule amendment 1 via power of the elastic clause, if you take away a person's ability to express themselves freely or to believe freely in any religion, what do you have? You get a dictatorship, a tyranny, you are taking away their, our freedom. The government should not tell me what to look like just so the country gets a certain reputation based on their appearance. The government should be a force to protect my rights, not take them away. Is that not why we broke away from Britain in 1776? In the grievances towards the King included in the Declaration of Independence, it is stated that, "He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good." Like the horrendous Acts enforced on American colonists, any laws regarding dress code only limit our freedom, for what purpose? What does the government gain by telling its people to have a certain appearance. Finally, my opponent stated again that sagging pants and miniskirts will not get you a job. Again this is not the government's fault that private employers do not wish to have that certain apparel as the face of their company. Private and public cases are two separate things and standards do not need to be the same. It is also stated that, "If it is denying jobs, then it shouldn't be allowed in public." Here is a counterexample to that point. A man is denied a job because he does not have a degree in engineering. So, because it is denying him a job, it should therefore be prohibited for him to be on American soil without a degree in engineering. My own points: 1. Like I stated before, amendment one gives citizens the right to express themselves through their speech. I would like to point out that the beginning of this amendment, or the Establishment Clause, states that "Congress shall make no laws..." The keyword in that clause is NO as in zero, zip, nada. 2. A certain appearance of a person is also not a necessary reason to make a law banning certain attire. Making these laws would not benefit the government or the economy and would not change people's actions. If laws regarding dress code are deemed necessary, where does it stop? Congress can then make any law, which leads to tyranny and throws our freedom out the window. In conclusion, The United States of America is a place where people of all appearances can come and be themselves, express themselves however they would like, where people can come to exercise their religion. If the government has the right to make laws regarding dress code, Oh how great our destruction will be, we will end up like any other tyrannical government just like the one we left when those 56 men signed the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776. Sources: 1. examiner.com 2. archives.gov 3. theguardian.com


Question: Should Pupils Be Required to Don School Uniforms?

The necessity of school uniforms
Research indicates that students may feel restricted in their self-expression when compelled to wear school uniforms. Thus, it seems reasonable to argue that uniforms should not be mandatory in educational institutions.

I believe that unifroms in private schools should NOT be allowed. In a private school you are suppose to be proper and all but uniforms in my opinion really don't allow us to express our creativity. May the best one win!!!

My group and I believe that School Dress Codes are targeting the female population and are unfair. School"s are beginning to focus on how the students dress rather than their education. For example, pulling a female out of class until she can change and taking her away from the education. Many cases have been reported of females being pulled out of class for minor infractions like straps being visible, or more than 3 inches of the thigh showing. Instead of letting the student know they're breaking dress code and let them off with a warning or letting them wait in class, they are pulled out to wait for a change of clothes. I understand there must be a general set of guidelines to avoid making peers feel uncomfortable, but dictating someone's clothing style is disrupting freedom of expression. The reason for a school dress code is to keep males focused on their education. Since when is a males education superior to a females? Pulling a female out of class while the male stays to continue learning without "distraction" is sexist. Men aren't pigs, they can control themselves. Making a dress code so boys stay on task is stereotyping males as pigs. An example - At a Haven Middle School, female students can"t wear shorts, leggings, and/or yoga pants because they might be distracting for boys at their school. This is a common occurrence across America at this day and time, Middle Schools AND High Schools. This not only teaches boys that it is okay to be distracted, it teachers girls that it's their fault if boys stare. This kind of message lands itself squarely on a continuum that blames girls and women for assault by men. It also sends the message to boys that their behaviors are excusable, or understandable given what the girls are wearing. This adds to Rape Culture. Rape Culture is when a citizens is raped and assaulted, it is their fault. It is their fault because of the way they looked, acted, or dressed before the crime was committed. It is saying "boys will be boys", and females will have to adjust themselves to a males perspective. Instead of girls dressing for themselves and feeling good about themselves, they are dressing based off teachers and the male students of the school. School Dress Codes need to stop making young girls feel inferior and feel like targets. A general set of rules is always okay, but when it is so strict it impacts a female, the administration has gone too far.

i prefer college uniform should be mandatory. although it increases priority,but children wear school uniform from their child hood. they get bored of this uniforms. but it is necessary to wear a uniform its reduces the burden of buying costly dresses.

Your argument is completely off topic and irrelevant. The debate topic was whether it SHOULD be required not if it could be required. And I do believe there are many government imposed things on state regulations for schools. The government comes up with what they want in all schools ( common core, NCLB, "healthier" lunches, etc.) and then they offer the state money. Yeah, some states refuse the money so that they can dictate what is to be taught in their schools, but most are desperate for the money and take it at any cost. So your argument had absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand but hopefully next round you can come up with something relative to the topic.

Dress code is not worth having at schools. 1. A dress code can take away some creativity of the student. With a dress code you can sometimes not be able to wear what you want to wear. When you say "Dress code" I understand this as, "Coat and Tie" or "School uniforms" not, you can wear anything you would like. As long as the student is not wearing a shirt that says. " "F" you teacher" or something like that, I do not see the problem with not having a dress code. 2. After a certain amount of time, the novelty factor of a school uniform, can eventually wear off. Once this happens, the person starts developing a negative attitude towards the uniform or dress code. It soon becomes a burden, rather than an object of pride. This defeats the very purpose of uniforms or dress codes. This can take away the effect of what wearing a dress code is meant to do to the individual. This is why I dress code should be removed from schools. Sources:

Hi your argument makes sense, but I am telling you now that it is not only one child not misbehaving in certain lessons, children might be intimidated due to the fact they don't want to go to school. Parents should have the rights to pay for whatever they want so I really don't see how your point is valid to our motion. Private schools do have trips and program that children attending the school could go to.

Temmo you fail to realize that the topic is suppose to say school uniforms should not be banned.Regardless if you refute my points you yourself have failed to state any points.If you were as intelligent as you seemed you would have put points.Now the win is mine. (Note: Temmo you say assasination is creative only in the eyes of a killer.You again fail at stating the point.) Freedom of speech regardless you got off point how do you know most people dont like creativity.And if they dont then at least the do not have to wear the exact same thing everyday.My point about bulling is that weather you have ripped jeans or silk trousers you will still be made fun of about the following: the way your face looks,your hair looks,your look (in general),or a yo mama joke.My point is that bullies will always find something to make fun of weather its your clothes of not.Am I right I am creative and analytical but I still dont want to wear the same thing everyday.

Your opinion is right, But I've got another comment. I want uniforms in school. The reason why I want uniforms is because they save money. Also, you don't have to worry about finding an outfit for the next day. This is my third opinion

Imagine that a class is sitting at their desks waiting for their class to begin when their teacher walks in wearing old sweatpants and a stained tank-top. Would you imagine that those students would listen to the teacher or take the teacher seriously?. If a teacher is dressed like a student, a student will treat the teacher like one. Vice versa, if a teacher is dressed like a grown up or an authority figure, a student will treat them like one. A student is more likely to listen to a teacher who is wearing a professional-like outfit than a teacher who is dressed sloppy.

PE should be mandatory in schools. Kids and teens in school are still growing. Going outside and being active is essential in doing this. As well as lowering risks of obesity, diabetes, high cholesterol, and high blood sugar, PE allows students to bond with their classmates in an environment outside of the classroom. PE also clears your mind, and helps us release energy and calm down.


Question: Should Pupils Be Required to Don School Uniforms?

School uniforms should be a mandatory requirement for all students. The argument that the government cannot enforce uniform policies in private schools is a non-issue, as the government has the authority to pass laws mandating uniforms if they choose. However, the primary concern is whether it is a sound idea or not. The decision should be left to local school boards, but if the implementation is seen as a significant barrier, a constitutional amendment could be proposed to allow for uniform mandates.

While many students may not enjoy wearing uniforms, they also may not enjoy attending school, learning math, science, or reading, or doing homework. Nonetheless, these things are essential for education. Uniforms can foster a sense of teamwork and support among students, helping each other to succeed. Con argues that school is about individualism, but students can still help each other succeed by providing mentoring, minimizing social pressure to slack off, valuing academic clubs alongside sports teams, and creating a respectful and participatory classroom environment.

Con argues that discipline is not essential for education and that creativity is stifled by uniforms. However, there is no evidence to support these claims. Maturity often involves accepting the postponement of gratification, which means learning to accept discipline and self-discipline. These are valid educational goals. While discipline can be overdone, American schools are not currently over-disciplined, and moving in that direction would be beneficial.

Con also argues that uniforms do not help students focus and that they will find other ways to bully or tease one another. While students can find other ways to misbehave, uniforms can still help. Just as laws against bank robbery do not prevent bank robbery but still help, uniforms can help reinforce the concept that there is a focused "education mode" and a "non-education" mode. This is similar to judges wearing robes, which helps maintain a judicial attitude and affords respect to the judge in his judicial role.

Con argues that students may not keep their uniforms in fashionable or clean shape, but social pressure can still help. The larger point is that the best a school can do is teach, and while it cannot guarantee that each person will learn, uniforms can help many students learn. Uniforms encourage students to evaluate people by their behavior and personality rather than their dress.

Con argues that students will be less likely to want to learn in a strict environment, but there is no evidence to support this claim. The evidence suggests that a more focused educational environment improves academic achievement. Uniforms can help solve the problem of students wearing gang colors or clothing styles that provoke

First, I want to start with your P.E. teachers statement. I have went to 9 different schools and everyone of my teachers have always graded kids on how much energy they exert. Those Fitness gram tests are required by the state and they are usually not part of your grade. My P.E. teachers just do this to see how they are performing in the class. My P.E. teachers also grade the people in our class if they are able to follow the rules and have the basic skills down. Now to answer your argument about the bad atmosphere. My teachers have always picked kids to go out. Then they choose other kids to go behind the "captains" and that would be a team. Usually, the captains are the same ability level ,so the teams could be even. Also, I have never seen a teacher that likes the most athletic kids if they have a bad attitude or if they think that they are better than all of the other kids. They hate those kids and they like the kids that exert the most effort. Finally, in response to your first argument. My school makes us have 90 minutes of P.E. class every day. And everyone in my GRADE have never gotten below a 85 in P.E. I am going to re-iterate this: my P.E classes have always been graded off of your effort that you show. I also want to talk about your uniform argument in Round 1. You said that students shouldn't have to wear horrible uniforms. Now, I highly disagree with this. For starters, I tend to wear dressier clothes to school and I wouldn't want to exercise in those. P.E. clothes can also reduce bullying between children. Some people get made fun of for the clothes that they wear. The P.E. clothes eliminates this route of bullying for kids.

This is the argument from my former account xXCryptoXx. This argument was not plagiarized; for it is my own work being used on this account that I created. My Arguments 1. Uniforms may increase a student’s self esteem because they do not have to worry constantly to be better dressed than those around them. [1] Many kids are discouraged by the fact that they don't own, or cannot afford some of the clothing other kids can. Uniforms put all kids at the same level, and takes that much more stress off the students that cannot afford the latest "fashion". [2] By implementing uniforms confidence is boosted and negative peer pressure is eliminated. Over 75% of schools that implemented school uniforms noticed a drop in peer pressure. [3] 2. Uniforms improve learning by not allowing kids to be distracted. Clothes can be a huge distraction when you are in the classroom, especially if you are bored. Kids always want to know what others are wearing and even judge other students over it. Uniforms eliminate this problem and helps kids to stay focused in class. 3. Uniforms show that everyone there with you is part of your school. It shows you are all part of a team. It promotes school spirit and shows that everyone there is "on the same side". [4] This togetherness helps to eliminate division among students at the school and reduces bullying; giving a sense of community is beneficial to the mental well being of a student. [5] 4. Uniforms help the school faculty to quickly identify who is part of the school and in the end could actually help in keeping strangers and potentially dangerous people off the campus. This helps to make students feel safer at school. School uniforms may also eliminate gang and clique symbols bringing about a feeling of safety and togetherness. Safety is very important when increasing the amount of students who enroll in a school. 5. Bullies like to pick on kids who are lesser than them, and therefore tend to pick on kids who do not wear quality or popular clothes. [6]By implementing school uniforms this problem is solved. School uniforms encourage discipline through neatness, order, and equality among students. [6] 6. School uniforms encourage creative forms of self expression. Since students lose the ability to express themselves in certain ways through the clothes they were, they will be more likely to express themselves through things such as their personality, academic performance, clubs, and sports. It pushes students to put themselves out there. 7. School uniforms reduce violence and student behavioral problems. [7] Long Beach, California District School held a study comparing violence and behavioral problem rates among students before and after uniforms were implemented. In the five years following the implementation of school uniforms there was an 86% drop in violent assaults. Vandalism cases dropped from 1409 to 106. [8] The U.S. Department of Education also found that school crime decreased 36%, sexual offenses decreased 74%, and fights between students dropped 51% after school uniforms were implemented.[13] Almost 80% schools that implemented school uniforms noticed an improvement in student discipline. [9] Schools that implemented school uniforms also showed to have a higher graduation rate and attendance rate than schools without school uniforms. [11] [12] School uniforms have helped improve schools, as emphasized by one study that finds that “various benefits to wearing uniforms were reported, including decreases in discipline, gang involvement and bullying; and increases in safety, eases of going to school, confidence and self-esteem. Additionally, school police data showed a 63 percent reduction in police log reports during the first year of implementation. Other decreases were noted in reports of gang-related activities and student fights, along with graffiti, property damage, battery and administrative assist. “[10] [1] http://everydaylife.globalpost.com... [2] http://www.eduguide.org... [3] https://www.dickies.com... [4]http://www.greatschools.org... [5]http://www.frenchtoast.com... [6] http://www.parenting.org... [7]http://www.calvaryschoolkc.com... [8] http://www.davidsonacademy.com... [9] http://www.buzzle.com... [10] http://www.unr.edu... [11] http://www.19actionnews.com... [12] http://www.uh.edu... [13] http://www.psmag.com...

Definition Physical education- instruction in the care and development of the body(1) Context- we are talking about physical education in terms of physical exercise that is to be done student for a stimulated amount of time up to a particular level to move up to next grade Model- the model con proposes is a persuasive model i.e. rather than making the subject mandatory, we persuade students to join in. Persuasion would be done by educating students about the benefits of physical education and the s same would be facilitated for the interested students, in terms of equipments, trainer(s) etc. Moving on to arguments Limits student"s freedom The problem with making anything mandatory is that we are risking free will i.e. the essence of any healthy functioning democracy, similar is the case with making physical education mandatory, when you talk about making it mandatory, you are simultaneously talking about further restricting(already restricted student freedom). Effectiveness When we are talking about making physical education mandatory, we are actually exposing everything that is limiting our education system and these limitations are two fold 1- It goes against basic principles of psychology i.e. a) persuasion works better than compulsion b) reward works better than punishment a) persuasion works better than compulsion- it is a well established psychological fact that persuasion works better than compulsion, but still, somehow, our education system is based around compulsion rather than persuasion , the psychology of persuasion and compulsion helps us make a clear deduction, that in education, whatever is achieved through compulsion, more can be achieved through persuasion. Applying the above analysis in case of physical education, we can understand that if we want kids to actively take part in physical activities, then we should persuade them to do so(as explained in the model) rather than compel.(2) b) reward works better than punishment " It is another well established psychological analysis that reward works better than punishment, apply this analysis in case of physical education(or any useful subject) as a subject and you will be able to see how the more effective way to go around would be to reward students for joining the course rather than punishing them(failing them) for not doing so.(3) 2- Treat student like robots Another problem with education system today is the "one size fits all" mentality, which is exactly what is being tried to be achieved by making physical education a mandatory subject. The one size fits all mentality is such that one curriculum is sufficient of each and every kid,as if the same are robots. The one size fits all mentality ignores the human element present in students, students are not like programmed robots in a lab, who all function same and respond to same commands, human beings(students) are diverse and have different needs and requirement and trying to fit them all into a one size fits all outfit is bound to result in over/under sizing issues, which is exactly what making P.E. mandatory would result in. much more to come in second round, best of luck, pro :) (1)https://www.merriam-webster.com... (2)http://www.americanthinker.com... (3)https://www.psychologytoday.com...

Welcome temmo I heavily apologize im a newcomer I dont really know much but I love law and poltics.And I really truly am sorry for the inconvinice with baus. Moving on my first point 1st.School uniforms should be banned because children and teens would like creativity in there lives that includes when they dress for school 2nd.Is it illegal for a student to dress freely.I know all about uniforms and yes it preven6ts alot of mishaps but i t restrains individuality. 3rd.Do you want to wear the same thing everyday? 4th.Bullies will still call you names regardless of the shirt or pants and the #1 rule is dont care about what they say (Note for my opponet I am extremly sorry for what happened)

Since I said that shcool is not cool, shcool is not cool. Kids should not have to be brutally forced to go to shcool, because it is not cool. Shcool just teaches us about hitler and those darn nazi's. Alos we learn how to spell. And it gets boring because I know how to spell every word in the alphapet. Shcool should be nuked. In other words screw shcool because shcool is not cool.

Uniforms have gained popularity in high schools throughout the world, however despite the few obvious benefits there are a number of disadvantages to them that people fail to acknowledge. Some of the key disadvantages include things such as students being compelled to conform and so their freedom has been infringed upon, the discomfort of wearing an uncomfortable uniform and the cost of uniforms that parents are forced to pay each year. The main reason uniforms should not be made mandatory is because they infringe on human rights. People have the to express themselves. One way of doing this is to select items of clothing that reflect your personality and personal beliefs. In doing so people can reveal their character and so be drawn to like-minded people. By making uniforms mandatory students are prohibited from being themselves. This is a major breach of an individual's rights. Additionally, uniforms do not always fit a student the way their normal clothing would. Hence, students do not feel comfortable wearing their uniform. This has the potential to distract the student at school and so their education will be at jeopardy. By allowing students to wear mufti they are more likely to feel comfortable in their own clothes and so focus on the material covered in class. Lastly, schools tend to be rather expensive which is a major issue for struggling families who may have a number of children and so not be able to purchase the mandatory uniform for their children. Furthermore, the problem with this is that such children will be disadvantaged as everyone is entitled to a free education. The moment uniforms become mandatory education will no longer be free. If society is going to continue to improve we need to ensure that children are educated so that humanity can make progress. Thus, as a result of the infringement of a child's rights, the discomfort of school uniforms and the cost of these uniforms, high schools should not make uniforms mandatory.

REFUTATIONS"1st.School uniforms should be banned because children and teens would like creativity in there lives that includes when they dress for school"False. You fail to meet your BoP, you can't prove that children and teens like creativity. In fact, various students despise art class, one of the main classes for creativity. People even write blogs about how they hate art school. [1] This is already rpoof not everyone likes creativity. Also, barely anyone even expresses their creativity through clothing, except for cosplaying of course. If they did express it through clothing, they are ignorant snobs. Some people can't afford "good" clothing, does that mean they can't express themselves? Of course not. Clothing is one of the few ways people express themselves, and people barely even do it through that. There are thousands of other much more effective ways to express oneself.Also, killing people is a way for people to expres their creativity, does that mean we should make it legal? No! Sexual assault and assasination is a creative thing, do we make those things legal? Once again no."Is it illegal for a student to dress freely.I know all about uniforms and yes it preven6ts alot of mishaps but i t restrains individuality."In some cases, it is illegal. For example, you can't go to school in nothing but a bikini. Uniforms do infact prevent mishaps, and innapropriate clothing."Do you want to wear the same thing everyday?"I honestly wouldn't care. Either way, this isn't a valid reason to ban uniforms."Bullies will still call you names regardless of the shirt or pants and the #1 rule is dont care about what they say" A large portion of bullying is due to appearance, this includes clothing. More than half of school girls get bullied due to appearance. [2]. Having uniforms, of course we don't stop bullying, but we diminish it. -------------- So far, there are no valid reasons to which why school uniforms should be banned.

First look at this site http://www.youtube.com... isn't that an reason enough. there would be less of a threat of guns in school. If we have school uniforms some of the bad kids wouldn't go to school and there would more learning to the good kids.

In this argument, I have construct both my stand and my argument, though to be honest, they seem to both have one thought: It is not the "school run" practice that makes the situation bad, rather, the people themselves. If the justification of abolishing "school runs" is because of many children being hit because of rush hour, or because of too much traffic, solutions can be given for that. Enforcing traffic rules in the school area is one of the solutions we can guarantee, not just enforcing, but STRICTLY enforcing it. To be more effective, make sure that the offender will be penalized. Providing traffic enforcers in the predestrial lane can help. Students MUST be guided that they SHOULD cross the street there, not in any part of the road. While the children our crossing, an officer would not allow cars to go in. It is up to the officer how he(or she) will balance it. On my stand, "school runs" is not the problem. What is needed here is discipline, because if to abolish school run, a tendency is that, kids can be abducted, as what have been said. Not all parents would agree on the "walking of students by group accompanied by an adult", for some are sensitive. Who knows, the adult himself/herself is the kidnapper. Hiring school bus is good, but we can't be assure of it. I mean, how about if the bus is full? Cycling towards school is also good (Its my attitude when we wear civilian clothes during "wash days"), but for children, not all children are good in cycling, and even when they know how to ride a bike, we cannot remove the possibility that they may fall, and sometimes, run over by cars. Even cyclist fall, dies when fall on highways, how much more of kids? In conclusion: All of the "alternatives" given to "school run" is good, but it is not enough to abolish the "school run" practice. All in all, "school run" should not be abolish, because it is not the problem.

We didn't, and currently this country's schools don't have uniforms for students and doing great! So apparently not needed, at all, at least here. K?


Question: Should Pupils Be Required to Don School Uniforms?

School uniforms should be mandated in educational institutions. I acknowledge my adversary's definition of "school uniform," but it's crucial to understand that the government cannot compel private schools to enforce a uniform policy if they choose not to. I also request that any video evidence not be considered until I specifically request it, dear reader.

Allow me to address my opponent's points and provide counterarguments:

1. Being a high school student, I understand that my feelings towards my school would not change significantly due to the presence or absence of school uniforms. In fact, being forced to wear uniforms might make me dislike my school even more. My opponent mentions fostering mutual success, but schools are about individual achievement. Teamwork is not a significant factor in most classes, where grades are primarily based on individual tests and essays. Comparing sports teams to schools is akin to comparing apples to oranges. School uniforms can make students feel like they are in a dictatorship, suppressing individuality and discouraging teachers from recognizing students for their unique personalities, abilities, and character traits. Uniforms also prevent students from taking responsibility for dressing appropriately for a public environment, a skill that is crucial for military schools where unity, discipline, and following orders are essential. However, public schools should encourage creativity and self-expression.

2. School uniforms do not necessarily help students concentrate, as they will find alternative ways to bully or tease each other. Uniforms may even encourage mocking those who do not have perfectly neat uniforms. Students will simply change into their own clothes once class is over. I know this from personal experience, as many of my friends who attend private Catholic schools where uniforms are mandatory detest them.

3. School uniforms do not teach boys to be neat or girls to be attractive. Who is to say that students will maintain their uniforms in a fashionable or clean state? Uniforms merely enforce a semi-formal dress code in schools.

4. My opponent's argument is invalid, as I have already disproved it. If uniforms truly helped, students who act differently or have distinct personalities would be bullied even more.

5. Students are less likely to be motivated to learn in a strict environment. My opponent's Japan cosplay example is rare, and this point is invalid since students can express themselves through fashion outside of school without uniforms. This link explores the differences between Japanese and U.S. schools: <http://sitemaker.umich.edu...> Japanese students attend school for 240 days a year, compared to 180 for American students. Japan also allocates its school funding more efficiently

School Dress Code should be abolished To note for this debate, we are talking about the complete abolishment of the entire school dress code. This more or less implies the idea that schools uniforms should serve to be completely non-existent. Of course, I am against this given resolution, and without further ado, I will begin with my arguments: C1: Serves as an identity Sub-point 1: School recognition By implementing the already existing school uniform for students to wear, it helps identify children/students from which school they are. It presents them in a way that they can proudly say “I am from _____ school” or “I am from _____ High school/Secondary school/Primary school” etc. A school with a uniform forms the basis of their public reputation from the uniform that they enforce their students to wear. If a public member sees a student walking to school with high heels and a straw-made hat, their reputation tumbles drastically, regardless of the education system within the school itself. It also marks part of their identity from their exterior appearance to where they have been educated for a large portion of their pre-adulthood stages of life. Sub-point 2: Student recognition This point is slightly different to the actually “school recognition”, but is still important to note. For example, when a group of students are out on an excursion, which option would clearly be better? A school with uniform or a school where students have the freedom of choice with the clothes that they are allowed to wear? Scenario 1: Bob is in Debate Dot Org High School and is attending the inter-school debating competition. His entire school wears a simple uniform, with a crest on the polo shirt. Unfortunately, on his way to the debating competition venue, he gets lost. He instantly finds a classmate due to the uniform, catches up with him, and gets to the venue on time. Scenario 2: Mr. I-HATE-UNIFORM is in No Uniform High School and is attending an excursion to learn about wave currents at a beach. Unfortunately for him, he becomes lost and is unable to find out where to go. His entire school does not have a school uniform, and has massive difficulty trying to locate the precise location of his classmate’s whereabouts. From the two scenarios given, it is clear that school uniforms gives a much clearer way to identify one person from their exterior appearance. C2: Smarter look For a student to appear in fashionable clothes that are suitable for odd fashion shows and competitions when attending something that relates to education is nonsensical. School uniforms are supposed to make the student look smart, educated, and willing to learn. This point has already been covered in the previous contention. A student who actually follows the school rules of wearing the correlating school uniform shows the following characteristics from the exterior appearance: 1. They are part of that school 2. They are disciplined (willing to follow the rules with wearing the uniform) 3. They look like they are smart (smarter than someone where casual clothes) 4. They look more formal than someone who is wearing casual clothes to school C3: No discrimination and/or judgement on clothing Most teenage students who are in school typically have the all-out hype on the latest fashion related to clothes and other clothing appeals, such as shoes, hats, bracelets, etc. The media strongly manipulates the way teenagers think of what is right and what is wrong, as well as what is apparently “better looking”, “More new” and other ridiculous concepts that should: 1. Not be part of schooling as it does not relate to the education of students 2. Not alter the child’s natural way of judgement If students have free reign over what type of clothing they are permitted to wear when attending school, most students (females in particular) will be subjected to being judged by their peers, based on what they wear. Students who are living within poorer families are unable to maintain the “Up-to-date-fashion” hype. Through these given contentions, I hope I have proved to the audience that the idea of the abolishment of the school dress code is not the idea of choice. Through these arguments, I aim to prove that the advantages of school uniforms outweigh the abolishment of the school uniforms. Looking forward to my opponent’s rebuttals in the next round.

For the purposes of this debate, unless otherwise challenged, "abnormal women" shall mean adult females with an unhealthy body weight, viz. being either underweight or overweight according to the body mass index scale (1) and "unfashionable uniform" shall mean one similar to the garment pictured hereunder: http://upload.wikimedia.org... The fact is, being underweight or overweight can present women with serious medical problems and they should obviously aim to be within the normal weight range in order to remain fit. (2, 3) In addition, women who are not too fat and not too thin are typically more attractive to men and are, therefore, not only the healthiest but also the happiest too. It is the type of female role models such as those normally portrayed in women's fashion magazines and adult male interest periodicals that girls and women need to aspire to because if they achieve this healthy body image they will be both healthier and happier. Furthermore, their husbands will be less tempted to run off with some properly fit Asian babe whilst on a business trip in Hong Kong which will lead to fewer marital breakdowns when his wife later hacks into his personal email account while he is out at work earning the money for her to spend on designer clothes. In conclusion, because women are typically really interested in fashionable clothes, forcing women who are too fat or thin to wear an ugly uniform whilst out in public will be a huge incentive for them to either lose or gain enough weight to be allowed to wear attractive garments of their own choice instead, and I therefore commend this resolution to the House. Thank you. (1)http://www.caloriecounting.co.uk... (2)http://www.womenshealth.gov... (3)http://www.womenshealth.gov...

For starters: how it can be beneficial. Well if you look at the percentage of people in school that get into fights at school because this guy is wearing these types of clothes compared to a school with a dress code the school with a dress code has a lower percentage. Also, a dress code can prevent segregation of different gangs. In any normal persons book a school with less relation to gangs is a safer school over all. Now about your point on the cost. If money is a issue which in some kids it is the school will buy you clothes. Now you brought up that people never wear it anywhere else and could use that money for food or utility bills. Now, lets clarify this a bit a dress code is completely different from a uniform. A uniform you are told what shirt is mandatory what socks is mandatory for example white or black, high or low, what color tie to wear etc... Now a dress code is a whole lot more relaxed. I wear clothes that I wear to school all the time and vise versa. So therefore the issue of money really isn't a problem and neither is the waste of clothes.

You don't need to explain to me what schools are, I know they exist to 'enhance learning' and to 'help them get a better education' as you put it. And believe it or not, I know teachers are their to help the children understand something they may not of understood previously. But even with this insight, I don't believe this is being done well by any means. If schools are good for children, like you say, what about the 40% of them that don't achieve 5 GCSE's grade A to C? What has school done for them that couldn't of been done by something else? 40% is huge, its almost half for gods sake! If you had a factory that made 40% of its products faulty, it would be shut down! So yer, school might be good for those kids who typically would of done alright anyways (because of their socio-economic class), but what about all those who fail? School does not encourage learning. Those who are interested may continue to be interested but few, if any, are brought to this mentality purely by schooling. From my experience I have found very few people my own age (and I mean like 2 people) that are interested in anything but man made things. For example football, cars, tv shows, music, celebrities and other shallow things such as, for men at least, women (but purely from a sexual perspective). Things like science, nature, history, politics, the universe, our bodies and biology are 'nerdy' or too an older person simply 'boring'. Funny how these things are the things we are forced to learn against our will throughout our entire childhood. Rule number 1: if you want a child to hate something; make them do it all the time against their will. This is Rule number 1 for human behaviour: that we want what we carnt have, and we don't want to do what we have to do, and we spoil ourselves with what we have. Also the hole process of learning is outdated and frankly boring. I mean, look at David attenbourgh's nature documentaries: if I saw that in school I would be hooked. There are also many documentaries and video's online that just make science wonderful, despite all this however, we still insist children sit in a class room at 9 o'clock in the morning (a time which is proven to be bad for learning for children as they are not meant to be awake at this time) and be force fed information about a subject they have no interest in. To learn something, you must first WANT too. Schools do not do this for children, it expects them to learn things in fear of a result of a test. Also once a child fails a test he/she loses their confidence and can become disengaged further, lowering their self-esteem. Also school only recognizes what we call academic intelligence, anyone who is expert at something that doesn't fit under this category is deemed 'stupid'. I know all the political correctness and all that but at the end of the day, this is the effect it has on the child's perception of themselves. Indeed, the child may not even know they have these talents as the system that is designed to enhance them, fails to notice. Even more worrying, is that even if a child is gifted at something regarded as academic, they can be squandered. Good examples of this include Einstein. School regarded him as a failure and failed him, he went to university through contacts and they thought him usless too. Had it not been for a friend and a string of chance situation, Einstien would have remained a lowly clerk and we would not know his name now. Another example is the Beatles; one particular MUSIC teacher had half the Beetles in his class and recognized no musical talent. Another example includes particular dancer and founder of an extremely successful dance school, she was thought to be disruptive and could of been diagnosed as having ADHD, but because of a fluke incident and an intelligent psychologist, she was discovered to be a natural dancer. She went to a dance school instead of normal school and ended up becoming a millionaire and brought joy to millions. So how many other potential geniuses has school overlooked? what are we now missing because of the school system squandering talents. It is my view that we are all potential geniuses, that intelligence is unique to the individual and that we can all be geniuses in our own way and in our own area of knowledge. There is enough knowledge and work to be uncovered and done for everybody and every different kind of talent is needed. School is uniform, it makes all children jump through the same hoops and feel a failure if the don't adhere to the schools narrow view of intelligence. If you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will think its whole life it is a failure. So to wrap it up, 40% of people 'fail'. Forcing people to learn (if you actually want them to learn, which I believe the system doesn't) is clearly ignorant to anyone who knows the first thing about human psychology. We judge intelligence in one way, and this is key to what is wrong with the system. Finally, our method of teaching (classroom, tests, early starts and long days) is frankly no good. I could write a book on this last point so I am trying to not get carried away. Also I would like to add that my personal experience of school was terrible, even though I am more 'academic' than anyone I have ever met !

I believe that students should not be required to take tests in school if they don't want to. The purpose of tests are to show how smart students are with the specific topic they studied and to get them to work/study harder to get better grades. The students should be able to decide weather or not they want good grades by putting their chosen amount of effort into their work and if they put their all into it, their work will pay off with good colleges, jobs, etc. On the other hand, if they don't want to put any effort into it, then that's their choice and in return they'll receive a harder time to get into a college, a hard time finding jobs that pay well, etc. As long as their amount of effort they put into their work gets them what they deserve, students shouldn't be required to take tests if they don't want to.

This is the argument from my former account xXCryptoXx. This argument was not plagiarized; for it is my own work being used on this account that I created. My Arguments 1. Uniforms may increase a student’s self esteem because they do not have to worry constantly to be better dressed than those around them. [1] Many kids are discouraged by the fact that they don't own, or cannot afford some of the clothing other kids can. Uniforms put all kids at the same level, and takes that much more stress off the students that cannot afford the latest "fashion". [2] By implementing uniforms confidence is boosted and negative peer pressure is eliminated. Over 75% of schools that implemented school uniforms noticed a drop in peer pressure. [3] 2. Uniforms improve learning by not allowing kids to be distracted. Clothes can be a huge distraction when you are in the classroom, especially if you are bored. Kids always want to know what others are wearing and even judge other students over it. Uniforms eliminate this problem and helps kids to stay focused in class. 3. Uniforms show that everyone there with you is part of your school. It shows you are all part of a team. It promotes school spirit and shows that everyone there is "on the same side". [4] This togetherness helps to eliminate division among students at the school and reduces bullying; giving a sense of community is beneficial to the mental well being of a student. [5] 4. Uniforms help the school faculty to quickly identify who is part of the school and in the end could actually help in keeping strangers and potentially dangerous people off the campus. This helps to make students feel safer at school. School uniforms may also eliminate gang and clique symbols bringing about a feeling of safety and togetherness. Safety is very important when increasing the amount of students who enroll in a school. 5. Bullies like to pick on kids who are lesser than them, and therefore tend to pick on kids who do not wear quality or popular clothes. [6]By implementing school uniforms this problem is solved. School uniforms encourage discipline through neatness, order, and equality among students. [6] 6. School uniforms encourage creative forms of self expression. Since students lose the ability to express themselves in certain ways through the clothes they were, they will be more likely to express themselves through things such as their personality, academic performance, clubs, and sports. It pushes students to put themselves out there. 7. School uniforms reduce violence and student behavioral problems. [7] Long Beach, California District School held a study comparing violence and behavioral problem rates among students before and after uniforms were implemented. In the five years following the implementation of school uniforms there was an 86% drop in violent assaults. Vandalism cases dropped from 1409 to 106. [8] The U.S. Department of Education also found that school crime decreased 36%, sexual offenses decreased 74%, and fights between students dropped 51% after school uniforms were implemented.[13] Almost 80% schools that implemented school uniforms noticed an improvement in student discipline. [9] Schools that implemented school uniforms also showed to have a higher graduation rate and attendance rate than schools without school uniforms. [11] [12] School uniforms have helped improve schools, as emphasized by one study that finds that “various benefits to wearing uniforms were reported, including decreases in discipline, gang involvement and bullying; and increases in safety, eases of going to school, confidence and self-esteem. Additionally, school police data showed a 63 percent reduction in police log reports during the first year of implementation. Other decreases were noted in reports of gang-related activities and student fights, along with graffiti, property damage, battery and administrative assist. “[10] [1] http://everydaylife.globalpost.com... [2] http://www.eduguide.org... [3] https://www.dickies.com... [4]http://www.greatschools.org... [5]http://www.frenchtoast.com... [6] http://www.parenting.org... [7]http://www.calvaryschoolkc.com... [8] http://www.davidsonacademy.com... [9] http://www.buzzle.com... [10] http://www.unr.edu... [11] http://www.19actionnews.com... [12] http://www.uh.edu... [13] http://www.psmag.com...

My opponent has chossen to forfeit his chance to oppose my argument. But I would just like to say that by taking away a persons choice to wear what they want, you also take a little bit of a persons free will along with it. I think that if private schools want to have uniforms that is great! No person attending a public school though should be forced to wear a certain outfit everyday.

If we make the school kids wear school uniforms they will pay less attention to what Susie is wearing and more on the task at hand. Like I showed on that video that kid was carrying like 13 guns if we were to have kids wearing uniforms that risk would cut down a lot

I do believe that uniforms are a good idea up until eighth grade. Because kids change so much during that period of time, and it helps them emotionally if they don't have to deal with mockery and teasing if they dress differently. However during High school and College people are starting to figure out who they are and by putting them in uniforms you are suppressing any creativity as far as clothing. In some peoples lives their clothing is one of their only ways to let out their inner feelings and so if you force them to wear matching uniforms it takes away freedom of expression. One reason you say uniforms are good because then you dont have to worry about buying costly clothing. Well one solution to that is shop at local second hand stores. If you go to second hand stores regularly and search around there are often adorable clothes that have barely been worn, and even top designer brands for $5.oo instead of hundreds of dollars.

There should be school uniforms for sports teams for the following reasons.A) If we didn't have uniforms for sports teams, people may find it difficult to identify people. Yes, a player in a sports team is likely to know most of the people in his team, but if one person on a team looked identical to another, and both were on different teams, then a uniform would definitely help differentiate between the two and not cause confusion. People watching sports games may also find it difficult to identify certain players for a school sports team.B) Some sports require safer equipment for you to play. Pads and a helmet are part of a Football uniform, and what happens when you take that away? More broken bones, more blood, and more disfigured muscles. Injuries in Football can get pretty ugly. Back in the 1900's when you didn't have as much safety equipment, you could actually get KILLED playing Football. And playing like they did back then could certainly lead to some serious injuries assuming there are no deaths.C) It would be far less creative to not use uniforms for our sports. We wear shirts everyday, and quite frankly, without sports uniforms, actual games would just look like kids playing around for recess. You don't get much of that team vibe. There's no school spirit in not wearinf uniforms and it would be very unusual since the norm today is for people to wear uniforms during games.


Question: Should Pupils Be Required to Don School Uniforms?

The enforcement of school uniforms should be compulsory. Dressing in uniforms prepares students for the future, as they will likely be required to maintain a smart appearance in their professional careers post-education.

Hi your argument makes sense, but I am telling you now that it is not only one child not misbehaving in certain lessons, children might be intimidated due to the fact they don't want to go to school. Parents should have the rights to pay for whatever they want so I really don't see how your point is valid to our motion. Private schools do have trips and program that children attending the school could go to.

REMINDER! Next round, you are not permitted to write any new argument, or post anything new. You are only permitted to write "thanks for the debate". This allows us to have an equal amount of rounds to debate. Breaking this rule shall result in a 7 point deduction. Do not ask for the rule to be revoked if you break it, because you have been warned.REBUTTALS Before beggining, I would like to point something out. Pro only states down sides of uniforms. This itself is not good enough to state a valid reason to ban them. For example, pizza can be unhealthy, does that meen we should ban pizza? No! Just because it has downsides doesn't mean it should be banned."The reasons why we shouldn't have school uniforms are the cost doesn't meet the wadges of families trying to make ends meet." The thing is, with uniforms you aren't immediatly required to pay. You can pay for them at any given time in the year. So, it does meet the wages of these families, and in fact as proven earlier, they cost much less than the average amount you would pay for your child's clothing. "Secondly it doesn't diminish bulling.How is this possible let me explain say I have a blue tie and then I give my opponent the same tie sure the ties are the same but we both look different in the same looking ties.Basically my point is everyone can wear the same clothing but how the look in that clothing is an entirely different story." Once again, you fail to properly read my argument. I stated that it diminishes bullying. This occurs because sometimes children get bullied because their clothing isn't "cool". Now with uniforms, no one has cool clothes, so people can't get bullied for their clothing, regardless of how they look in it. So, even though bullying still occurs, it is at least slightly diminished. Also, this still isn't a valid reason to which why we should ban uniforms."Also con stated on google there are 1 million people don't care about creativity or art that is not alot there are seven billion people world wide and when viewed from that scale that small compared to seven billion." Perhaps there are various who care, but there are definitly more who don't care. First of all, a 7th of the population is a huge number. Second of all, more than half of the world is in poverty. They have no time to care about creativity. And so, more people don't care about creativity than those who do."BULLYING PREVENTION is illogical because I could had out a billion people the same suit and i promise you all of them will look different sure IT IS THE SAME UNIFORM but the people wearing them will look different." Refer to previous rebuttal."Restricts inapropriate clothing this one is also illogical sure uniforms restrict bad or improper clothing but the one thing is that WHO IN THERE RIGHT MIND COMES TO SCHOOL WITH A BIKINI!!!!!We are humans no nianderthals we know right and wrong.We have proper sense.Cons statement is possibly a derogatory slur calling our species inferior and dumb.And if that's not what it meant then what dos it mean we have common sense to dress correct.We have parents that tell us not to wear a bikini to school or wait they don't tell us that why because we have enough sense to correctley dress." This is where you are wrong. Since this is a long contention, I shall have a long rebuttal. First of all, regardless if it's a bikini or mini skirt, it is innapropriate. Also, regardless of proper sense, people still wear innapropriat clothing to school. I did not imply our species is dumb, I am implying we make mistakes. And your comment about parents, you honestly have no idea about children and parents in general. First of all, children are very smart, they can easily sneak inapropriate clothing in their bags and change at school. In doing so, parents can't stop them. Here is a little story I found of a fellow parent who experianced I similar dilema. "My husband and I and are the parents of three wonderful children, but we've been having some issues lately with our 15 year old, our middle child. She continues to wear skirts that are much too short for her, including to school" "We both have to leave for work early in the morning and rely on our kids to get ready to go to school by themselves in the mornings, and we are unable to verify our children's attire; in fact, we first found out our daughter was wearing miniskirts was when the school called to tell us. " "I explained to her that when I was growing up, we were in a strict religious community where modesty was a big deal and we were expected to wear skirts that were almost ankle length" [1] As you can now see, people have jobs. They don't always have time to check on their kids. Also, you can now see kids are good at sneaking things, their parents only found out after the school called them! You also notice that the lady writing this article somewhat had a uniform aswell, and she learned a variety of lessons in doing so, such as respect and modesty.Parents aren't always around, and so kids can easily break rules. However, with uniforms, these rule breaking children will experiance severe consequences, preventing them from breaking it and wearing innapropriate clothing.-------------------------------------------- At this point, ending our debate, my opponent presents no valid argument whatsoever to which why uniforms should be banned. He/she also drops various of my arguments. Also, he/she has failed to meet any of his/her BoP at all! This is pretty much an automatic loss. I now continue with my final contentions. CONTENTION 4: OVERALL IMPROVEMENT Studies show that children overall improve due to uniforms. They tend to not be troublesome out side of school, because due to their uniforms, they can easily be identified. Also, girls enjoy it due to the fact that male counterparts do not offend her, preventing harrasement. [2]CONTENTION 5: MORE SLEEP A variety of people choose what they wan't to wear in the morning. This makes them wake up early. With uniforms, this isn't an issue, and so people get more sleep. Sleep is important for a growing body.CONCLUSION There is no valid reason to ban uniforms. They have endless benefit, from preventing bullying to improving studies and overall behaviour. They also prevent inapropriate clothing, save money and induce more sleep. It does not go against the first amendament, and does not take away freedom of expression. Banning it is the same as banning pizza. My opponent has no valid reason whatsoever on why they should be banned, he/she only states the down sides of uniforms in general. They also make false accusations, such as me " calling our species inferior and dumb." and claiming uniforms go against the first amendament. In addition, they fail to meet any of their BoP, and lack any source of proof whatsoever. I on the other hand have a variety of sources, and BoP isn't even on me. I explained a variety of reasons why uniforms are beneficial, and proved all my opponent's arguments wrong, whereas they dropped the majority of mine. Thanks for the debate overall however!Sources:[1]http://parenting.stackexchange.com...[2]http://www.dailymail.co.uk...------------------------ And just to warn you once more because I am nice:REMINDER! Next round, you are not permitted to write any new argument, or post anything new. You are only permitted to write "thanks for the debate". This allows us to have an equal amount of rounds to debate. Breaking this rule shall result in a 7 point deduction. Do not ask for the rule to be revoked if you break it, because you have been warned.

Dress code is not worth having at schools. 1. A dress code can take away some creativity of the student. With a dress code you can sometimes not be able to wear what you want to wear. When you say "Dress code" I understand this as, "Coat and Tie" or "School uniforms" not, you can wear anything you would like. As long as the student is not wearing a shirt that says. " "F" you teacher" or something like that, I do not see the problem with not having a dress code. 2. After a certain amount of time, the novelty factor of a school uniform, can eventually wear off. Once this happens, the person starts developing a negative attitude towards the uniform or dress code. It soon becomes a burden, rather than an object of pride. This defeats the very purpose of uniforms or dress codes. This can take away the effect of what wearing a dress code is meant to do to the individual. This is why I dress code should be removed from schools. Sources:

Hello! Welcome to the debate! I will be for school uniforms. You will be against school uniforms. 1ST ROUND IS ACCEPTANCE ONLY! Good luck to you!

Thank You for those arguments but No matter what you dress students in, they will always find a way to pass judgement upon their peers; there are many other ways to judge people and form cliques, some of these things are: hair style hair color height weight accessories (ie necklaces, watches and etc. ) odor (type of perfume/clone and etc. ) the way one walks smoking habits . http://everydaylife.globalpost.com... This can lead to forms of bullying. also They cost more than other clothes Even with uniforms, parents would still need to purchase "regular" clothes for when students are not in school, thus creating an additional expense. A 2012 presentation by North Brunswick Township Public Schools in New Jersey reported the average cost for families to purchase uniforms would be about $300 per student each year PLUS clothes for after school. People don't stay in uniform all day. Then there is summer. People who wear uniforms have to buy the same amount of clothes PLUS their uniforms . http://everydaylife.globalpost.com...

Should we wear uniforms? As a student myself I can say from experience I don't see the point in uniforms. As children our forms of expression based upon personalities are limited, So the way we dress and carry ourselves reflect who we are as a person and if wearing a uniform would generalize us then it should not happen. As for bulling it will still happen. Bulling is not the reflection of the bullied but the bully. Generalizing clothes will not help, And many still will find work around. Shortening skirts, Fancy accessories, Etc. Such uniforms do nothing but add extra burden and financial if not time consuming weight upon a student and family

Thank youEvidence is only to be presented when asked forI will first be presenting my arguments, then refuting my opponent's arguments. First, some definitions. Public School- K-12 Schools run by the US federal government1. Makes people equal in the eyes of others, thus stopping bullyingSome schools when they add uniforms it changes the way the students act, for example on the kimatv news the school system in yakima started to use uniforms. After each school started to use uniforms the bullying rate when down by 50%. People may be poor or rich. Income disparity is a huge problem in today’s public school system. People are bullied and teased based on the type/condition of their clothes. With kids, there would be none of that. No one will tease or bully anyone because everyone is wearing the same uniformThe impact that will come from this discovery will be huge, this is because kids a tormented by name calling and other types of bullying everyday and it ruins their lives. Bullying can cause suicidal and traumatic problems which is detrimental to students. 2. Stops Inappropriate clothes to be worn to schoolCEPI says that uniforms stops gang colors This is good because gangs won’t be able to communicate thus keeping gangs from committing crimesThe Impact is that because gangs won’t communicate, they can’t commit crimes making the world a better place Less people die from gang related crimes, saving lots of lives3. Kids can be readily identified in outside activitiesIn a field Trip, if the whole school is wearing a uniform, then if the kid wanders off, the teacher will recognize him/her in a huge crowd because of his/her clothes. US Department of Education says that the uniforms can help teachers identify their students easier. This will keep the students from getting lost and thus keeping them safe. If the school has uniforms, then the kids will be safe. They cannot wander off and get into trouble or danger. This is especially beneficial for younger kids. Now, to my opponent's arguments My opponent talks about how it violates rights. However, some things, you need to give up for a better life. I would rather feel safe and give up a few rights. In fact, I would rather stay alive instead of dead with the ability to express myself. Obviously, life is much more important than the right to express oneself. Limiting the right to express oneself is not going to kill every child in the US.

At the beginning of his arguments, Pro stated that he stated his points but did not argue them. This is referred to the statement where it is said that the Elastic Clause gives a certain power to the government. What I pointed out was that this is not an argument rather than a fact. Likewise I could have stated that Article 1 gives Congress the right to pass laws. This statement does not prove why the government can make a law regarding dress code but rather that congress can take out a certain action. Also, I would like to state that Pro keeps referring to a dress code as "No sagging pants or miniskirts", when in fact it is just a dress code that could include long hair, no blue shirts, no black tuxedos, and so forth. While sagging pants and miniskirts may not get a person a specific job, it is not the government's problem that employers do not desire to employ a person with the "hipster" outward appearance, nor is it the government's jurisdiction to force a person to have a certain outward appearance. Pro also stated that a good point regarding why the government should enforce a dress code strengthens the points why they can enforce a national dress code. This is not a valid point since you have to take into account that just because you should do something doesn't mean you can. For example, a person might think it a good idea to overthrow the government, but in reality cannot possibly do that without major assistance. Main point, just because you should do something doesn't mean you can, which my opponent stated in his argument. Unbeknownst to Pro, some states have indeed made laws involving dress code that have gone against one's religious beliefs. For example in a certain part of Texas, long hair on boys was prohibited, which happened to go against Adriel Arocha's religious Native American beliefs. Residents of the Needville School District passed a strict dress code that prohibited long hair because they wanted children in the area to look the same so that they well reflected small-town America. This dress code is clearly unconstitutional and like Needville the government should not have the right to make me look a certain way just so that a country, or a school district, can look pretty and therefore have a good reputation. Pro stated that removing inappropriate clothing will make society a better place and decrease gangs as well as gang related violence, but as I have already stated, the removing the apparel will not remove the message behind it. This is not helping the situation, as Pro stated it, but rather feeding the fire and angering people for not allowing the clothes. Also, my opponent stated that a dress code would lead to a better run government which would lead to a better economy. To this I say, "Well that escalated quickly!". On a more serious note, I would like to state that according to theguardian.com, one of the main problems of the U.S. economy is a major beating to the middle class, not an un-smooth government that is partially failing due to a quite-less-than-perfect-society caused partially by "sagging pants" and "miniskirts". My opponent pointed out that the Elastic Clause overrules AMENDMENT 1, arguably the most important amendment in the Bill of Rights, but does not include a source that proves that this is true. Anyways, assuming that Congress could overrule amendment 1 via power of the elastic clause, if you take away a person's ability to express themselves freely or to believe freely in any religion, what do you have? You get a dictatorship, a tyranny, you are taking away their, our freedom. The government should not tell me what to look like just so the country gets a certain reputation based on their appearance. The government should be a force to protect my rights, not take them away. Is that not why we broke away from Britain in 1776? In the grievances towards the King included in the Declaration of Independence, it is stated that, "He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good." Like the horrendous Acts enforced on American colonists, any laws regarding dress code only limit our freedom, for what purpose? What does the government gain by telling its people to have a certain appearance. Finally, my opponent stated again that sagging pants and miniskirts will not get you a job. Again this is not the government's fault that private employers do not wish to have that certain apparel as the face of their company. Private and public cases are two separate things and standards do not need to be the same. It is also stated that, "If it is denying jobs, then it shouldn't be allowed in public." Here is a counterexample to that point. A man is denied a job because he does not have a degree in engineering. So, because it is denying him a job, it should therefore be prohibited for him to be on American soil without a degree in engineering. My own points: 1. Like I stated before, amendment one gives citizens the right to express themselves through their speech. I would like to point out that the beginning of this amendment, or the Establishment Clause, states that "Congress shall make no laws..." The keyword in that clause is NO as in zero, zip, nada. 2. A certain appearance of a person is also not a necessary reason to make a law banning certain attire. Making these laws would not benefit the government or the economy and would not change people's actions. If laws regarding dress code are deemed necessary, where does it stop? Congress can then make any law, which leads to tyranny and throws our freedom out the window. In conclusion, The United States of America is a place where people of all appearances can come and be themselves, express themselves however they would like, where people can come to exercise their religion. If the government has the right to make laws regarding dress code, Oh how great our destruction will be, we will end up like any other tyrannical government just like the one we left when those 56 men signed the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776. Sources: 1. examiner.com 2. archives.gov 3. theguardian.com

Just a short while ago, I was innocently sitting in the cafeteria eating the excruciating and sorry excuse for a burger, when out of nowhere I expirienced a heat wave course through me. So in response, I took off my jacket for a moment and continued ingesting the disgusting meal. I wore beneath my jacket a light-blue shirt, which barely showed my, ehem, bra straps. But it was only a minute afterwards that one of the supervisors patrolling the cafeteria was on my back, demanding that I put my jacket back on. I did so with no argument, but as the supervisor walked away, a thought occured to me. What makes it justified for most girls to wear these short-shorts and very mini-mini skirts that barely conceal what so desperately should be concealed, but if another girl's bra-strap shows a little, it's to be rebuked? Why can some girls go through the day unprovoked about their wild dyed-black hair with pink and red and blue streaks throughout but a boy with slight facial hair is given a crappy disposable razor and a helping of shame and sent to the restroom to take care of that problem? Why doesn't anyone get onto the boys wearing hats with marajuana(sp?) leaves on the front and alchohol references all over a black t-shirt? If the school is going to make a dress code, than they should make a better effort to enforce it, shouldn't they? No one should be able to slip through the cracks.

First of all, you've totally disregarded the duration of my arguments which can only make me assume you have none and you're hoping for the best here. Okay, if it's around "85 then that's you covered for the whole year, providing they've bought the correct size. It's not like you have to buy a brand new uniform every week. Since when is school a place for a child to feel special and different? This isn't heaven. School is a place for kids to LEARN and get an education. And as I said before, if kids wear non-school uniform everyday, it will distract the kids from learning because they'll be looking at what all their friends are wearing. And as I also said before, if non-school uniform is worn everyday, the higher class kids WILL bully the lower class kids because they're not wearing "branded clothes" I'm 14 years old; I've seen it with my own eyes. You will be able to pin-point a child easier if they are wearing the exact same attire; say you're a teacher and an accident happened; a young man got lost; the police ask you "Hey, what was the child wearing?" You could easily reply "Oh, he's wearing school uniform" The police would look at the uniform and it'd totally narrow down the search. However, if they were in non-school uniform, said accident happened and the police asked you "Hey, what was that kid wearing" we all know you'd be like "Erm, it was like something blue maybe? Not too sure" Is that helping the police? NO. Also, if you've already acknowledged that you agree with the statement, why is it you're trying to question said statement even though you've just said you've agreed with it. C-O-N-T-R-A-D-I-C-T-O-R. You know what that spells, right? Yeah, you can express yourself through clothing, but OUTSIDE OF SCHOOL. At school, the way you're supposed to express yourself is by excelling at the subjects you do. As said above and in the previous argument, kids who can afford the branded clothes will bully those who can't afford them. Wearing the same attire means no one will ever know if you have branded clothes or not, therefore preventing bullying. Also, the kids represent the school. Them walking around in non-school uniform isn't exactly doing that, is it? For Round 3, I want you to respond to ALL my arguments this time, not just one or two that you could barely think of responses for.


Question: Should Pupils Be Required To Don Uniforms At School?

School uniforms have practical advantages when students are outside the school premises. When students are easily identifiable as belonging to a specific school, they may be more conscious of their actions while commuting to and from school. This could encourage them to behave more politely, for instance, towards fellow passengers on public transport like buses or trains. During organized excursions away from the school, teachers can more easily keep track of all students and oversee their behavior, compared to when students wear their own clothing and blend into the general public.

First look at this site http://www.youtube.com... isn't that an reason enough. there would be less of a threat of guns in school. If we have school uniforms some of the bad kids wouldn't go to school and there would more learning to the good kids.

Some students want to express themselves in the attire they are wearing. Many middle school students will agree with "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, Or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, Or abridging the freedom of speech, Or of the press, Or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, And to petition the Government for a redress of grievances". (Amendment 1) If schools don't let middle-schoolers wear everyday attire they are taking students the freedom to express themselves away. It is stated in the 1st amendment of The Bill of Rights that freedom of religion, Speech, And the press is against the law. Therefore, Some students would like to express their feelings in what they wear so students would rather wear everyday attire.

Hello! Welcome to the debate! I will be for school uniforms. You will be against school uniforms. 1ST ROUND IS ACCEPTANCE ONLY! Good luck to you!

In America"s school districts, P.E. class should not be required. It is embarrassing. It is awkward. Parents are questioning if it should be. It is embarrassing. If you can't do 10 push-ups or 20 sit-ups, everybody shoves their score, of like 50 or 40, in your face. If you try to hard you could get injured. If you fall while doing some sport you get laughed at. It is awkward. If you are in your squads and have to warm up, you might have to touch your toes. In order to touch your toes you have to bend over. It feels like you are sticking your butt in someone's face. Or vice versa. Parents are questioning if it should be required. According to an investigation by MSNBC, the average time spent exercising is 16 out of 45 minutes. That's not very much physical time. Since we aren't doing very much parents think that it should be cut. All in all, gym class should not be mandatory. Students get embarrassed. Students feel awkward. Parents think it should be cut. We need more time for better things like study hall or longer classes.

School uniforms help schools portray discipline. It keeps schools somewhat in check. Usually public schooling doesn't require uniforms, some do, while catholic schools try to keep a uniform a requirement. According to Statisticbrain.com, Parents spend roughly 1.3 billion dollars annually on school uniforms, which breaks down to about 249 dollars per parent per year. That would be much cheaper than trying to get the newest clothing per year and spending money so that the child can have a new outfit of the "coolest styles" each day. School uniforms also try to keep the school itself united. The uniforms help diminish economic and social barriers between students. (greatschools.org)

First off, I guess this is a controversial issue so I'll do it. Bear in mind that this is my first time. ~~ You say that school uniforms are expensive, you think non school uniforms are much cheaper? Finance regarding buying both school and non-school uniforms will always be a problem. Also, kids aren't the nicest nowadays; I know for a fact that the richer kids will bully the poorer kids for not wearing popular branded clothes. So by saying you want non-school uniform all the time, you're indirectly promoting bullying. You say and I quote "Having kids all wear the same thing can make a harmful envirement for kids to learn." It's actually the opposite As sad as it is to say, you can tell how a person is doing financially by what they wear; kids don't want their peers to know their parents may be having financial problems. If everyone is wearing the exact same thing, no one will find out about any of the problems they may have outside school. The idea of expressing yourself clothes-wise is ludicrous. When in school, that's not the way you should be expressing yourself; you SHOULD be expressing yourself with vast knowledge of the subjects you learn, playing well in sports. Of course there's the fact it'll improve general appearances for the future but that's not a very strong argument so you can disregard that. But now, here's the gruesome part: What if there was a major accident and a kid was lost? How would you describe that kid? See, if they were wearing a designated uniform, it would be a lot easier to pin-point those who ever appeared in situations like that. And believe it or not, these things do happen often. In conclusion, everyone wearing the same thing will prevent bullying, save lives and you don't need to express yourself via clothes. I agree that non-school uniform days should happen every so often but not everyday; we don't need that at all.

For me, we have to respect each of students personality and fashion for style. Due to the fact, contemporary people are open-minded. So they have duty for show their fashion. Therefore, i think students don't need to wear school uniform at school.

1) In a crowd it would be easier for officials to find a child if he is wearing a school uniform as the child will stand out among others due to the distinct uniform. 2)" Schools these days are encouraging an appreciation of diversity" but can you surely say that there is no discrimination at all between teachers and students? It is still being "encouraged", discrimination and partiality has not yet been eradicated and if all students can not be made equal economically at least they can be deemed as an equal by common clothing. All students are not equally capable which makes teachers partial, there is no need to enhance this partiality by allowing students to wear clothing of choice. I have first hand experience of how the under privileged children are treated by teachers in schools. 3) Burden of Proof missing 4) A school uniform is of sentimental value to alumnis of the particular school. It is something that all children deserve to have as a memoir of being a part of their school

If we make the school kids wear school uniforms they will pay less attention to what Susie is wearing and more on the task at hand. Like I showed on that video that kid was carrying like 13 guns if we were to have kids wearing uniforms that risk would cut down a lot

You may argue that PE shouldn't be mandatory because some might have trouble doing some thing in PE and feel uncomfortable around their peers, but this only happens if you set unrealistic standards for athletic performance in schools. PE should be mandatory in schools. Kids and teens in school are still growing, and going outside and being active is essential in doing this. As well as lowering risks of obesity, diabetes, high cholesterol, and high blood sugar, PE allows students to bond with their classmates in an environment outside of the classroom. PE also clears your mind, and helps you release energy and calm down. If kids and teens go outside and do light exercise while having fun and making friends, it will help build good habits for the future.