High School Debate Topics

All students should have an after school job.

Partial birth abortion should be illegal.
Every student should be required to take a performing arts course.
Homework should be banned.
School uniforms should be required.
Year round education is not a good idea for student learning.
The legal drinking age should be lowered to 18.
PE should be required of all students throughout high school.
All students should be required to perform one year of community service.
Schools should block Youtube.
Students should be able to leave school for lunch.
All parents should be required to attend parenting classes before having a child.
Single-sex schools are better for students.
Students should be held legally responsible for bullying in schools.
Cyberbullying that occurs outside of school, should be punished by the school.
Teachers should not be allowed to contact students through social media.
Public prayer should not be allowed in schools.
High stakes state testing should be abolished.
All people should be vegetarians.
Renewable forms of energy should be subsidized by the government.
Should America provide foreign aid to countries that kill and sell items from
endangered animals.
It is never appropriate for the government to restrict freedom of speech.
Human cloning should be banned.
Poetry should be removed from the curriculum.
Macs are better than PCs.
Androids are better than iPhones.
The US Government should fund a space mission to Mars.
Mixed Martial Arts (MMA) should be banned.
Democracy is the best form of government.
All citizens who do not vote should pay a fine.
The death penalty should be abolished.
Sports stars should be positive role models.
The right to bear arms is a necessary constitutional amendment.

Grades should be abolished.

Progressive tax rates are unfair.
The voting age should be lowered.
The driving age should be raised.
Sharing music online should be allowed.
Video games are too violent.
History is an important subject in school.
Schools should not be allowed to track students.
Students should be required to pass algebra to graduate.
Affirmative action should be abolished.
Students should not be graded on their handwriting.
Women should not get the right to vote. (Note: This provides students with
historical context for the 19th amendment.)
America should not give foreign aid to other countries.
The government should provide wireless service for everyone.
Smoking should be illegal.
People should be fined for not recycling.
Performance enhancing drugs should be allowed in sports.
Parents should be allowed to choose their baby's gender.
Animal testing should be banned.
Corporations should be allowed to donate money to political campaigns.
Drone attacks against specific targets are a necessary part of modern warfare.
US representatives and senators should have term limits.
All students should take an online course.
Social media comments should be protected by free speech.
A border fence should be constructed between US and Mexico.
Same sex marriage should be legal.
Intelligent design should be taught in science classes

Ran
k

Debate Motion

This House believes single-sex schools are good for education

Ran
k

Debate Motion

This House would ban animal testing

This House believes reality television does more harm than good

This House supports the death penalty

This House would ban homework

This house would raise the legal driving age to 18

This House believes university education should be free

This House believes the internet brings more harm than good

This house Would Ban School Uniforms - Junior

10

This House believes Tennessee is correct to protect teachers who wish to explore
the merits of creationism

11

This House believes that children should be allowed to own and use mobile
phones.

12

This House Believes that assisted suicide should be legalized

13

This house would ban cosmetic surgery

14

This House believes wild animals should not be kept in captivity

15

This House believes mothers should stay at home and look after their children.

16

This House would ban junk food from schools.

17

This house believes that capitalism is better than socialism

18

This House would Censor the Internet

19

This House believes science is a threat to humanity

20

This House believes that cannabis should be legalised

21

This House would legalize the sale of human organs

22

This House believes that advertising is harmful

23

Homework is a waste of time. (Junior)

24

This House would ban the sale of violent video games/censor violent video games.

25

This House would ban boxing.

26

This House believes homosexuals should be able to adopt.

27

This House would ban beauty contests

28

This house believes parents should be able to choose the sex of their children

29

This House would permit the use of performance enhancing drugs in professional
sports

30

This house would allow gay couples to marry

31

This house believes extra-curricular activities in schools should be formally

recognised.

32

This house would make physical education compulsory

33

Every child should have a mobile phone. (Junior)

34

This House Would Lower The Drinking Age

Ran
k

Debate Motion

35

This house would ban smoking in public spaces

36

This House would give illegal immigrants drivers licenses

37

This House Would Ban Human Cloning.

38

This house would allow prisoners to vote

39

This house would make voting compulsory

40

This House would limit the right to bear arms

41

This house Would reintroduce Corporal Punishment in Schools

42

This House believes that parents should be held responsible for their school-going
children's discipline problems.

43

This House would ban gambling

44

This House believes criminal justice should focus more on rehabilitation.

45

This House Believes Terrorism can be justified

46

This House believes that the United Nations has failed

47

This House would restrict advertising aimed at children

48

This House believes that marriage is an outdated institution

49

This House would arm teachers

50

This house believes that housewives should be paid for their work

51

This House would arm the police

52

This House supports random drug-testing in schools

53

This House Would Implement A Fat Tax

54

This House would introduce child curfews

55

This house believes that hosting the Olympics is a good investment

56

This House would go vegetarian

57

This House Believes that religion does more harm than good

58

This House would ban music containing lyrics that glorify violent and criminal
lifestyles

59

This House would ban child performers

60

This house supports home schooling

61

This house would legalize polygamy

62

This House would legalise Prostitution

63

This house believes that developed countries have a higher obligation to combat
climate change than developing countries

64

This house believes that animals have rights.

65

Neo-functionalism explains the integration of the European Union

66

This House would hold students legally responsible for bullying if it resulted in the
victim's death

67

This House believes all nations have a right to nuclear weapons

Ran
k

Debate Motion

68

This House would ban teachers from interacting with students via social
networking websites.

69

This House would use torture to obtain information from suspected terrorists.

70

This house Believes People Should Not Keep Pets

71

This House would ban the development of genetically modified organisms

72

This House would go nuclear

73

This House would ban alcohol

74

This House would make all parents attend parenting classes

75

This House Would Distribute Condoms in Schools (Junior)

76

This House would ban the use of animals as objects of sport and entertainment

77

This house believes that internet access is a human right

78

This house believes in the woman's right to choose

79

This House would make sex education mandatory in schools

80

This House believes that it is sometimes right for the government to restrict
freedom of speech

81

This House would force feed sufferers of Anorexia Nervosa

82

This house believes that newspapers are a thing of the past

83

This House would ban smacking

84

This House believes that music that glorifies violence against women should be
banned.

85

This House believes social deprivation causes crime.

86

This House Would Promote Safe Sex through Education at Schools

87

This House would abolish the monarchy.

88

This House believes that downloading music without permission is morally

equivalent to theft

89

That The UK Should Have a Written Constitution

90

This house would further restrict smoking

91

This House believes that bribery is sometimes acceptable

92

This House believes that endangered species should be protected

93

This House believes we're too late on global climate change

94

This house believes the internet encourages democracy

95

This House would ban religious symbols in public buildings

96

This House Would Abolish nuclear weapons

97

This House would explore the universe

98

This House would as the United States ban assault weapons

99

This house believes that the United States should be isolationist

100

This House would impose democracy

Single Sex School

(agree)
Women are better off in single-sex institutions
POINT
Women in particular benefit from a single-sex education; research shows that
they participate more in class, develop much higher self-esteem, score higher in
aptitude tests, are more likely to choose male disciplines such as science in
college, and are more successful in their careers. In the USA Whos Who,
graduates of womens colleges outnumber all other women; there are only
approximately 50 womens colleges left in the States today.[1] Elizabeth Tidball,
who conducted the Whos Who research, also later concluded that womens
colleges produced more than their fair share who went on to medical school or
received doctorates in the natural or life sciences, typically male fields.[2]
[1] Calefati, Jessica, The Changing Face of Womens Colleges, US News, 11
March 2009.
[2] Kaimer, W. The Trouble with Single-sex Schools. The Atlantic, April 1998.

COUNTERPOINT
Other studies have found that women in fact are not any better off in single-sex
institutions. A 1998 survey from the American Association of University Women, a
long-time advocate of single-sex education, admitted that girls from such schools
did not show any academic improvement.[1] That they are more inclined towards
maths and sciences is of questionable importance to society as a whole. As the
report noted, "boys and girls both thrive when the elements of good education
are there, elements like smaller classes, focused academic curriculum and
gender-fair instruction".[2] These can all be present in co-educational schools.
Tidball in her research made the mistake of not controlling for other
characteristics, namely socio-economic privileges of those at elite womens
colleges.[3]
[1] Morse, Susan ed., Separated by Sex a critical look at single-sex education for
girls, American Association of University Women Educational Foundation, March
1998.
[2] Lewin, Tamar, All-Girl Schools Questioned As a Way to Attain Equality, The
New York Times, 12 March 1998.
[3] Kaimer, W. The Trouble with Single-sex Schools. The Atlantic, April 1998.
Boys and girls are an unwelcome distraction to each other
POINT

Boys and girls distract each other from their education, especially in adolescence
as their sexual and emotional sides develop. Too much time can be spent
attempting to impress or even sexually harassing each other (particularly boys
toward girls). Academic competition between the sexes is unhealthy and only
adds to unhappiness and anxiety among weaker students. As Tricia Kelleher, a
school principal, argues, rather than girls defining themselves by their interests,
they define themselves by what the boys think of them or what other girls think
boys think of them.[1] Furthermore, John Silber, President of Boston University,
declared in 2002 that his university would prioritize male applications in order to
even up the student composition and ensure the male population did not become
ungentlemanly towards women due to their numerical inferiority. A single-sex
environment is therefore a space where (children) can learn without feeling
pressurized by the other sex.[2]
[1] Kelleher, Tricia et al., Should boys and girls be taught
together, perspicacious.
[2] Kelleher, Tricia et al., Should boys and girls be taught
together, perspicacious.
COUNTERPOINT
In fact boys and girls are a good influence on each other, engendering good
behaviour and maturity particularly as teenage girls usually exhibit greater
responsibility than boys of the same age. Academic competition between the
sexes is a spur to better performance at school. Any negative effects of coeducational schools have been explained away by studies as the result of other
factors, such as classroom size, economic discrepancies and cultural
differences.[1] Furthermore, the separation of boys and girls only serves to
embrace sexual objectification, for they exist for each other only as dates rather
than the classmates they would be in a co-educational environment[2]. Allowing
them into the same educational environment, in part to permit them to distract
each other, is a welcome social development as well as a beneficial learning
curve.
[1] Bronski, M., Single-sex Schools. Znet, 25 October 2002.
[2] Kaimer, W. The Trouble with Single-sex Schools. The Atlantic, April 1998.

Boys and girls develop at different times and speeds, therefore they
should be taught separately
POINT
Co-educational schools attempt to establish uniformity in the teaching of two
groups, boys and girls, who typically learn and develop at different speeds and
using different methods. They do not develop in the same way or at the same
time; boys favour visual processing and do not have the hand-motor control that
girls readily achieve in early grades.[1] It is widely accepted that boys develop
more slowly than girls..thats true at every level of analysis.[2] Furthermore, they
develop physically at different speeds, girls often developing earlier which can
lead to bullying from the opposite sex for those who either over-develop or underdevelop. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that, at least in the United
States, elementary school boys are 50% more likely to repeat a grade than girls
and they drop out of high school a third more often.[3] If they were taught
separately and the curriculum and teaching was tailored to their needs, drop-out
rates would not be so high nor as vastly disproportionate.

[1] Gilbert, M. Single-sex schools help children thrive. The Christian Science
Monitor 20 September 2007.
[2] Bronski, M., Single-sex Schools. Znet, 25 October 2002.
[3] Gilbert, M. Single-sex schools help children thrive. The Christian Science
Monitor 20 September 2007.
COUNTERPOINT
Everyone develops at slightly different speeds, however few would advocate
everyone should be home-schooled. Ultimately, the curriculum determines the
mode of teaching, not the gender composition of the class, and the curriculum
can be moulded to suit both girls and boys, faster and slower learners and those
with under-developed hand-motor control. If elementary school boys are being
forced to repeat grades that is a manifestation of difficulties in learning and as
relevant to their proximity to girls in the classroom as it is to the higher-achieving
boys. Furthermore, the sociologist Cynthia Epstein argues that in fact there is no
consensus among psychologists as to the existence of psychological or cognitive
differences between the sexes.[1] Finally, as Michael Bronski notes, the benefits
of same-sex schools cannot be applied across the educational sphere for the
private schools where the tests take place admit either only high-achieving
pupils or self-select by expelling poorly-performing or misbehaving students.[2]
[1] Kaimer, W. The Trouble with Single-sex Schools. The Atlantic, April 1998.
[2] Bronski, M., Single-sex Schools. Znet, 25 October 2002.

Teachers favour their own gender in co-educational schools

POINT
Teachers frequently favour their own gender when teaching co-educational
classes; for example, male teachers can undermine the progress and confidence
of girl students by refusing to choose them to answer questions etc. A recent
study by the American Association of University Women found that gender bias
is a major problem at all levels of schooling, asserting girls are plagued by
sexual harassment and neglected by sexist teachers, who pay more attention to
boys.[1]As a result, girls tend to fall behind their male counterparts.
[1] Kaimer, W. The Trouble with Single-sex Schools. The Atlantic, April 1998.

COUNTERPOINT
There is little evidence to support this claim. Valerie Lee, a professor at the
University of Michigan, studied a sample of coeducational, all-boys and all-girls
independent schools, finding that the frequency of sexist incidents was similar in
the three types of schools. Wendy Kaimer argues that the restraints of femininity
are actually self-imposed at single-sex schools, whether manifested in feminine
dcor orpandering to womens fear of masculinizing themselves.[1]
[1] Kaimer, W. The Trouble with Single-sex Schools. The Atlantic, April 1998.

(disagree) Children need to be exposed to the opposite sex in

preparation for later life
POINT
The formative years of children are the best time to expose them to the company
of the other gender, in order that they may learn each others behaviour and be
better prepared for adult life. The number of subjects benefiting from single-sex
discussion is so small that this could easily be organised within a co-educational
system. Furthermore, even if girls naturally perform better in an environment
without boys, they need to learn how to perform just as well with boys. Dr. Alan
Smithers, a respected British schools expert, declared in a 2006 report that
distraction by boys was a myth and that half a century of research has not
shown any dramatic or consistent advantages for single-sex education for boys or
girls.[1]
[1] Asthana, A. Single-sex schools no benefit to girls. The Guardian, 25 June
2006.

COUNTERPOINT
Children will gain exposure to the opposite sex when they reach adult life; whilst
they are young, they should be around those who they feel most comfortable
with. The inclinations of children in the formative years, between 7 and 15, are to
gravitate towards their own sex. What is natural should be encouraged, and can
most easily be done so in single-sex institutions. Furthermore, they naturally tend
towards behaviour appropriate to their gender. It is therefore easier to implement
an education strategy geared specifically towards one gender. Moreover, certain
subjects are best taught, both in terms of ease and effectiveness, in single-sex
classrooms, such as sex education or gender issues.

Single-sex schools are manifestations of patriarchal societies

POINT
Single-sex schools are a throwback to the patriarchal society of the past; in many
historical cultures, only men were allowed an education of any sort. To perpetuate
this is to remind women of their past subservience and to continue to hold them
from full social inclusion. In India, where the colonial yoke of British rule remains,
the national average for the difference in male-female literacy is 16.7%, with
some districts as high as 28%.[1] Single-sex schools discourage female education
and make it increasingly difficult for parents to find room for girls in the limited
co-educational schools. A push for single-sex education therefore is predicated
on outdated, moronic, and destructive gender stereotypes.[2]
[1] Times of India, Male-female literacy gap highest in Rajasthan, Times of India,
5 April 2011.
[2] Bronski, M., Single-sex Schools. Znet, 25 October 2002.

COUNTERPOINT
Single-sex schools for women are a natural extension of the feminist movement;
there are co-educational schools, men have had their own schools, why should
women not? It would still be discrimination if there were only male single-sex
schools; as long as both genders are catered for, this discrimination is redressed.
The issue in states like India is not there are too many single-sex schools, but
that there are not enough. This is more to do with cultural preferences for males,
and a population heavily overpopulated with males, than the lingering effects of
British colonial rule.

Single-sex institutions are bad for the emotional health of males

POINT
Men always say that they do not understand women, perhaps because they were
sent to single sex schools. Research has proved that boys who went to single sex
schools as opposed to mixed schools are more likely to get divorced and suffer
from depression in their 40. This is proof that we should school our children in
mixed schools in order to give them the best bill of emotional health. Dr. Diana
Leonard, who presented the findings, concluded that Boys learn better when
they are with girls and they actually learn to get on better.[1]
[1] Garner, R. Why single-sex schools are bad for your health. The Independent,
1 December 2009.

COUNTERPOINT
The positive health effects of single-sex schools pointed out in the same Dr.
Leonard study outweigh the emotional distress potentially felt by a minority of
divorced men. Regarding the majority, the research found those who stayed
together were just as likely to be happy in their relationship as men educated in
mixed schools. As for girls, the findings suggest they seem to learn what the
nature of the beast is without needing to learn alongside boys, whilst a central

finding of the study is that single-sex moderates the effect of genderstereotyping in terms of choice of field of study.[1]
[1] Garner, R. Why single-sex schools are bad for your health. The Independent,
1 December 2009.

Making the case for single-sex education

Those who advocate for single-sex education in public schools argue that:

Some parents don't want their children to be in mixed-gender classrooms

because, especially at certain ages, students of the opposite sex can be a distraction.
Leonard Sax and others agree that merely placing boys in separate classrooms
from girls accomplishes little. But single-sex education enhances student success
when teachers use techniques geared toward the gender of their students.
Some research indicates that girls learn better when classroom temperature is
warm, while boys perform better in cooler classrooms. If that's true, then the
temperature in a single-sex classroom could be set to optimize the learning of either
male or female students.
Some research and reports from educators suggest that single-sex education
can broaden the educational prospects for both girls and boys. Advocates claim co-ed
schools tend to reinforce gender stereotypes, while single-sex schools can break
down gender stereotypes. For example, girls are free of the pressure to compete with
boys in male-dominated subjects such as math and science. Boys, on the other hand,
can more easily pursue traditionally "feminine" interests such as music and poetry.

One mother, whose daughter has attended a girls-only school for three years, shares
her experience on the GreatSchools parent community: "I feel that the single gender
environment has given her a level of confidence and informed interest in math and
science that she may not have had otherwise."
Federal law supports the option of single-sex education. In 2006, Education
Secretary Margaret Spellings eased federal regulations, allowing schools to offer
single-sex classrooms and schools, as long as such options are completely voluntary.
This move gives parents and school districts greater flexibility.

What critics say about single-sex education

Those who claim single-sex education is ineffective and/or undesirable make the following claims:

Few educators are formally trained to use gender-specific teaching techniques.

However, it's no secret that experienced teachers usually understand gender
differences and are adept at accommodating a variety of learning styles within their
mixed-gender classrooms.
Gender differences in learning aren't the same across the board; they vary
along a continuum of what is considered normal. For a sensitive boy or an assertive
girl, the teaching style promoted by advocates of single-sex education could be
ineffective (at best) or detrimental (at worst). For example, a sensitive boy might be
intimidated by a teacher who "gets in his face" and speaks loudly believing "that's
what boys want and need to learn."
Students in single-sex classrooms will one day live and work side-by-side with
members of the opposite sex. Educating students in single-sex schools limits their
opportunity to work cooperatively and co-exist successfully with members of the
opposite sex.
At least one study found that the higher the percentage of girls in a co-ed
classroom, the better the academic performance for all students (both male and
female). Professor Analia Schlosser, an economist from the Eitan Berglas School of
Economics at Tel Aviv, found that elementary school, co-ed classrooms with a
majority of female students showed increased academic performance for both boys
and girls. In high school, the classrooms with the best academic achievement were
consistently those that had a higher percentage of girls. Dr. Schlosser theorizes that a
higher percentage of girls lowers the amount of classroom disruption and fosters a
better relationship between all students and the teacher.
The American Council on Education reports that there is less academic
disparity between male and female students overall and a far greater achievement
gap between students in different racial, ethnic and socioeconomic groups, with poor
and minority students children faring poorly. Bridging that academic chasm, they
argue, deserves more attention than does the gender divide.
Single-sex education is illegal and discriminatory, or so states the American
Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) . In May 2008, the ACLU filed suit in federal court, arguing
that Breckinridge County Middle School's (Kentucky) practice of offering single-sex
classrooms in their public school is illegal and discriminatory. The school doesn't
require any child to attend a single-sex class, yet the suit argues that the practice
violates several state and federal laws, including Title IX and the equal Educational
Opportunities Act.