Detention in School Actually Serves a Higher Purpose

I am arguing that detention in school does not serve any form of higher purpose in an educational setting. Since I will be Con (It doesn't serve a higher purpose) I will allow my opponent to make the first argument and include definitions. Thank You in advance to the opponent who accepts my topic.

I welcome my opponent to Debate.org and thank her for presenting this topic for discussion. I will take the Pro position, but some portion of the burden falls on the instigator; she can present a purely negative case if she wishes.

Clarifications: The instigator did not posit the position or resolution addressing the effectiveness of any type of school punishment, as such, effectiveness of different types of punishment are outside the scope of this debate. All punishments addressed will focus on an "educational setting", not effectiveness for any other goal.

Terms:
Detention: My opponent offered detention in respect to education so we need not concern ourselves with incarceration or detention is respect to violating criminal laws. Con appears to present detention as in school detention i.e. staying after school or coming in on Saturday as a form of punishment for some non legal infraction of school rules.
http://dictionary.reference.com... (see World English Dictionary definition 3)
I singled out aspects of the definition to serve the instigator's mention of an educational setting.

Higher purpose: My opponent did not define this phrase for the debate, but detention is a punishment so we can guess that "higher purpose" means something more than just punishment. I must show that after school detention serves some purpose other than "just" punishment and that this purpose is "higher" than punishment. I will do so. I see no need to use "higher purpose" in respect to a deity.

PRO: After hours detention serves the higher purpose of continuing education in a controlled environment as opposed to other forms of punishment that add nothing to academic progress.

Forms of Punishment:
Corporal Punishment: Typically corporal punishment is administered in the form of paddling, push ups, running laps, etc. Physical exertion or pain is the motivating factor used to discourage a student from repeating behavior. The effectiveness, or lack thereof, is not the topic of this debate but I challenge Con to produce one personal academic benefit to beating a child. No one learned chemistry by being on the receiving end a weapon.
http://dictionary.reference.com...

Removal: Disruptive behavior can be remedied by removing a student from others and having this student sit in an isolated location so as to alienate the child and prevent her from bothering others. The child receives no guidance and is meant to be an example for others. Removing a child from the chemistry teacher and her materials does nothing to further her education.

Ridicule: Placing a student in front of the class with a hat that says "creationist" or "dunce" may serve to embarrass the student, but does nothing to further the goal of academic progress. The student may also be forced to "put her nose in a corner" and this method of punishment only makes the child a spectacle. Wearing hats and placing our faces against a brick wall does not help us learn the eight parts of speech.

DETENTION:
This form of punishment forces the student to attend school after hours and the detention area is monitored by a teacher or principal and the student is not permitted to sit idle. The student must, unless matters have changed significantly, bring study materials and is not allowed to speak or interact with others while in this detention period. Unlike other punishments, this method forces the student to do some form of homework or complete the work she should have been doing earlier in the week that was put off due to misbehavior. In respect to furthering academics, no other punishment serves the purpose of actual school work than detention.

Conclusion:
Because detention, unlike other punishments, forces the student into a learning environment focused on some type of work associated with secondary education (writing lines, studying, typing, writing a report about why she is in detention, etc.) then the punishment satisfies the purpose of academic learning and is; therefore, serving a higher purpose than just mere punishment. Because this higher purpose, continuing education, is served, the resolution is upheld.

Very Truly Yours,
SherlockMethod

I accept your definition of Detention and "Higher Purpose" and I apologize for not clarifying "Higher Purpose" in the Resolution.

I agree with you descriptions for all the punishments, but who is not to say " Placing a student in front of the class with a hat that says "creationist" or "dunce" Wouldn't have an effect?

Yes, detention does serve the purpose of getting some form of educational work complete, but does it really convince the student not to misbehave? At what point did you define higher purpose to be completing something educational. All you said was that it had to do something more than just a punishment. (I must show that after school detention serves some purpose other than "just" punishment and that this purpose is "higher" than punishment)

Public Humiliation is the best form of punishment.
http://www.kstatecollegian.com...
Thus, if Detention does not convince the student to quit misbehaving, is it ultimately fulfilling a higher purpose?

---Debatek3

I thank my opponent for a swift reply. After reading Con's second round response, I found no convincing evidence allowing me to abandon the Pro position. The resolution, at this point, has been upheld.

Point 1:
"I accept your definition of Detention and ‘Higher Purpose'"

Response: Excellent! I hate semantics.

Point 2:
"[W]ho is not to say ‘Placing a student in front of the class with a hat that says ‘creationist' or ‘dunce' Wouldn't have an effect?"

Response: I never stated that such actions would have no effect. On the contrary, I'm sure some effect would occur but I simply do not care about that effect. I made clear the effectiveness of the various types of punishment is irrelevant to your proposed debate topic. I listed the different types of punishment to show how each fails to achieve the higher purpose of furthering education in and of itself; detention, on the other hand, does further education and you agreed that a student in detention must study in some capacity. Even if you show that public ridicule serves the higher purpose of furthering education, such a position does nothing to show that detention is incapable of such a position and this, detention, is the debate topic.

Point 3:
"Yes, detention does serve the purpose of getting some form of educational work complete, but does it really convince the student not to misbehave?"

Response: I don't care if such a punishment convinces the student to not misbehave. I am only concerned with whether it serves the higher purpose of continuing education, and you agree it does. This is the debate topic and you just upheld the resolution as the Con position.

Point 4:
"At what point did you define higher purpose to be completing something educational. (sic)"

Response: I made clear that furthering education was the higher purpose. Doing something educational is more than just mere punishment. Detention is a punishment, unlike the others listed, that requires, by definition, study time in a controlled environment. The studying or writing, etc (I went over this in my first round) is a task that the schools are assigned regardless of punishment. The fact that detention, by definition, is more than just punishment and requires study time is the higher purpose. With all due respect, you accepted this definition.

Point 5:
"Public Humiliation is the best form of punishment."
Response: I don't care as the best form of punishment is not the topic. I do not agree with the opinion piece, but I have no need to address it as it is off topic.

Point 6:
"Thus, if Detention does not convince the student to quit misbehaving, is it ultimately fulfilling a higher purpose?"

Response: Yes, maybe not the purpose you wish it to serve, but forcing a controlled study environment after school hours to make up for the loss of this time in class due to misbehavior serves the higher purpose of continuing education, and you agree already that detention does this very thing.

Conclusion:
I have rebutted all points relevant to this debate topic. At this point, the resolution is upheld.

First, I would like to apologize for taking so long to reply

Second;
"I listed the different types of punishment to show how each fails to achieve the higher purpose of furthering education in and of itself; detention, on the other hand, does further education and you agreed that a student in detention must study in some capacity"

Yet I ask, how des this further their education? In detention, you are simply completing work, you are not being instructed or taught by a teacher. Therefore, I still stand to believe the Humiliation serves as the best solution to fulfill a higher purpose, because with humiliation, you will most likely stay in the same classroom, with a teacher explaining things.

Third;
"I don't care if such a punishment convinces the student to not misbehave. I am only concerned with whether it serves the higher purpose of continuing education, and you agree it does. This is the debate topic and you just upheld the resolution as the Con position"

If it convinces them not to misbehave, then they will carry on with good behavior and not have to be sent to detention, which, does the opposite of fulfill a higher purpose.

Fourth;
"The fact that detention, by definition, is more than just punishment and requires study time is the higher purpose. With all due respect, you accepted this definition"

I realize this now, and would like to apologize for challenging the definition I allowed for you to make.

---debatek3

Point 1: "Yet I ask, how des this further their education? In detention, you are simply completing work, you are not being instructed or taught by a teacher. Therefore, I still stand to believe the Humiliation serves as the best solution to fulfill a higher purpose, because with humiliation, you will most likely stay in the same classroom, with a teacher explaining things."

Response: Simply completing work is educational. The punishment is the work and the higher purpose of furthering education is satisfied by completing assignments. A student who does not finish the whole assignment can not be said to be receiving more academic education that another who does all the assigned problems. Even if the student is without a specific teacher, an educator is present.

I will fully concede just for the purposes of this debate that humiliation is more effective or even the best solution, but this stipulation does nothing to satisfy the con position which states that detention serves no higher purpose. Effectiveness is not the issue here.

Point 2:
"If it convinces them not to misbehave, then they will carry on with good behavior and not have to be sent to detention, which, does the opposite of fulfill a higher purpose."

Response: The forms of punishment I listed are all designed to discourage future misbehavior. In looking for a higher purpose, I went past mere punishment and found detention does more than just punish or attempt to prevent future bad acts, it actually serves as a punishment allowing for educational materials to be an inherent part of the punishment. No other punishment provides this academic requirement. Even if a student avoids future misbehavior as a secondary cause of embarrassment, this has nothing to do with the higher purpose of continuing education in relation to detention.

First;
"Simply completing work is educational"

I argue that it is not educational because there is no teacher instructing you on what to do. Yes, doing wok des serve higher purpose, but if you don't have an instructor and don't know what you're doing, its a set back.

Second;
"...does nothing to satisfy the con position which states that detention serves no higher purpose. Effectiveness is not the issue here."

Would effectiveness and serving the higher purpose not be contributing the same?

I thank my opponent for this debate and will briefly address her final round and conclude.

My opponent feels that completing work is not educational because a teacher is not instructing the student during the process; this notion is false. I complete self study all the time. I am capable of purchasing a text book, reading the book, and completing the book assignments and this process has been educational for me.

My opponent asks, "Would effectiveness and serving the higher purpose not be contributing the same?"

Maybe, but so what? Effectiveness was not the topic so, as I stated in the first round, it is not at issue here.

Conclusion:
I upheld the resolution presented by the instigator and Con's negative case does nothing to warrant a negation. I showed that detention serves the higher purpose of continuing education by forcing a student to study in a supervised environment. This aspect of continuing education differentiates detention from other forms of punishment and satisfies the agreed upon definition of "higher purpose". This resolution has been upheld.

Very Truly Yours,
Sherlockmethod.