Candy should be used as a reward for students

I'll begin with rebutting my opponent ====== I. Bribes ====== a. That's good to know. I can't see how it matters. --- b. "They are not being intrinsically motivated to read books" Nobody but you can make you intrinsically motivated. Nothing, including candy, adds or detracts from 'intrinsic motivation.' The problem is with students who need extrinsic motivation and aren't getting it. "Another teacher complaint with AR is that the reading quizzes that students take to receive points are many times mainly lower level comprehension questions." What does that have to do with candy as motivation? ============ II. Mixed Message ============ a. "By rewarding students with candy we are giving them the mixed message that whenever they get a question right they will get a reward." How is this a mixed message? --- b. "This isn't the way it works in college, and because of the lack of candy reward they might not like learning in college." So we should do this in college, too. --- c. "Shouldn't learning be it's own reward? i.If a student answers a question right, he has a sense of pride, candy or not." Ok? "ii.When you answer a question right, that's its own reward." To some people it is. How does this matter? ============== III. Promotes Obesity ============== "a.In every class lets say you earn one piece of candy i.And you have 6 classes without PE so that would make 6 pieces of candy per day." Why do we need to earn candy in every class, every day? If it becomes commonplace, it's no longer a reward; it's simply an expectation of the students that they will receive candy. The candy should only be doled out when a student earns it. "ii.With 6 pieces of candy, each on average being 28 calories. This adds up to 200 calories! (the Rollo website)" Why don't we give out healthy candy, then? Pages upon pages of sugar-free candy: http://www.candywarehouse.com... Forbes article on new healthy candies: http://www.forbes.com... Even if we don't, candy in moderation can still be a healthy thing: http://www.forbes.com... "iii.200 calories added to the number eaten for meals each day is not exactly helping when it comes to preventing obesity." It's not exactly hurting either. Considering the amount of sugar the average child eats, even if it were 200 calories, that's not exactly a large impact on their health. ============ A Case for Candy ============ I'll continue with my opponent's Roman Numeric system. Contention I. Positive Reinforcement When children to good they are rewarded; when they do bad they are punished. There's a reason for it. It teaches kids to associate doing 'good' things (reading, homework, good grades, etc.) with rewards. This reinforces the idea that kids should do these things, which leads to greater education. Here, Brenda L. Gargus explains why positive reinforcement works: http://life.familyeducation.com... Contention II. Moderation Even outside of conventional education, much of childhood knowledge comes from school interactions. [1] This includes eating habits. Students are given the candy in small servings (1-2 pieces.) This teaches them moderation in eating. Exposing students to this on a daily basis throughout their high school career hammers this message home: An appropriate serving of candy is 1-2 pieces. This is a far better way for students to learn eating habits than watching their friends gorge on candy on halloween. [1] http://www.eric.ed.gov...