Nap time for Elementary age children should be done away with.

(Yeah. Not the best idea, time wise. Thankfully, the debate fell on the weekend though. Great timing.) 1. Kids are to hyper to relax. While the Con's argument asserts that the relaxation effect is only applicable to laying down and closing ones eyes, I, as the pro, will argue this point again with any possibility that can occur, number one being this. Con admits that children are hyper and playful. However, he also concedes to me during R2 that he "does believe thay a majority of the kids do not nap during nap time. Since he has admitted this, let's use an example. Say that, during nap time, 20% of the children are asleep, that leave the other 80% awake. Now, if these children are, as Con states, hyper and playful, what are the chances that these children will actually lie down and close their eyes? There is no indication, or evidence given to support the possibility that children may lay down and relax. Second scenario, children are, by very nature, curious to the world around them. As such, they are constantly aware of their surroundings and always taking in and processing information whenever possible. As such, say a child stays in a designated nap spot, what is the likely hood that they will actually close their eyes, or fall asleep? As hyper as the Con claims the children to be, what will make them suddenly shut off their brain? What's to stop them from staring at the ceiling, or shifting around and looking at posters on the walls, or outside, if windows are nearby? 2. Children and wasting time napping. According to Con, "based on bonuses of sleeping and rest, kids can gain benefits that they use later in life." I agree that rest is beneficial to children, and that proper sleep can boost cognitive functionally,, con does not go into detail about what benefits sleeping will give that are actively used later in life. The reason I say this is because it begs the question, "What benefits do children learn?" Do they learn techniques for how to fall asleep better? And if they do gain benefits, I would like con to point out which benefits are gained from Elementary school nap time specifically, as most of the benefits derived from sleep can be gained by just natural, nighttime sleep. 3. children and falling asleep in middle school I'm glad that the Con brought this up, because this is a point I wanted to touch upon as well. So here goes. I completely deny Cons argument outright that a lack of nap time in class can bring sleeping in class in later grades. The reason behind this is due in part to the fact that the VERY reason con uses for his argument is the fact that abolishing nap time will, in turn, cause napping in middle school due to a change in the schedule. However, let's talk hypothetically for a moment and say that nap time is done away with. Now elementary students will not have to deal with a schedule flux, because they won't have a nap time in middle school either. Now, according to Con, Teens also need more sleep due to their rapidly changing bodies. Being a teen myself, this is true. However, if we follow Con's logic that Elementary school children need naps because of their fluctuating energy, we can also assume that, with Con's logic, it would also be okay to institute nap times for teenagers, since they also have an influx in energy. And it's common fact that a large majority of teenagers do NOT get the proper amount of sleep at night, so we can attribute Con's defense for nap time as a possibility that it would also be okay to add nap time for High School aged children. Rebuttals to Defense against refutations: First, I would like to point out that I only had one teacher in elementary school, but I will do my best to think as Con does on this situation. Second off, I will refer to back to a point a had pervious made for this round in which I hypothetically created a scenario in which the students could not, and did not rest, if we were to aply this situation to this particular argument, my response would be that this in and of itself would prevent a teacher from completing his or her work, and as such, would cause a general disruption. To this extent, I make the point that if nap time were to be done away with, the teacher would not have to worry about sitting down and working with the possibility of it being interrupted by children not sleeping. I say this because, without nap time, a teacher would know his students are awake and instead of using that time worrying, he or she could use that time to teach. And as I've stated before, in a state that Con has not argued, Lunch time exists for the sole purpose of eating, re-energizing, and getting a break, therefore, the teacher can get a break during lunch, when he or she is supposed to be "on break". On to the second defense. Con raises a very good question. "Who knows what might happen?" And I agree, nobody knows. However, this debate is meant to answer that question, or at the very least, begin to do so. Again, Con brings up the point that everybody needs a break. This is true. But again, this is why LUNCH exists. It's THERE for the purpose of getting a break. And on the point of workers vs children, I will say that, this is not a good comparison. Workers are told when they get a job that they can accumulate paid vacation days, in fact, it's common knowledge for those with jobs, such as myself, that vacation days are avalible, however, they must be earned. Children have nap time just because they can get it, they do not have to earn it. In conclusion, It is my stance as the Pro that nap time for elementary schools should be abolished. Over the course of this debate, I have supplied evidence and reasoning as to why this should be the case. I end by asking the judges to vote Pro. Thank you. And thank you to my opponent for my first full debate. It was absolutely fantastic and I had a ton of fun. Thanks.