Schools ought to replace textbooks with a digital medium.

I will answer each point breifly, then continue to refute the points my opponent has brought upon me. FIRST: This is fine, let us assume schools have certain obligations. SECOND: I agree with my opponent once more; he must now prove that DVDs, PDFs etc. have unique benefits that outweigh textbooks. However, my opponent DOES NOT assert the problem that arises when the students simply cannot afford a laptop. In the status quo, a laptop is viewed as a luxury item for teens, most parent would be upset if it suddenly became a requirement for them to fetch out $400-2000 on a school laptop. http://www.geeks.com... <--- Cheap laptops; but not necc. the most reliable. http://www.blaptops.com... <--- the average laptop is $1000 THIRD: Replace doesn't matter. FOURTH: This is where we continue to disagree. My argument is simple. CDs and laptops eventually run out of battery and die. They are more prone to scratches and other defects that do not/can not occur in a textbook. Sure, a textbook may have ripped pages, or may be defaced; this only means that "schools ought to issue legible textbooks", not replace them with cost-ineffective, unreliable digital mediums. I'd like to offer a FIFTH point: Distractions. Laptops are extremely dangerous. When I open my laptop for studies, I generally fall straight onto facebook, myspace or other social networking sites. We know that teens are addicted to these sites however when we give them a laptop with internet access, they are susceptible to viewing these sites and not doing homework. My opponent may respond by saying the internet CAN be blocked or etc. but this is outside the scope of the topic. He cannot fiat that in EVERY instance, or even MOST instances this will occur. So we must take this into account as a disadvantage. http://www.time.com... ___________ My opponent's points: FIRST: Certainly I cannot deny the ease of use when compared to a textbook, however this does not outweigh how unjust it would be for a low-wage student to be forced to purchase a laptop, or be responsible for a rented laptop that his family cannot afford. The "ease of use" argument is further outweighed by the fact that distractions are inevitable. Just as "easy" as it is the copy and paste a sentence; the student can log onto his Myspace account and not even get to his actual assignment. We have had textbooks since schools were first created, it is certainly not that much of a hassle to continue its usage. The costs outweigh this benefit. SECOND: Here my opponent asssumes a few things: 1) The student will not harm a laptop 2) The student would not misplace it. 3) If you give a person something nice they will attempt to take care of it. He precedes each of these statements with remarks like, "it is obvious that..." "its common sense that..." etc. However, these statement are intentionally misconceiving. Allow me to show you how these statements are invalid: FIRST: "The student will not harm a laptop" My opponent does this as a comparaison. However, it is highly unlikely that a students would regard their laptop like its gold. Laptops break all the time, this is an undeniable fact (check the link) ALL laptops break eventually, and we cannot assume that a teenager has the ability to keep them in perfect condition for a year. http://consumerist.com... My opponent continues by saying after 5 years a textbook is ruined. Sure. Let us assume that this is true, we can purchase another textbook for $50, however laptops only last three to five years according to cnet.com Senior editor Matt Elliot. And I ensure you it will cost more than $50 to replace that laptop. http://reviews.cnet.com... SECOND: "The student won't misplace it." Essentially, insofar as the first point has been taken out respectively; this point doesn't matter. But, to entertain the point: We have ALL lost something valuable unintentionally. I, personally, have lost a laptop on my shuttle at a local airport. And I have a friend that lost her backpack while camping last weekend. We all lose things, my opponent cannot fiat otherwise. THIRD: "If you give a person something nice they will attempt to take care of it." Have you ever given a teen something? If you have you know that this point is blatantly incorrect. If you haven't allow my these videos to explain: http://www.youtube.com... <--- I know, he's a baby, but still, you get the point. http://www.youtube.com... <--- These are teens. I think this wraps things up. In summary, I have proved that the laptop alternative is distracting, dangerous, economically unfair, and economically undisireable. I have also shown you that my opponent's advocacy is either outweighed, or untrue. For these reasons it would be logical to vote in my favor, CON. Thank you for your time and consideration, Protagoras (is back)