Skip header content and main navigation Binghamton University, State University of New York - Patrick
Banner Brandon Evans Brittney Bleyle Trevor Reddick Phillip George Sonya Robinson Maneo Choudhury Daniel Friedman Joe Leeson-Schatz Anna Pinchuk Masakazu Kurihara Joshua Frumkin

Binghamton Speech & Debate

Proposition: Anna Vattana (Binghamton University) vs. Opposition: ben xu (Binghamton University)

Judge: Brandon Evans (Binghamton University)

Resolution: RESOLVED: Sugary drinks should not be sold in primary and secondary schools.

  • Anna Vattana
    Anna Vattana
    vs.



    ben xu
    ben xu
    Click to begin

    Speech Details

    Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.

    Posted at February 19, 2014 08:50:24PM EST by Anna Vattana

    Citations

    Show

    Works Cited

    U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Crawford, Lester M. "Safety of Federal School Lunches." U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 30 Apr. 2002. Web. 19 Feb. 2014. <http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Testimony/ucm115173.htm>.

    Hawkes, Corinna, PhD. "The Worldwide Battle Against Soft Drinks in Schools." Yale Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity. Yale Rudd Center, n.d. Web. 19 Feb. 2014. <http://ruddcenter.yale.edu/resources/upload/docs/what/policy/SoftDrinksSchools_Hawkes_AJPM_4.10.pdf>.

    World Health Organization, "Obesity and Overweight." WHO. n.d. Web. 17 Feb. 2014. <http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs311/en/>.

    American Heart Association. "Policy Approaches to Address Obesity." American Heart Association/American Stroke Association, n.d. Web. 19 Feb. 2014. <http://www.heart.org/idc/groups/heart-public/@wcm/@adv/documents/downloadable/ucm_453908.pdf>.

    North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services. "Soft Drinks and School Age Children: Trend Effects Solution." N.C. DHHS, n.d. Web. 19 Feb. 2014. <http://www.ncdhhs.gov/dph/oralhealth/library/includes/ed-materials/Soft_Drinks_and_School_Age_Children.pdf>.



    Posted at February 20, 2014 11:28:55PM EST by ben xu

    Citations

    Show

    SEALEY, GERALDINE. "No Sweat When Gym Class Cut." abc news. (2003): n. page. Web. 20 Feb. 2014. <http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=116688>.

    Hutton, Lindsay. "What's in that Mystery Meat? School Lunch Standards Fall Short Read more on FamilyEducation: http://life.familyeducation.com/lunch/school/64977.html

    Collins, Karen . "The Soft Drink explosion Among Kids." nbc news. (2004): n. page. Web. 20 Feb. 2014. <http://www.nbcnews.com/id/6142711/ns/health-diet_and_nutrition/t/soft-drink-explosion-among-kids/

    Park , Alice. "Banning Sugared Drinks in Schools Doesnt Lower Student Consumption Read more: Banning Sugared Drinks in Schools Doesn't Lower Student Consumption | TIME.com http://healthland.time.com/2011/11/08/banning-sugared-drinks-in-schools-doesnt-lower-student-consumption/

    Posted at February 21, 2014 09:14:13PM EST by Anna Vattana

    Citations

    Show

    "Secondary School." An Encyclopedia Britannica Company. Merriam-Webster Incorporated, n.d. Web. 21 Feb. 2014. <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/secondary%2Bschool?show=0&t=1393029374>.

    Hawkes, Corinna, PhD. "The Worldwide Battle Against Soft Drinks in Schools." Yale Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity. Yale Rudd Center, n.d. Web. 19 Feb. 2014. <http://ruddcenter.yale.edu/resources/upload/docs/what/policy/SoftDrinksSchools_Hawkes_AJPM_4.10.pdf>.

    World Health Organization, "Obesity and Overweight." WHO. n.d. Web. 17 Feb. 2014. <http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs311/en/>.

    American Heart Association. "Policy Approaches to Address Obesity." American Heart Association/American Stroke Association, n.d. Web. 19 Feb. 2014. <http://www.heart.org/idc/groups/heart-public/@wcm/@adv/documents/downloadable/ucm_453908.pdf>.

    Posted at February 22, 2014 08:21:35PM EST by ben xu

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at February 23, 2014 12:49:51PM EST by Anna Vattana

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Status

    This match has been completed. Show the Decision.

    Submitted at February 26, 2014 07:48:35AM EST by Brandon Evans

    Category Anna Vattana ben xu
    Use of evidence: 3.8 3.3
    Delivery skill: 4.1 3.6
    Coherence of arguments: 3.8 3.8
    Responsiveness to opponent: 3.2 2.8
    Identification of key points: 4 4
    Comments: I am skeptical about the resolutional basis for your proposal. Regulation of sugary drinks is not a ban, which the resolution necessitates. In your last speech, you even claim that the resolution is different than it clearly is stated as on the top of this page.

    Good explanation of how that even if parents should get involved, that doesn't mean the plan isn't still a good idea.

    You should better answer his alternative causality arguments; if school lunches are the main problem, then there's no real benefit to your plan. Just because he's talking about things outside of the resolution doesn't mean they don't have a bearing to your plan. If he had a reason why your plan did something bad, then I would likely vote for him because he has given multiple reasons why your plan does not solve obesity or necessarily even make it better.

    You shouldn't say derogatory things about your opponent's skill and preparation as a debater; that's just mean and doesn't make me want to vote for you. Attack the argument, not the person.
    You make a lot of great arguments, but many of them are defensive, meaning that instead of proving that the proposition is doing something bad, you are merely saying that what she is proposing would be "not good". This becomes a problem because without any reasons why her plan is bad, if there's any risk that she overcomes your reasons why she would fail, I vote for her. You need offense to win debate rounds. Give me reasons why her plan is bad. An easy go to would be to make all of the arguments you are already making, and then argue that her plan wastes taxpayers' money, and then explain why that would be bad.

    You need to clash with her specific proposal. It seems like you have just attempted to answer the resolution, which is a problem because she has a specific plan that doesn't fall into the normal traps of the resolution (I would argue that she is not topical).

    Colleges are not secondary schools by definition.

    The decision is for the Proposition: Anna Vattana

    Reason for Decision:

    I vote purely because the opposition has failed to provide a reason as to why the plan proposed is bad, but merely has stated why it is not good. I don't think the proposition does a particularly good job answering these defensive arguments, but there's still a chance that her plan is good, so as a legislator, I would not be risking anything by adopting her plan.

    If the opposition at any point questioned the proposition's topicality, I would have been very persuaded. I do not think this proposition is within the resolution whatsoever. But, I'm not the one debating, so I can't make that argument for the opposition.


    Add Comment

    Please Create an Account or Log-In to post comments.

    Connect with Binghamton:
    Twitter icon links to Binghamton University's Twitter page YouTube icon links to Binghamton University's YouTube page Facebook icon links to Binghamton University's Facebook page Pinterest icon links to Binghamton University's Pinterest page

    Binghamton University Online Debate Platform powered by:

    PHP MySQL SUIT