# data[].attributes.body
Rebuttal: Contrary to what the other team believes, my team and I strongly believe that Volunteerism should not be a compulsory component of secondary school education and we will stand by this.

Point: We strongly believe that volunteerism should not be a compulsory component of secondary school education because we deem that compulsory volunteerism removes genuine choice and reduces intrinsic motivation.

Evidence: Research on Singapore youths found that Mandatory school based volunteerism is often perceived as forced while meaningful experiences only happen when students have choice and autonomy.

Elaboration: To further elaborate on this, i would like to say that proper volunteerism comes from the Heart. When it is forced, it defeats the purpose of the idea of volunteerism. Back to what i said about students being able to have choice and autonomy, i strongly believe that volunteerism should orbit around this. It should not be a compulsory component of school because it brings no value to the table. I believe there is nothing that volunteering can achieve that a classroom context can’t.

Link: In a nutshell, i believe my that volunteerism should not be compulsory component of secondary school because it brings no value because its forced

# data[].attributes.body
Definition:

Stand:

Point:

Elaboration:

Evidence:

Link:

# data[].attributes.body
Rebuttal:

Point:

Elaboration:

Evidence:

Link:

# data[].attributes.body
Good morning everyone my team and I strongly believes that volunteerism should be a compulsory component of secondary school education.

First, making volunteerism compulsory helps students develop essential life skills. Through volunteering, students learn responsibility, teamwork, communication, and empathy—skills that cannot be fully taught in a classroom. These experiences prepare students nowever, structured and meaningful programs can make the experience enjoyable and rewarding. Over time, students naturally develop connections and a sense of belonging.

In conclusion, compulsory volunteerism is not just about helping the community—it is about bringing students together, breaking down social barriers, and creating a more united, shaping them into capable, caring individuals while strengthening society as a whole.

Next my second speaker is talking about how volunteerism makes students more caring and understanding as they learn different perspectives from helping different people

My 3rd speaker is talking about how compulsory volunteerism helps students to develop soft skills like communication and teamwork.

# data[].attributes.body
Rebuttal:

Point:

Evidence:

Elaboration:

Link:

# data[].attributes.body
Rebuttal(s):

Point:

Evidence:

Elaboration:

Link:

# data[].attributes.body
Rebuttal(s):

Point:

Evidence:

Elaboration:

Link:

# data[].attributes.body
Rebuttal(s):

Point:

Evidence:

Elaboration:

Link:

# data[].attributes.body
Definition of Key Terms:

Point:

Evidence:

Elaboration:

Link:

# data[].attributes.body
Rebuttal(s):

Point:

Evidence:

Elaboration:

Link:

# data[].attributes.body
Rebuttal(s):

Point:

Evidence:

Elaboration:

Link:

# data[].attributes.body
Rebuttal(s):

Point:

Evidence:

Elaboration:

Link:

# data[].attributes.body
Rebuttal(s):

Point:

Evidence:

Elaboration:

Link:

# data[].attributes.body
Rebuttal(s):

Point:

Evidence:

Elaboration:

Link:

# data[].attributes.body
Rebuttal(s):

Point:

Evidence:

Elaboration:

Link:

# data[].attributes.body
Rebuttal(s):

Point:

Evidence:

Elaboration:

Link:

# data[].attributes.body
Rebuttal(s):

Point:

Evidence:

Elaboration:

Link:

# data[].attributes.body
1st speaker

P: Influencers are essentially advertisers.
E: They are paid or given benefits to promote products.
E: In traditional advertising, companies are held accountable for false claims. Influencers should follow the same rules.
L: Hence, influencers must be held accountable like any other advertiser.

# data[].attributes.body
Imagine being told you have to care. It doesn’t really feel like care anymore it just feels like another assignment.

When students are forced to volunteer, they’re not doing it because they want to help, but because they have to. And research in Behavioral Psychology shows that when people are pushed like this, they’re actually less likely to keep doing it in the future.

Also, not every student has the same situation. Some have family duties or financial struggles, and organisations like UNICEF highlight how these differences affect what students can realistically take on.

So instead of building kindness, we risk creating stress and resentment.

Volunteerism should come from the heart not from a requirement.

# data[].attributes.body
Point: Students should not be encouraged to do international volunteerism because of the lack of experience in helping more complex problems

Evidence: NUS teacher brought 15 peers to a village in Laos to help build bookshelves, they were disillusioned by the work they had to do. They were inexperienced compared to the locals and felt useless

Elaboration: While the thought of helping with problems from other countries sounds good, it’s in no way actually helping anybody. Students and teachers don’t know what they’re doing, people are losing money for the work that they could’ve done for the villagers and there’s no space for mistakes to be done by people who are inexperienced and young.

Link: therefore, my team believes that students should not be encouraged to do international volunteerism

# data[].attributes.body
Point :International volunteer work develops skills like communication, teamwork, problem-solving, and adaptability. These are skills students cannot fully learn in a classroom.

Evidence : for example students in singapore secondary schools have went to multiple overseas learning journey , some may have went to less fortunate areas etc in vietnam or jakarta .

Elaboration : students were thr to help out and understand real life struggles that they may have not went through . This makes them feel more empathetic and grow to be someone who appreciates what they are given . This can strengthen and encourage students mindset to always never take things for granted.

Link : overall i do feel that students should be allowed to go on overseas learning journeys as it can benefit them by helping the less fortunate and improving their communication skills . This can strengthen and let them come out of their comfort zones while helping out at the same time

# data[].attributes.body
Speaker 2:Volunteerism is beneficial for students as it pushes them to step outside their academic bubble and gain deeper understanding of the struggles face by others building on this , such exposure is important in developing empathy and social awareness . By making volunteerism compulsory we ensure that every single student , rather than just a small number of willing individuals, is giving the opportunity to develop these quality’s

# data[].attributes.body
2nd speaker

P:influencers should be held accountable

E:this is because whatever they do their followers are most likely to imitate them and do what they do

E:influencers actions can spread very fast across social media platforms so if they do anything they can be easily traced such James the butttickler. He was doing questionable things because he thought the camera wasn’t facing him during his stream but when he realised that the camera was facing him he shrugged it off and said that it was no biggie. Other kids started to follow him and this led to multiple young children doing questionable things and not focusing on their studies

L: therefore influencers should be held accountable as their accretions would impact the people around them

# data[].attributes.body
Rebuttal: even if students are forced to volunteer they are still helping other people

Point: Compulsory Volunteerism helps students to develop soft skills like communication and teamwork.

Evidence: For example when students are working in a senior activity centres they have to work together and communicate with one another to lead the activities.

Elaboration: This teaches students communication and teamwork in a way that classrooms can’t replicate.

Link: Therefore, I think there should be compulsory volunteerism.

# data[].attributes.body
Rebuttal: i forgot

Point: Firstly, volunteerism helps students become more caring and understanding.

Evidence: students who volunteer are more likely to stay engaged in community activities, and a recent OECD report found that voluntary work improves youth employability

Statistics show that 51 percent of students in Australia had volunteerism introduced into their school which improved their odds of students having higher earning and improved work satisfaction in adulthood

Elaboration: When students help the elderly, young children, or disadvantaged groups, they learn to see the world from different perspectives.

Link: This develops empathy and kindness, which are important values in society.

# data[].attributes.body
point: Students should be encouraged to engage in international volunteer work because it fosters global awareness and empathy.

evidence: For example, students who participate in overseas volunteering programs often work in underprivileged communities, where they are exposed to issues such as poverty, limited access to education, and inadequate healthcare.students in Singapore from NUS often participate in projects that include building school vegetable gardens and teaching children in rural areas.

explanation : This firsthand experience allows students to better understand the challenges faced by others, breaking down stereotypes and developing compassion. As a result, they become more socially responsible individuals who are motivated to contribute positively to society, both locally and globally.

link: Therefore, encouraging students to take part in international volunteer work not only benefits the less fortunate but also shapes students into more empathetic and globally conscious citizens.

# data[].attributes.body
Point: International volunteer work plays a significant role in developing students’ personal growth and essential life skills that are difficult to acquire through traditional classroom education alone.

Evidence: A report by British Council found that young people who engage in international volunteering show measurable improvement in key competencies such as leadership, communication, teamwork, and adaptability.

Elaboration: When students volunteer abroad, they are placed in unfamiliar and often challenging environments where they must step out of their comfort zones. For instance, they may need to overcome language barriers, adjust to different cultural norms, and collaborate with people from diverse backgrounds. These situations require them to think critically, solve problems independently, and communicate effectively despite differences.

Additionally, students often take on responsibilities such as organizing activities, teaching, or assisting in community projects, which strengthens their leadership and initiative. Living in a different country also builds resilience and flexibility, as students learn to cope with uncertainty and adapt quickly to new situations.

Unlike theoretical learning, these experiences are practical and immersive, making the skills gained more deeply ingrained. Such qualities are highly valued by universities and employers, as they demonstrate maturity, independence, and the ability to function in a globalized world.

Link: Therefore, encouraging students to participate in international volunteer work equips them with transferable skills and personal qualities that contribute to both their academic success and future career readiness.

# data[].attributes.body
Speaker 3:Volunteerism have provide student with invaluable opportunities to develop important soft skills such as teamwork, communication, problem solving skills ,in real world setting somethings that a traditional classroom cannot provide . Such experience not only enchance their personal skills but also repair them better for future challenges beyond schools. By making volunteerism compulsory we ensure

That every student is equal with these practical skill , allowing education to expand beyond academics and TrueType prepared individuals for the real world

# data[].attributes.body
Firsty, speaker 2 from the affirmative side argues that higher taxes on the rich can fund public goods like education and

transport. However,we disagree because this approach unfairly targets one group. Taxing the rich more simply because they are successful risks turning achievement into a disadvantage.This can discourage people from striving to succeed.secondly, Speaker 2 that wealthy individuals have better access to education and opportunities. in our opinion,

oppourtunities are not determined by money alone factors such as effort, determination and personal choices play a major role. Many individuals , are able to achieve success despite financial difficulties.

lastly, speaker 2 raised the issue of income inequalities, While inequalities exists it is important to recognise their differences in income can reflect differences from risk taking, effort and contribution. If individuals are not allowed to enjoy the rewards of their hard-work it creates a system that does not adequately reward success and may reduce overall productivity and ambition in society

# data[].attributes.body
Good morning everyone. My team consisting of Julienne, Hana, Anushka, and myself, Mikki, firmly opposes the motion that the government should tax the rich more heavily. While this idea may seem fair, we believe it is ultimately harmful to economic growth, discourages innovation, and fails to address the root causes of inequality.

First, let me define some important key terms. By “rich people,” we mean individuals who earn significantly more than the average population. “More heavily” refers to increasing tax rates beyond current levels, placing a greater financial burden on this group.

P: One of our main arguments is that taxing the rich more heavily does not solve the root causes of inequality.

E: Inequality is mainly caused by systemic issues such as lack of access to education, unequal opportunities, and gaps in skills and resources.

E: Raising taxes on the wealthy does not directly fix these problems. Even if the government collects more revenue, inequality will still exist unless there is direct investment in education, job opportunities, and social support systems. It shows that taxation only addresses the surface issue rather than the deeper causes.

L: Therefore, since heavier taxation on the rich does not solve the root causes of inequality, this motion cannot stand.

# data[].attributes.body
P: The Responsibilities also lies with the influencer that promotes the product

E:if there are any faults with the product they are at fault as they can choose if they wanted to promote the product or not

E:They could have tested the product before even promoting it to see if it is worth promoting or not which if they didn’t and something goes wrong then it’s their fault for promoting a faulty product.

L:Hence, the influencer should also be held accountable together with the creator of the product as they are at fault too

# data[].attributes.body
Point:
Pets should not be allowed in public places such as restaurants or stores because they can pose hygiene and health risks.

Evidence:
According to health guidelines, animals can carry bacteria, allergens, and parasites that may contaminate food or surfaces. For example, pet fur and dander can trigger allergic reactions in some individuals.

Elaboration:
In places like restaurants where food is prepared and consumed, maintaining cleanliness is essential. The presence of pets increases the risk of contamination, even if the animals appear clean. Not everyone is comfortable around animals, and some may have severe allergies or phobias, making public spaces less inclusive if pets are allowed. Businesses also have a responsibility to ensure a safe environment for all customers, which becomes more difficult when animals are present.

Link:
Therefore, to protect public health and ensure comfort for everyone, pets should not be allowed in public places such as restaurants and stores.

# data[].attributes.body
rebuttal: The 1st speaker of the affirmative side said that if the government taxes the rich more heavily, the tax from the rich can be used to boost CPS for the workers, the disabled or low-income people. It can also solve the gap between the rich and the poor and the lower income families can benefit from the taxes the rich is charged. However, we think that if the government taxes the rich more heavily, it would not only create a bigger gap as the taxes do not solve everything but it is also unfair because this causes people to be treated differently from other based on how much they earn and are not equally under the law.

P: We disagree with what the 1st speaker of the affirmative side said, my take on this statement is that if the government tax the rich more heavily, it encourages tax avoidance

E: These wealthy people have more resources to hire lawyers and accountants to find loopholes or more money to tax havens. When the tax rates increase significantly, the need to avoid paying taxes becomes stronger because they are trying to protect a larger portion of their wealth. In reality, the government mah not collect as much additional revenue as expected. In some cases, they may even collect less money. Furthermore, it creates an unfair situation whee ordinary citizens who cannot avoid taxes as easily end up being a relatively heavy burden for them.

E: For example, many high-income people and corporations shift profits to low-income countries. Studies and real world cases show that the richer someone is, the easier it is for them to move money and avoid taxes compared to middle or low-income groups.

L: Thus, higher taxes on the rich may actually result in less affective tax collection, making these polices counterproductive.

# data[].attributes.body
Volunteerism should not be made compulsory in secondary schools because studies show it reduces genuine motivation and engagement. According to Self-Determination Theory, developed by Edward Deci and Richard Ryan, people are more committed when they act out of choice rather than pressure. When students are forced to volunteer, their intrinsic motivation decreases, and the activity becomes just another obligation.

In fact, studies published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology show that individuals who choose to volunteer are more satisfied and more likely to continue helping in the long term compared to those who are required to do so. This suggests that compulsory programmes may produce short-term participation but fail to build lasting values.

As a result, students may simply complete the minimum required hours without genuine effort, treating volunteer work as a checkbox task. This not only reduces the quality of service but also risks creating negative attitudes toward helping others.

Therefore, instead of making volunteerism compulsory, schools should encourage it voluntarily, so students develop real empathy and a lasting commitment to serving their communities.

# data[].attributes.body
Not everyone feels safe around animals. Some individuals have phobias, while others may have had negative past experiences. Even well-trained pets can act unpredictably in crowded, noisy environments. A sudden bark, jump, or movement can cause panic or even injury.

Public places should be welcoming to everyone—not just pet owners. Allowing pets creates unnecessary discomfort and potential risk for others.

Even if no one is physically harmed, this can cause panic—especially for children.

Consider a child who is afraid of dogs. If a large dog is sitting in a narrow restaurant aisle, that child may feel trapped or unsafe, turning what should be a normal outing into a stressful experience.

Public places operate on mutual respect and responsibility. Unfortunately, not all pet owners act responsibly. Some fail to control their pets, clean up after them, or prevent disruptive behaviour such as barking or wandering.

This leads to disturbances that affect other customers and staff. By setting a clear rule that pets are not allowed, businesses can maintain order and ensure a pleasant experience for all.

# data[].attributes.body
Point-Influencers should not be fully held accountable for the products they endorse because they are not the ones who create or control those products.

Evidence-The responsibility for product safety, testing, and truthful claims lies primarily with the company that produces it. Regulatory bodies like the Federal Trade Commission focus on requiring influencers to disclose paid promotions, rather than holding them liable for product defects.

Explanation - This shows that influencers are treated as promoters, not experts or manufacturers. They often rely on information provided by brands and do not have the means to independently verify every claim. Holding them fully responsible would be unrealistic and unfair, as it expects them to perform roles beyond their expertise. Additionally, consumers still have the ability to make their own decisions and should not rely solely on influencer opinions.

link-Therefore, while influencers should act honestly and transparently, the main responsibility should remain with the companies, making it unreasonable to hold influencers fully accountable

# data[].attributes.body
Point:
Pets should not be allowed in restaurants and stores because of hygiene and health concerns.

Evidence:
Animals naturally shed fur, carry bacteria, and may bring parasites such as fleas or ticks into indoor environments.

Elaboration:
Places that sell or serve food must maintain strict cleanliness standards. Even well-groomed pets can spread allergens and germs onto surfaces, which increases the risk of contamination and illness for customers.

Examples:
Hair or dander falling onto tables, food displays, or shopping baskets can create serious hygiene issues and violate food safety standards.

Link:
Therefore, banning pets helps protect public health and maintain hygiene in shared spaces.

Point:
Pets in public places can harm people who suffer from allergies or asthma.

Evidence:
Many individuals experience allergic reactions triggered by animal fur or dander.

Elaboration:
Public spaces should be accessible and safe for everyone. If pets are allowed indoors, people with allergies may avoid these places altogether, limiting their access to essential services and social activities.

Examples:
A person with severe pet allergies may experience breathing difficulties while dining or shopping if animals are nearby.

Link:
Thus, banning pets ensures public spaces remain inclusive and safe for all.

Point:
Not all animals behave predictably, which creates safety risks.

Evidence:
Even well-trained pets can react unpredictably in crowded or stressful environments.

Elaboration:
Busy restaurants and stores can overwhelm animals, increasing the chance of barking, scratching, or biting. This can create dangerous situations for customers and staff.

Examples:
A startled dog may jump on customers, knock over items, or react aggressively when surrounded by strangers.

Link:
Therefore, restricting pets helps maintain safety in public environments.

Point:
Pets can disrupt the shopping and dining experience.

Evidence:
Businesses are designed to serve customers, not manage animals.

Elaboration:
Staff are not trained to handle pets, and their presence may cause noise, mess, or blocked walkways, reducing comfort for other customers.

Examples:
Pets may bark, fight with other animals, or create accidents that require staff to clean up.

Link:
Hence, banning pets ensures businesses can operate smoothly and comfortably.

# data[].attributes.body
Rebuttal

Point rich people should be taxed more

Evidence people think that the rich should be taxed more as they are not earning a income but are owning assets which makes them think that it’s unfair as they don’t get taxed by their assets and not getting taxed by income tax like working people

Elaboration the rich should be taxed from their assets which will make it fair for everyone

Link taxing the rich for their assets will result in more tax money coming out of them

Summary of affirmative group

# data[].attributes.body
Rebuttal : the first speaker in the opposition talked about how it would be unfair to tax the rich more and the government should instead tax everybody equally she also talked about how taxing the rich heavily would be bad for the economy as the rich would have less money to fund projects like the counties private housing etc but I think that it would actually be unfair if they taxed the rich the same way they taxed people who don’t earn as much as the rich earn more which could cause wealth inequality ,wealth inequality would cause the poorer people to have less opportunities as they simply do not have as much money as the rich and the rich would and I think taxing the rich would be better for the economy as the money gained by the rich could be used to fund more government housing which the prices of these housing would actually be cheaper than the private housings as the government tries to subsidise the prices of these housing so that the problem of lack of housing could be solved the extra money taxed by the rich could also be used to subsidise transport fees , school fees and also hospital fees all these fees can be subsidised by the government due to taxing the rich heavier that’s why I think that it would be a benefit to the economy if we taxed the rich heavier

P. The money gained by taxing the rich can be used for subsidising privileges that the poorer might not be able to have like transport , proper education and a good access to healthcare

E. tax revenue allows for the wealth gap between people to lessen this would then allow for people to have more opportunities in factors like healthcare the taxed money would allow for a subsidised fee after the care of professional healthcare workers if you get injured this would allow lesser people to be afraid of going into hospitals and coming out having to pay a hearty sum of money

E. The taxed money could be used to subsidise education for example in Sweden the taxed money goes to free or subsidised education to promote education so that every person would have equal access to human needs

L . so I think tax more better

# data[].attributes.body
Point:
Pets should be allowed because they provide emotional and social benefits to the owner. As some owners feel very stressed without their pet with them

Evidence:
Studies show that interacting with animals can reduce stress and improve mood.research in psychology and neuroscience shows that interacting with animals can lower stress by boosting Oxytocin and reducing Cortisol.

Explain:
Allowing pets in public places can create a more relaxed and friendly environment, benefiting both owners and others around them.

Link:
Therefore, pets contribute positively to public spaces rather than harming them.

# data[].attributes.body
P: Taxing the rich is essential for reducing wealth gap and ensuring a more balanced distribution of resources in society.

E: Wealth inequality has reached high levels in countries like the United States, where the top 1% owns a disproportionately large share of national wealth. In contrast, countries such as Germany and Netherlands use progressive tax systems which imposes higher tax rates to higher income indivuals and this can help social welfare policies to maintain lower inequality levels while still sustaining strong economies.

E: When wealth becomes too concentrated among a small group, it limits opportunities for others and can slow overall economic mobility. Taxing the rich allows governments to redistribute a portion of that wealth into public services such as education, healthcare, housing, and social support systems. These services help individuals from lower-income backgrounds access opportunities they might otherwise be excluded from, creating a more level playing field. Furthermore, reducing inequality can strengthen social cohesion, as societies with smaller wealth gaps tend to experience less crime, better public health outcomes, and higher levels of trust. Importantly, because wealthy individuals still retain significant income even after taxation, their incentive to work, invest, and innovate generally remains intact.

L: Therefore, increasing taxes on the rich is not just about raising revenue, but about building a fairer, more stable society where opportunities are more equally shared.

# data[].attributes.body
Point: we should be getting into international problems as we are unskilled and lack experience and they have high expectations of us if we help .

Evidence :

Elaboration: they will want some good as we are there to help then but we are unskilled and lack of knowledge which will just let them down

Link: therefore I think we should not involve in international volunteerism.

# data[].attributes.body
Rebuttal :

The proposition claims that compulsory volunteerism builds a caring society and ensures all students contribute. However, they ignore that forcing participation can actually reduce sincerity and harm the quality of service. A caring society is built on genuine values, not enforced actions.

Point:

Compulsory volunteerism can harm beneficiaries and reduce the overall quality of service.

Evidence:

In Singapore, some Values in Action (VIA) programmes—such as mandatory visits to elderly homes or community events—have been criticised for being rushed and superficial. Students often attend only to fulfil required hours, resulting in minimal interaction with beneficiaries and sometimes even causing inconvenience to organisations that must supervise large, uninterested groups.

Elaboration:

When students are not genuinely interested, their involvement becomes passive. For example, during short VIA visits, students may simply complete tasks without forming meaningful connections with the elderly or understanding their needs. This can make beneficiaries feel like they are part of a “school activity” rather than being truly cared for. Additionally, organisations must spend extra time managing these groups instead of focusing on real community work, which reduces efficiency and impact.

Link:

Therefore, instead of benefiting society, compulsory volunteerism can lower the quality of help provided and even burden communities, proving that it should not be a mandatory part of secondary school education.