Class: XI-7

Absent Number: 22

I stand agreeing with the statement that students should not be given homework. I believe homework creates more harm than benefit for students’ development, health, and learning quality.

Supporting Arguments

1. Student Health and Mental Well-being

Research from Stanford University shows that 56% of students see homework as their main source of stress. Too much homework reduces sleeping hours, with many students sleeping less than 7 hours per night. This leads to fatigue, anxiety, and even decreased motivation.

2. Effective Learning Can Happen at School

The Governor of West Java, Kang Dedi Mulyadi (KDM), recently removed homework for students in his province. He argued that learning should be finished at school, while home should be a place to rest, bond with family, and grow socially. He even involved 600 child psychologists to ensure that this policy supports children’s mental and academic growth.

3. Equity and Fairness

Not every student has the same facilities at home. Some may lack internet, a quiet place to study, or parental guidance. This means homework can create educational inequality, making disadvantaged students fall further behind.

4. Time for Holistic Development

Without homework, students have more time for extracurriculars, sports, hobbies, and family. This balance is essential for building creativity, teamwork, and life skills that are just as important as academics.

Closing Statement / Conclusion

In conclusion, homework is not the best way to improve students’ learning. Instead, it often causes stress, unfairness, and imbalance in their daily lives. Learning should be maximized at school, while time at home should be used for rest, family, and self-development.

Therefore, I strongly support the policy of “No Homework for Students”—because happy and healthy students will always learn better.

Thank you.

Name: Muhammad Irsyad Ramadhan

Class and absent number: XI-10, 12

Link google drive: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/11TGMqCtRrEHdz6OSt508WL9fgvlsNFls

1. Statement

We strongly disagree with the policy that requires students to arrive at school at 06.30 am. This would make students study while still sleepy and hungry. They would have to wake up much earlier than usual, which directly affects their mood and motivation to learn. It also disturbs their sleeping hours. On top of that, distances to school and the lack of public transportation at that early time make things even harder for both students and teachers. Meanwhile, in Singapore, the government bans all levels of education, even universities, from starting classes before 07.30 am. For middle and high school, the recommended start time is 08.00–8.15. So, the government should review this policy because it cuts students’ sleeping time and could even cause chronic sleep problems, like insomnia or emotional issues.

2. Arguments

Argument 1: Starting school too early actually harms students. It makes them sleep less, lose focus, become more vulnerable to mental health problems, and study outside the ideal learning hours of 07.00–11.00 when the brain is still fresh. Instead of improving achievement, it lowers both learning quality and student health.

Argument 2: Besides harming students, this policy also affects safety and family life. Students would have to leave home while it’s still dark, and parents would be forced to wake up much earlier, which could even cause family conflicts. Clearly, this policy creates more problems than solutions.

3. Rebuttal

Policymakers need to realize that improving education is not about making school start earlier. It’s about seeing students as whole human beings who need enough sleep, energy, and space to grow. Education is not about who arrives the earliest, but about who goes home with more understanding.

4. Conclusion

This policy is not educational at all because it makes students tired, unfocused, and more likely to get sick, while also burdening families. Discipline doesn’t mean waking up in the dark; it means giving students the chance to learn in a healthy, fresh, and ready condition. School is not a factory, students are not workers, and learning is not just about showing up earlier.

Class : XI-10

Absent Number : 29

1. Statement

We strongly disagree with the policy that requires students to arrive at school at 6:30 a.m. This would make students study while still sleepy and hungry. They would have to wake up much earlier than usual, which directly affects their mood and motivation to learn. It also disturbs their sleeping hours. On top of that, long distances to school and the lack of public transportation at that early time make things even harder for both students and teachers. Meanwhile, in Singapore, the government bans all levels of education, even universities, from starting classes before 7:30 a.m. For middle and high school, the recommended start time is 8:00–8:15. So, the government should review this policy because it cuts students’ sleeping time and could even cause chronic sleep problems, like insomnia or emotional issues.

2. Arguments

Argument 1 Starting school too early actually harms students. It makes them sleep less, lose focus, become more vulnerable to mental health problems, and study outside the ideal learning hours of 7:00–11:00 when the brain is still fresh. Instead of improving achievement, it lowers both learning quality and student health.

Argument 2 Besides harming students, this policy also affects safety and family life. Students would have to leave home while it’s still dark, and parents would be forced to wake up much earlier, which could even cause family conflicts. Clearly, this policy creates more problems than solutions.

3. Rebuttal

Policymakers need to realize that improving education is not about making school start earlier. It’s about seeing students as whole human beings who need enough sleep, energy, and space to grow. Education is not about who arrives the earliest, but about who goes home with more understanding.

4. Conclusion

This policy is not educational at all because it makes students tired, unfocused, and more likely to get sick, while also burdening families. Discipline doesn’t mean waking up in the dark; it means giving students the chance to learn in a healthy, fresh, and ready condition. School is not a factory, students are not workers, and learning is not just about showing up earlier.

Class : XI-10

Absent Number : 28

Before starting our arguments, let us explain what a study tour is. A study tour is an educational trip where students go outside the school to learn something new, for example visiting museums, factories, or historical places. The purpose is to give students more experience and knowledge beyond the classroom.

1. My Opinion

However, even though study tours can be fun and educational, they also bring some serious problems. This is why we, as the agree/pro team, support the governor’s decision to prevent schools from having study tours.

2. Supporting Arguments

First, safety is the most important thing. When students go on a study tour, accidents can happen on the way, like bus crashes or getting lost. By not allowing study tours, the governor is protecting students from dangerous situations.

Second, Study tours usually cost a lot of money. Not all families can afford it. This can create inequality between students. If there is no study tour, every student can feel equal and no one will be left out because of money.

Third, Schools can still give students new experiences without going far. For example, schools can invite guest speakers, use virtual tours, or organize local educational activities.

These are cheaper, safer, and still give valuable lessons.

Not all parents have enough money to pay their childern to go on study tours.

Although the purpose of a study tours is to learn, such as visiting museums and historical places. These era we can use social media platforms like youtube, instagram, tiktok, to learn visually. So students can learn widely without having to spend a lot of money.

Based on my personal experience, during my study tour, i didn't really learn much about the places i visited. Instead, i learned more by watching youtube. So why we have to doing study tour when we can learn trough youtube.

1. Ineffective Cost: Study tours often require a significant amount of money for transportation, accommodation, and other activities. By abolishing study tours, schools can save costs and allocate them to more effective activities.

2. Time Constraint: Study tours can take up a lot of time and disrupt the academic schedule of students. By abolishing study tours, schools can prioritize academic activities and improve the quality of education.

3. Limited Benefits: Study tours may not always provide significant benefits to students. By abolishing study tours, schools can focus on more beneficial activities and improve the quality of education.

4. Safety and Security Concerns: Study tours can pose safety and security risks to students, especially if they are conducted in unfamiliar places. By abolishing study tours, schools can reduce risks and ensure student safety.

5. Technological Advancements: With the advancement of technology, schools can conduct learning activities more effectively and efficiently without having to organize study tours. By abolishing study tours, schools can save costs and improve the quality of education.

3. Conclusion/Closing Statements

In conclusion, the governor's decision is not to stop student from learning, but to keep them safe and make education more equal for

everyone.

The ban on study tours is the right step.

because it prevents students from the risk of accidents and motivates school to provide other learning activities that are safer, cheaper, and more useful. That's why we strongly agree with this topic.

Class : XI-7

Absent Number : 34

I disagree with the idea that students have to attend school at 6:30 a.m. because it is too early for teenagers. Many studies show that students need enough sleep to stay healthy and focused in class. If school starts too early, students will feel sleepy, less productive, and it can even affect their mental health. I believe school should start later, around 7:30 or 8:00 a.m., so students can have more rest and learn more effectively.

Supporting Arguments

Argument 1: Health and Sleep

First of all, students need enough sleep to stay healthy and focused. According to health experts, teenagers need at least 8–9 hours of sleep per night. If school starts at 6:30 a.m., most students will have to wake up around 4:30 or 5:00 a.m. This will force them to sleep less, which can lead to fatigue, stress, and even long-term health problems. Lack of sleep is also linked to depression and anxiety among students.

Argument 2: Academic Performance

Starting school too early negatively affects students' learning ability. When students are sleepy, they cannot concentrate well in class. Research shows that students perform better academically when school starts later, around 8:00 or 8:30 a.m. A tired student cannot absorb knowledge effectively, and this will harm the quality of education.

Argument 3: Safety and Practical Issues

Starting school at 6:30 a.m. raises safety concerns. Many students must travel in the dark early morning, which increases the risk of accidents or crimes. Furthermore, public transportation is often not fully available at such an early time, causing difficulties for students who depend on it. Parents, especially mothers, feel burdened with early morning preparations, including preparing breakfast and taking care of other children. This can be a hassle, especially for families with many children or young children.

Argument 4: Evidence from Developed Countries

The disadvantages of a 6:30 a.m. school start policy in developed countries include the risk of disrupting children's physical and mental health, decreased sleep quality, reduced concentration, and a misalignment with biological rhythms, as evidenced by numerous studies and statements from psychologists and neuroscientists. Developed countries like the United States, Finland, Japan, and South Korea have much later school start times typically around 7:30 to 8:30 a.m., or even later.

Conclusion (Closing Statement):

In conclusion, starting school at 6:30 a.m. is not good for students because it is unhealthy, unproductive, and unsafe. Schools should start later to help students stay healthy, focus better in class, and travel more safely. Many developed countries like the United States, Finland, Japan, and South Korea already start school later, around 7:30 to 8:30 a.m., and it works better for students. That is why we reject the proposal to start school at 6:30 a.m.

Thank you.

Class: XI-7

Absent Number: 15

I disagree with the idea that students have to attend school at 6:30 a.m. because it is too early for teenagers. Many studies show that students need enough sleep to stay healthy and focused in class. If school starts too early, students will feel sleepy, less productive, and it can even affect their mental health. I believe school should start later, around 7:30 or 8:00 a.m., so students can have more rest and learn more effectively.

Supporting Arguments

Argument 1: Health and Sleep

First of all, students need enough sleep to stay healthy and focused. According to health experts, teenagers need at least 8–9 hours of sleep per night. If school starts at 6:30 a.m., most students will have to wake up around 4:30 or 5:00 a.m. This will force them to sleep less, which can lead to fatigue, stress, and even long-term health problems. Lack of sleep is also linked to depression and anxiety among students.

Argument 2: Academic Performance

Starting school too early negatively affects students' learning ability. When students are sleepy, they cannot concentrate well in class. Research shows that students perform better academically when school starts later, around 8:00 or 8:30 a.m. A tired student cannot absorb knowledge effectively, and this will harm the quality of education.

Argument 3: Safety and Practical Issues

Starting school at 6:30 a.m. raises safety concerns. Many students must travel in the dark early morning, which increases the risk of accidents or crimes. Furthermore, public transportation is often not fully available at such an early time, causing difficulties for students who depend on it. Parents, especially mothers, feel burdened with early morning preparations, including preparing breakfast and taking care of other children. This can be a hassle, especially for families with many children or young children.

Argument 4: Evidence from Developed Countries

The disadvantages of a 6:30 a.m. school start policy in developed countries include the risk of disrupting children's physical and mental health, decreased sleep quality, reduced concentration, and a misalignment with biological rhythms, as evidenced by numerous studies and statements from psychologists and neuroscientists. Developed countries like the United States, Finland, Japan, and South Korea have much later school start times typically around 7:30 to 8:30 a.m., or even later.

Conclusion (Closing Statement):

In conclusion, starting school at 6:30 a.m. is not good for students because it is unhealthy, unproductive, and unsafe. Schools should start later to help students stay healthy, focus better in class, and travel more safely. Many developed countries like the United States, Finland, Japan, and South Korea already start school later, around 7:30 to 8:30 a.m., and it works better for students. That is why we reject the proposal to start school at 6:30 a.m.

Thank You

Class: XI.10

Absent Number: 31

• Statement

We strongly disagree with the policy that requires students to arrive at school at 6:30 a.m. This would make students study while still sleepy and hungry. They would have to wake up much earlier than usual, which directly affects their mood and motivation to learn. It also disturbs their sleeping hours. On top of that, long distances to school and the lack of public transportation at that early time make things even harder for both students and teachers. Meanwhile, in Singapore, the government bans all levels of education, even universities, from starting classes before 7:30 a.m. For middle and high school, the recommended start time is 8:00–8:15. So, the government should review this policy because it cuts students’ sleeping time and could even cause chronic sleep problems, like insomnia or emotional issues.

• Arguments

Argument 1 : Starting school too early actually harms students. It makes them sleep less, lose focus, become more vulnerable to mental health problems, and study outside the ideal learning hours of 7:00–11:00 when the brain is still fresh. Instead of improving achievement, it lowers both learning quality and student health.

Argument 2 : Besides harming students, this policy also affects safety and family life. Students would have to leave home while it’s still dark, and parents would be forced to wake up much earlier, which could even cause family conflicts. Clearly, this policy creates more problems than solutions.

• Rebuttal

Starting school at 06.30 am is harmful. In addiction, we must also see the bigger picture, if students are forced to wake up too early, not only their health and concentration are affected, but also their social life. Many students spend long hours commuting, meaning they lose valuable time for family interaction, rest, and even self development like reading or joining extrracurricular activities. A balanced routine is impirtant for shaping responsible and creative young generations. Therefore, this early start policy does not only reduce academic effectiveness, but also disturbs students overall quality of life.

Policymakers need to realize that improving education is not about making school start earlier. It’s about seeing students as whole human beings who need enough sleep, energy, and space to grow. Education is not about who arrives the earliest, but about who goes home with more understanding.

• Conclusion

This policy is not educational at all because it makes students tired, unfocused, and more likely to get sick, while also burdening families. Discipline doesn’t mean waking up in the dark; it means giving students the chance to learn in a healthy, fresh, and ready condition. School is not a factory, students are not workers, and learning is not just about showing up earlier.

Thank you.

Class: XI.7

Absent Number: 10

I disagree with the idea that students have to attend school at 6:30 a.m. because it is too early for teenagers. Many studies show that students need enough sleep to stay healthy and focused in class. If school starts too early, students will feel sleepy, less productive, and it can even affect their mental health. I believe school should start later, around 7:30 or 8:00 a.m., so students can have more rest and learn more effectively.

Supporting argument:

Argument 1: Health and Sleep

First of all, students need enough sleep to stay healthy and focused. According to health experts, teenagers need at least 8–9 hours of sleep per night. If school starts at 6:30 a.m., most students will have to wake up around 4:30 or 5:00 a.m. This will force them to sleep less, which can lead to fatigue, stress, and even long-term health problems. Lack of sleep is also linked to depression and anxiety among students.

Argument 2: Academic Performance

Starting school too early negatively affects students' learning ability. When students are sleepy, they cannot concentrate well in class. Research shows that students perform better academically when school starts later, around 8:00 or 8:30 a.m. A tired student cannot absorb knowledge effectively, and this will harm the quality of education.

Argument 3: Safety and Practical Issues

Starting school at 6:30 a.m. raises safety concerns. Many students must travel in the dark early morning, which increases the risk of accidents or crimes. Furthermore, public transportation is often not fully available at such an early time, causing difficulties for students who depend on it. Parents, especially mothers, feel burdened with early morning preparations, including preparing breakfast and taking care of other children. This can be a hassle, especially for families with many children or young children.

Argument 4: Evidence from Developed Countries

The disadvantages of a 6:30 a.m. school start policy in developed countries include the risk of disrupting children's physical and mental health, decreased sleep quality, reduced concentration, and a misalignment with biological rhythms, as evidenced by numerous studies and statements from psychologists and neuroscientists. Developed countries like the United States, Finland, Japan, and South Korea have much later school start times typically around 7:30 to 8:30 a.m., or even later.

Conclusion (Closing Statement):

In conclusion, starting school at 6:30 a.m. is not good for students because it is unhealthy, unproductive, and unsafe. Schools should start later to help students stay healthy, focus better in class, and travel more safely. Many developed countries like the United States, Finland, Japan, and South Korea already start school later, around 7:30 to 8:30 a.m., and it works better for students. That is why we reject the proposal to start school at 6:30 a.m.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, starting school at 6:30 a.m. is not good for students because it is unhealthy, unproductive, and unsafe. Schools should start later to help students stay healthy, focus better in class, and travel more safely. Many developed countries like the United States, Finland, Japan, and South Korea already start school later, around 7:30 to 8:30 a.m., and it works better for students. That is why we reject the proposal to start school at 6:30 a.m.

Class: XI-10

Absent Number: 26

I disagree with the implementation of a night curfew for students in West Java by Governor Dedi Mulyadi, because it does not address the root causes of juvenile problems. This policy is seen as restricting children’s freedom and potentially creating negative stigma for those who are outside at night. Its effectiveness is also questioned, since issues like brawls can occur during the day or be arranged through social media. Moreover, it adds pressure on parents to supervise their children more closely, while out-of-school youths are not even covered by the regulation. Instead of offering a long-term solution, the curfew only tackles the symptoms and fails to provide proper guidance, facilities, and positive support that teenagers truly need.

Supporting argument :

1. Violation of Children’s Rights

The curfew limits students’ freedom of movement, which is part of their fundamental rights. It creates an unfair stigma, as if being outside at night automatically means engaging in negative behavior.

2. Ineffective in Preventing Juvenile Delinquency

Curfews do not stop teenagers from arranging fights or mischief, since many of these are organized through social media and can take place during the day as well.

3. Unfair Burden on Parents

The regulation forces parents to control their children more strictly, which may be difficult for working parents who cannot always monitor their kids at night.

4. Excludes Non-School Youths

Many children who are not enrolled in school are left outside the scope of the policy, even though they are equally vulnerable to delinquency and need protection.

5. Short-Term Solution, Not Long-Term Impact

A night curfew only treats the surface problem. What teenagers really need are safe spaces, constructive activities, alinquency in the long run.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, the implementation of a night curfew for students in West Java is not an effective solution to address juvenile delinquency. This policy risks violating children’s rights, fails to truly prevent brawls, and places an extra burden on parents while ignoring the root causes of the problem. A better approach would be to provide proper guidance, create positive activities and safe spaces, and strengthen social support so that teenagers can grow in a healthy environment without feeling restricted.

Class: XI-10

Absent Number: 27

•Topic: West Java Governor Dedi Mulyadi issued a policy probhiting study tours for students in his region. This measure was taken to ease the financial burden on parents and reduce risks to student safety.

•Opinion

Study tour is an educational trip where students go outside the school to learn somehing new, for example visiting museums, or historical places. The purpose is to give students more experience and knowledge beyond the classroom.

However, even though study tours can be fun and educational, they also bring some serious problems. This is why we, as the agree/pro team, support the governor's decision to prevent school from having study tours

1. First, safety is the most important thing. When students go on a study tour, accident can happen on the way, like bus crashes or getting lost. By not allowing study tours, the governor is protecting students from dangerous situatuons.

2. Second, study tours usually cost a lot of money. Not all families can afford it. This can create inequality between students. If there is no study tour, every student can feel equal and no one will be left out because of money.

3. Third, schools can still give students new experiences without going far. For example, schools can invite guest speakers, use virtual tours, or oganize local educational activities. These are cheaper, safer, and still give valuable lessons.

In conclusion, the governor's decision is not to stop students from learning, but to keep them safe and make education more equal for everyone. That's why we strongly agree with this.

•Arguments

-Not all parents have enough money to pay their children to go on study tours.

-Although the purpose of study tours is to learn, such as visiting museum, and historical places. Right now we can use social medua platforms like youtube, instagram, tiktok to learn visually. So students can learn widely without having to spend a lot of money.

-Based on my personal experience. During my study tour, i didn't really learn much about the places i visited. Instead i learned more by watching youtube. So why we have to doing study tours when we can learn trough youtube.

-Ineffective Cost: Study tours often require a significant amount of money for transformatation, accommodation, and other activities. By abolishing study tours, school can save costs and allocate them to more effective activities.

-Time constraint: Study tours can take up a lot of time and disrupt the academic schedule of students. By abolisihing study tours, school can prioritize academic activities and improve the quality of education.

-Limited Benefits: Study tours may not always provide significant benefits to students. By abolishing study tours, schools can focus on more beneficial activities and improve the quality of education.

-Safety and Security Concerns: Study tours can pose safety and security risks to students, especially if they are conducted in unfamiliar places. By abolishing study tours, schools can reduce risks and ensure student safety.

-Technological Advancements: With the advancement of technology, schools can conduct learning activities more effectively and efficiently without having to organize study tours. By abolishing study tours, schools can save costs and improve the quality of education.

•Conclusion: The ban of study tours is the right step because it prevents students from the risks of accidents. And motivate schools to provide other learning activities that are safer, cheaper, and more usefull.

Class: XI-7

Absent Number: 03

Agree Team

My Opinion:

I'm agree with this program because it will increase students’ discipline, give them more time in the morning to socialize, finish assignments, and do other positive activities. For Muslim students, it is also suitable since they already wake up early for morning prayers. For other students, this habit will help them get used to waking up early. Moreover, this program can help to reduce traffic jams in the morning.

Supporting Arguments:

1. Better concentration and productivity: According to a study by the American Psychological Association (2020), students’ brains tend to be more alert and active in the early hours of the morning. This shows that the early morning is the golden hour of learning.

2. More free time in the afternoon: A survey conducted by the Indonesian Ministry of Education and Culture (2022) revealed that more than 65% of students reported that finishing school earlier gave them more opportunities to join extracurricular activities.

3. Time management and solutions: With good time management, students can sleep earlier and wake up earlier, making their mornings more productive. If students face sleep problems, solutions can be applied, such as reducing homework and ending school earlier (for example, at 2.30 PM) so they still have enough time to rest.

4. Parental and transportation support: Parents can support their children by taking them to school. If they are busy, students can use ride-hailing services like GrabBike or public transportation. As another solution, schools or the government can provide free public transportation for students so they can arrive on time without extra costs.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, starting school at 6.30 AM is a beneficial program because it improves discipline, enhances concentration and productivity during the golden hours of learning, and provides more time in the afternoon for extracurricular activities or rest. With proper time management, strong parental support, and good transportation facilities, this program will create a more effective, healthier, and disciplined learning environment for students.

Name: Puji Ayu Komalasari

Class: XI-7

Absent Number: 26

Agree Team

My Opinion:

I'm agree with this program because it will increase students’ discipline, give them more time in the morning to socialize, finish assignments, and do other positive activities. For Muslim students, it is also suitable since they already wake up early for morning prayers. For other students, this habit will help them get used to waking up early. Moreover, this program can help to reduce traffic jams in the morning.

Supporting Arguments:

1. Better concentration and productivity: According to a study by the American Psychological Association (2020), students’ brains tend to be more alert and active in the early hours of the morning. This shows that the early morning is the golden hour of learning.

2. More free time in the afternoon: A survey conducted by the Indonesian Ministry of Education and Culture (2022) revealed that more than 65% of students reported that finishing school earlier gave them more opportunities to join extracurricular activities.

3. Time management and solutions: With good time management, students can sleep earlier and wake up earlier, making their mornings more productive. If students face sleep problems, solutions can be applied, such as reducing homework and ending school earlier (for example, at 2.30 PM) so they still have enough time to rest.

4. Parental and transportation support: Parents can support their children by taking them to school. If they are busy, students can use ride-hailing services like GrabBike or public transportation. As another solution, schools or the government can provide free public transportation for students so they can arrive on time without extra costs.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, starting school at 6.30 AM is a beneficial program because it improves discipline, enhances concentration and productivity during the golden hours of learning, and provides more time in the afternoon for extracurricular activities or rest. With proper time management, strong parental support, and good transportation facilities, this program will create a more effective, healthier, and disciplined learning environment for students.

Grade:

Student Number:

Class: XI-7

Absent Number: 15

I disagree with the idea that students have to attend school at 6:30 a.m. because it is too early for teenagers. Many studies show that students need enough sleep to stay healthy and focused in class. If school starts too early, students will feel sleepy, less productive, and it can even affect their mental health. I believe school should start later, around 7:30 or 8:00 a.m., so students can have more rest and learn more effectively.

Supporting Arguments

Argument 1: Health and Sleep

First of all, students need enough sleep to stay healthy and focused. According to health experts, teenagers need at least 8–9 hours of sleep per night. If school starts at 6:30 a.m., most students will have to wake up around 4:30 or 5:00 a.m. This will force them to sleep less, which can lead to fatigue, stress, and even long-term health problems. Lack of sleep is also linked to depression and anxiety among students.

Argument 2: Academic Performance

Starting school too early negatively affects students' learning ability. When students are sleepy, they cannot concentrate well in class. Research shows that students perform better academically when school starts later, around 8:00 or 8:30 a.m. A tired student cannot absorb knowledge effectively, and this will harm the quality of education.

Argument 3: Safety and Practical Issues

Starting school at 6:30 a.m. raises safety concerns. Many students must travel in the dark early morning, which increases the risk of accidents or crimes. Furthermore, public transportation is often not fully available at such an early time, causing difficulties for students who depend on it. Parents, especially mothers, feel burdened with early morning preparations, including preparing breakfast and taking care of other children. This can be a hassle, especially for families with many children or young children.

Argument 4: Evidence from Developed Countries

The disadvantages of a 6:30 a.m. school start policy in developed countries include the risk of disrupting children's physical and mental health, decreased sleep quality, reduced concentration, and a misalignment with biological rhythms, as evidenced by numerous studies and statements from psychologists and neuroscientists. Developed countries like the United States, Finland, Japan, and South Korea have much later school start times typically around 7:30 to 8:30 a.m., or even later.

Conclusion (Closing Statement):

In conclusion, starting school at 6:30 a.m. is not good for students because it is unhealthy, unproductive, and unsafe. Schools should start later to help students stay healthy, focus better in class, and travel more safely. Many developed countries like the United States, Finland, Japan, and South Korea already start school later, around 7:30 to 8:30 a.m., and it works better for students. That is why we reject the proposal to start school at 6:30 a.m.

Thank you.

Class: XI-7

I agree that there should be no homework for students. School shouldn't only focus on academic tasks, but also on students mental health, family time, and personal development.

1. According to Stanford research in 2014, 56 percent of students said homework is their main source of stress. Too much homework also causes lack of sleep and reduces family time. The research explained that more than two hours of homework per night is counterproductive and can harm students well-being.

2. In West Java, Governor Dedi Mulyadi has issued a policy that starting in 2025/2026, homework will no longer be given. Learning will be more effective if focused in school, while at home students need rest and self-development.

3. Students also need time for developing themselves such as hobbies or talents. Homework often takes away this opportunity.

4. Homework makes students stressed, and this stress can lead them to cheating instead of truly learning.

Students need time to relax and spend with their families, which is very important for their balance and happiness.

Conclusion

Homework often causes stress for students, therefore I don't agree with having homework for students

Homework should be replaced with fun and educative activities in school, so that learning remains effective without burdening students at home.

"No homework for students—!"

Thank You

Name: Chesa Hadian Natansyah

Class: XI-7

Absent number: 07

I agree with KDM’s policy of creating barracks for students who are considered problematic, naughty, or rebellious.

In this Case, barak is a special dormitory like Place where Students with discipline problems are guided, trained, and supervised. Sometimes for 3 days, a week, or more depending on their behavior

Our arguments are:

1. Guidance and Second Chance – The barak offers guidance instead of punishment or expulsion, giving students the opportunity to change.

2. Character Building and Reform – Through discipline, teamwork, and daily routines, the program shapes responsibility, respect, and moral values.

3. Proven Success and Positive Impact – Alumni testimonies and students’ experiences show real improvements, even giving them a sense of belonging and purpose.

4. A Leader Who Is Close to the Community – The barracks prove that Dedi Mulyadi is a leader who gets out and meets people. He doesn't just stay in an office; he sees and understands what his community is going through. He often visits the barracks to talk to people and share things, which builds a real connection. This shows that a leader can make a big difference with a simple, human approach, rather than with big, expensive projects.

These arguments are supported by facts and data.

1. Program Launch

On May 1–2, 2025, West Java officially launched a military-style barrack program in Purwakarta, designed for high school students with behavioral problems. The program involves structured daily routines supervised by multidisciplinary teams, including educators, psychologists, medical staff, and religious mentors.

(Source: Politika.co.id, Antara Jabar)

2. Scale and Duration

The program prepared 40 barracks across West Java and is scheduled to run for up to 6 months, with the first phase lasting 14 days.

(Source: Kabar Majalengka)

3. Budget and Participants

The provincial government allocated Rp 6 billion to support the program, targeting 900 students. The first wave enrolled around 350 students.

(Source: Kompas Bandung)

4. Activities and Content

Students undergo training in discipline, nationalism, anti-drugs education, spiritual guidance, marching drills, and first aid. The aim is character building, not militarization, with a focus on restoring students’ positive values and healthy lifestyles.

(Source: Bappeda Jabar, PPID Jabar)

5. Human Rights Compliance

The Ministry of Law and Human Rights in West Java confirmed that the program does not violate human rights, since it requires parental consent and is not based on forced militarization.

(Source: Politika.co.id)

So the conclusion is, the barak program by Dedi Mulyadi is very useful because it helps solve youth problems and keeps culture alive. In the barak, young people learn discipline, teamwork, and new skills, so they stay away from negative activities. Many of them become more independent and responsible. No other program gives results like this, so the barak is a policy that should be supported.

class:XI-10

absent:30

Arguments

Not all students live close to School are harm ACCAIS to reliable public transportation, for Nary, riding a motorcycia is a practical Solution to avoid tradiness and Iniprove mobility. A tatar ban may lead to unfairness and Faus to educate wisely.

*we disagree in our opinion

1.A total ban is unfair to Students who never the requirements. Sonce Students are of legal age, have a valid license and ride responsibly. Baning them treats an Studings the soner, ignoring individual

Circumstances.

2.Better to regulate and supervise than to ban outright. Schools con a permit System - For exonpo, Only upperclassmen with licenses and parental consent May bring Motorcycles - This is more aducational than a blanket Prohibition

3.Schools can manage Parking Zones and Staggered entry times. If well managees, Motorcycles don't have to be disruptive. Schoo15 con organize Parking Sistem Stagger arrival time, of work with Security Personnel to to Maintain a order

4.Motorcycle use Ban teach responsibility and road ethics.

Students who ride Must Follow trafic rules, Maintain their vehicles, an ride respectfully. This can be a real-world Lesson in responsibility and character development.

5.Motorcycles are practical for Stadens living Far Fron

School Many Students live in rural or Suburban greas where public transport is unavaiable motor Cycirs help them arrive on tiner withour burdening working Parents.

*Conclusion

Instead of a total ban, School Should adapt thoughtful and flexible Policies with Pernies. Supr vision, an d education Students can reniain Safe and responsible without Feeling overly restricted. Education is not Just about prohibitions-It's about trust, guidance, and character growth.

Name:Zahra linggar solihat

class:XI-7

absent numbers:36

•opening statement (kontra/disagree)

"Good morning everyone, today, i strongly agree that homework is important for student. Homework helps us riview the lessons, teaches respon sibility, and prepares us for the future. sometimes, even right after the class ends and the teacher leaves, some students al ready forget the lesson. with out homework students may become lazy and forget what they babe learned theefore i be lieve homework should exist in school"

•Second Speaker

-i respect your opinion, but i disagree. you say homework makes students tired, but actually homework jelas students remember the lesson. Sometimes, even right after class, students al ready forget the material. with homework, they can prectice again at home. Homework is not a burden, it is away to make Learning stronger

- yes, there are regulations, but rules are not always. Education is not only abaut reles, abaut results. Hemework has proven benefits for students, so we should not just follow a rele without thinking of the real impact

-"stres does not come from homework it self, but from bad time management. If students learn to manage their time, homework becomes a use ful practice, not stres"

•conclusion

My opinion is that homework can actually increase students’ grades, because it gives them more practice. So, if students feel too busy, the solution is not to remove homework, but to reduce the length of school lessons. That way, students still have enough time to rest, but also keep the benefit of homework

Class: XI-7

Absent Number: 35

I stand agreeing with the statement that students should not be given homework. I believe homework creates more harm than benefit for students’ development, health, and learning quality.

Supporting Arguments

1. Student Health and Mental Well-being

Research from Stanford University shows that 56% of students see homework as their main source of stress. Too much homework reduces sleeping hours, with many students sleeping less than 7 hours per night. This leads to fatigue, anxiety, and even decreased motivation.

2. Effective Learning Can Happen at School

The Governor of West Java, Kang Dedi Mulyadi (KDM), recently removed homework for students in his province. He argued that learning should be finished at school, while home should be a place to rest, bond with family, and grow socially. He even involved 600 child psychologists to ensure that this policy supports children’s mental and academic growth.

3. Equity and Fairness

Not every student has the same facilities at home. Some may lack internet, a quiet place to study, or parental guidance. This means homework can create educational inequality, making disadvantaged students fall further behind.

4. Time for Holistic Development

Without homework, students have more time for extracurriculars, sports, hobbies, and family. This balance is essential for building creativity, teamwork, and life skills that are just as important as academics.

Closing Statement / Conclusion

In conclusion, homework is not the best way to improve students’ learning. Instead, it often causes stress, unfairness, and imbalance in their daily lives. Learning should be maximized at school, while time at home should be used for rest, family, and self-development.

Therefore, I strongly support the policy of “No Homework for Students”—because happy and healthy students will always learn better.

Thank you

name: Riyanie gadis p

class: Xl.7

absent numer: 32

My opinion, I disagree with the implementation of military barracks for students.

First, this program is still new, so the preparation might not be well-planned.

Second, it could increase the risk of bullying among students.

Third, students might fall behind in their lessons because they spend too much time in the barracks.

Fourth, it reduces quality time with their parents and families.

Lastly, living under strict rules for a long period could make students feel pressured and stressed.

Supporting argument

Usually, barracks are filled with so-called “naughty” students, so bullying might happen inside the barracks, or when students go outside they could also be bullied because they were placed in the barracks.

Second, students might fall behind in their studies. Even though there are lessons in the barracks, the learning targets are different from their classmates, which can disadvantage the students themselves.

Third, they may feel pressured because they have to follow a military lifestyle that is very different from their own way of life.

And also, even though this policy is made by the government, children’s right to education is disturbed.

In addition, the facilities in the barracks may not be fully ready because the program is still new, so students’ comfort and learning quality can be affected.

Living in the barracks also makes students lose precious time with their parents, while family support is very important for their growth.

Not all students are the same , some may be naughty, but others are not, and putting them together in the same place might make the problem worse instead of solving it.

Lastly, strict rules and pressure in the barracks could even cause long-term trauma, making students feel afraid, stressed, and emotionally unstable

Conclusion(closing statement)

In conclusion, the idea of putting students in military barracks is not an effective solution. Instead of improving discipline, it may cause new problems such as bullying, learning loss, emotional pressure, lack of family time, and even trauma. Therefore, I strongly disagree with the implementation of military barracks for students, because education should focus on guidance, support, and equal opportunities for every child.

Thank you.

Name : Muhammad Pasha

Class : XI-7

Absent No : 24

I am on the side that agrees with the topic, which is about not bringing our motorcycle to school. I believe this rule is important for the safety and discipline of students.

Supporting Arguments

1. I agree with the rule of not bringing motorcycles to school because it can be dangerous for students. Many students are still underage and do not have enough driving experience. Riding a motorcycle requires responsibility and full concentration, but students at a young age may not be ready for this. If they bring motorcycles, the risk of accidents on the way to school is very high. This could cause injuries, even death, and of course, it would be a big loss for the family and the school community.

2. Instead of bringing motorcycles, students can use other types of transportation to come to school. For example, they can use public transportation such as buses, angkot, or school shuttle services. Some students can also ride bicycles or walk if their house is close to the school. This way, they can still arrive safely without risking their lives by riding a motorcycle. Public transportation is also more environmentally friendly and helps reduce traffic congestion around the school.

Conclusion

In our country, the law states that students are only allowed to ride motorcycles if they are at least seventeen years old and already have a driving license. Therefore, students who are still under seventeen should not be allowed to bring their motorcycles to school. If their home is far from school, they can use alternative transportation such as buses or school shuttle services. By following this rule, students will be safer, more disciplined, and will learn responsibility step by step.

Name: Cantika Aura Muslimah

Class: XI-7

Absent Number: 06

Agree Team

My Opinion:

I'm agree with this program because it will increase students’ discipline, give them more time in the morning to socialize, finish assignments, and do other positive activities. For Muslim students, it is also suitable since they already wake up early for morning prayers. For other students, this habit will help them get used to waking up early. Moreover, this program can help to reduce traffic jams in the morning.

Supporting Arguments:

1. Better concentration and productivity: According to a study by the American Psychological Association (2020), students’ brains tend to be more alert and active in the early hours of the morning. This shows that the early morning is the golden hour of learning.

2. More free time in the afternoon: A survey conducted by the Indonesian Ministry of Education and Culture (2022) revealed that more than 65% of students reported that finishing school earlier gave them more opportunities to join extracurricular activities.

3. Time management and solutions: With good time management, students can sleep earlier and wake up earlier, making their mornings more productive. If students face sleep problems, solutions can be applied, such as reducing homework and ending school earlier (for example, at 2.30 PM) so they still have enough time to rest.

4. Parental and transportation support: Parents can support their children by taking them to school. If they are busy, students can use ride-hailing services like GrabBike or public transportation. As another solution, schools or the government can provide free public transportation for students so they can arrive on time without extra costs.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, starting school at 6.30 AM is a beneficial program because it improves discipline, enhances concentration and productivity during the golden hours of learning, and provides more time in the afternoon for extracurricular activities or rest. With proper time management, strong parental support, and good transportation facilities, this program will create a more effective, healthier, and disciplined learning environment for students.

Class: XI-10

Absent: 23

Debate Topic
Students should not be allowed to ride or bring motorcycles to school.

My Opinion
I agree with this restriction.

Supporting Arguments

1. Lack of Driving License
   Many students are not old enough to legally obtain a driver's license. Riding a motorcycle without one is against the law and poses a danger to themselves and others.

2. Risk of Accidents
   Students often lack sufficient driving experience. This increases the likelihood of traffic accidents, especially during busy hours when going to or leaving school.

3. More Orderly School Environment
   Without personal vehicles, the school area becomes safer, less congested, and easier for teachers and security staff to monitor.

Conclusion
Banning students from bringing motorcycles to school is a wise decision to ensure safety, order, and comfort for everyone. A school should be a place for learning—not one filled with traffic risks.

Class : XI-7

Absent : 29

I agree with KDM'S Policy of Creating barak for Students who are Considered problematic or Naughty and rebel.

In this Case, barak is a special dormitory like Place where Students with discipline problems are guided, trained, and supervised. Sometimes for 3 days, a week, or more depending on their behavior

Our arguments are:

1. Guidance and Second Chance – The barak offers guidance instead of punishment or expulsion, giving students the opportunity to change.

2. Character Building and Reform – Through discipline, teamwork, and daily routines, the program shapes responsibility, respect, and moral values.

3. Proven Success and Positive Impact – Alumni testimonies and students’ experiences show real improvements, even giving them a sense of belonging and purpose.

4. A Leader Who Is Close to the Community – The barracks prove that Dedi Mulyadi is a leader who gets out and meets people. He doesn't just stay in an office; he sees and understands what his community is going through. He often visits the barracks to talk to people and share things, which builds a real connection. This shows that a leader can make a big difference with a simple, human approach, rather than with big, expensive projects.

These arguments are supported by facts and data.

1. Program Launch

On May 1–2, 2025, West Java officially launched a military-style barrack program in Purwakarta, designed for high school students with behavioral problems. The program involves structured daily routines supervised by multidisciplinary teams, including educators, psychologists, medical staff, and religious mentors.

(Source: Politika.co.id, Antara Jabar)

2. Scale and Duration

The program prepared 40 barracks across West Java and is scheduled to run for up to 6 months, with the first phase lasting 14 days.

(Source: Kabar Majalengka)

3. Budget and Participants

The provincial government allocated Rp 6 billion to support the program, targeting 900 students. The first wave enrolled around 350 students.

(Source: Kompas Bandung)

4. Activities and Content

Students undergo training in discipline, nationalism, anti-drugs education, spiritual guidance, marching drills, and first aid. The aim is character building, not militarization, with a focus on restoring students’ positive values and healthy lifestyles.

(Source: Bappeda Jabar, PPID Jabar)

5. Human Rights Compliance

The Ministry of Law and Human Rights in West Java confirmed that the program does not violate human rights, since it requires parental consent and is not based on forced militarization.

(Source: Politika.co.id)

So the conclusion is, the barak program by Dedi Mulyadi is very useful because it helps solve youth problems and keeps culture alive. In the barak, young people learn discipline, teamwork, and new skills, so they stay away from negative activities. Many of them become more independent and responsible. No other program gives results like this, so the barak is a policy that should be supported.

Class: xi-7

Absent Number: 31

We're from pro team supporting that no homework for students, because stanford research in 2014 shows that excessive homework causes students to be stressed, lack sleep, and losing their time with their families. In addition, the governor of west java, Dedi Mulyadi, issied a new policy that prohibits giving homework for students in west java, starting at 2025/2026. Learning activities will be more effective if they are focused at school, and those at home need time to rest and develop themselves.

• First speaker's argument:

1. Official West Java Policy Foundation

• Governor Dedi Mulyadi (KDM) has formally eliminated homework in West Java, effective from the upcoming academic term. Schools are instructed to cover learning entirely during school hours and ensure students return home to rest or help at home, not to handle schoolwork. 

• This policy is grounded in scientific thinking: KDM asserted that children need eight hours of sleep, and if they sleep early, they should wake up early—thus reducing the need for homework. 

• He also engaged some 600 child psychologists and plans to conduct statistical and psychological assessments to evaluate its effects. 

2. Psychological Relief & Well-being

• A 2014 Stanford study found that 56% of students view homework as a major source of stress—and excessive assignments contribute to burnout. 

• Other meta-analyses show that school-aged children may not benefit academically from homework—and in some cases, it can worsen performance.  

• Data from GITNUX (2025 report) states that:

• 65% of students say homework does not help them understand material better

• 64% feel homework strips away their social time

• 45% report less than 7 hours of sleep on school nights due to homework

• Second speaker:

Without homework, students hope to have more time to play with friends and rest. This is also in line with the hopes of parents who want their children to have time to rest, chat with family, or simply relax together at home.

Because they feel overwhelmed and don't enjoy doing homework at home, students often end up cheating on their assignments, and parents often even do their children's homework for various reasons.

•third speaker:

the Solution of this case if needed is Spend time efficiently, if ill want give a homework for they Students, the school time need to be reduces example, go to school lifter than now or back from School earlier, beaura homework is taking their time, they need extra time for that,

And another Solution is doing fun activities at school to Change home work efectively and educative.

• Conclusion:

In conclusion, homework should be replaced with fun and educative activities in school, so that learning remains effective without burdening students at home.

Thank you!

The topic of the debate:

“The Importance of a 9:00 PM Curfew for Teenagers.”

My opinion:

I agree with the statement that teenagers should already be home at night, especially before 9:00 PM.

Supporting arguments:

First, being at home at night helps keep teenagers safe. The risk of accidents, crimes, or bad influences usually increases after dark. By being home early, parents can make sure their children are protected.

Second, coming home early helps teenagers manage their time better. They can rest, study, and prepare for the next day. This habit builds discipline and responsibility for the future.

Third, setting a curfew also strengthens family relationships. Parents can spend time with their children in the evening, have dinner together, and discuss their daily activities.

Conclusion / Closing statement:

In conclusion, I strongly believe that teenagers should be home before 9:00 PM. This rule is not meant to limit their freedom, but to ensure their safety, health, and personal growth.

Kelas: 11-7

Absen: 2

1. Opening statement (kontra/disagree)

Good morning everyone, today, i strongly agree that homework is important for student. Homework helps us riview the lessons, teaches respon sibility, and prepares us for the future. sometimes, even right after the class ends and the teacher leaves, some students al ready forget the lesson. with out homework students may become lazy and forget what they babe learned theefore i be lieve homework should exist in school.

2. Arguments

yes, there are regulations, but rules are not always. Education is not only abaut reles, abaut results. Hemework has proven benefits for students, so we should not just follow a rele without thinking of the real impact.Stres does not come from homework it self, but from bad time management. If students learn to manage their time, homework becomes a use ful practice, not stres.

3. Rebuttal

I respect your opinion, but i disagree. you say homework makes students tired, but actually homework jelas students remember the lesson. Sometimes, even right after class, students al ready forget the material. with homework, they can prectice again at home. Homework is not a burden, it is away to make Learning stronger.

4.conclusion

My opinion is that homework can actually increase students’ grades, because it gives them more practice. So, if students feel too busy, the solution is not to remove homework, but to reduce the length of school lessons. That way, students still have enough time to rest, but also keep the benefit of homework.

Class: XI-7

Absent: 23

We Support Dedi Mulyadi’s Creating barracks for students who are Considered problematic or "Naughty and rebel". In this case, barak is a special dormitory like place where students with discipline problems are guided, trained, and supervised.

Our arguments are:

1. Guidance and Second Chance – The barak offers guidance instead of punishment or expulsion, giving students the opportunity to change.

2. Character Building and Reform – Through discipline, teamwork, and daily routines, the program shapes responsibility, respect, and moral values.

3. Proven Success and Positive Impact – Alumni testimonies and students’ experiences show real improvements, even giving them a sense of belonging and purpose.

4. A Leader Who Is Close to the Community – The barracks prove that Dedi Mulyadi is a leader who gets out and meets people. He doesn't just stay in an office; he sees and understands what his community is going through. He often visits the barracks to talk to people and share things, which builds a real connection. This shows that a leader can make a big difference with a simple, human approach, rather than with big, expensive projects.

These arguments are supported by facts and data.

1. Program Launch

On May 1–2, 2025, West Java officially launched a military-style barrack program in Purwakarta, designed for high school students with behavioral problems. The program involves structured daily routines supervised by multidisciplinary teams, including educators, psychologists, medical staff, and religious mentors.

(Source: Politika.co.id, Antara Jabar)

2. Scale and Duration

The program prepared 40 barracks across West Java and is scheduled to run for up to 6 months, with the first phase lasting 14 days.

(Source: Kabar Majalengka)

3. Budget and Participants

The provincial government allocated Rp 6 billion to support the program, targeting 900 students. The first wave enrolled around 350 students.

(Source: Kompas Bandung)

4. Activities and Content

Students undergo training in discipline, nationalism, anti-drugs education, spiritual guidance, marching drills, and first aid. The aim is character building, not militarization, with a focus on restoring students’ positive values and healthy lifestyles.

(Source: Bappeda Jabar, PPID Jabar)

5. Human Rights Compliance

The Ministry of Law and Human Rights in West Java confirmed that the program does not violate human rights, since it requires parental consent and is not based on forced militarization.

(Source: Politika.co.id)

So the conclusion is, the barak program by Dedi Mulyadi is very useful because it helps solve youth problems and keeps culture alive. In the barak, young people learn discipline, teamwork, and new skills, so they stay away from negative activities. Many of them become more independent and responsible. No other program gives results like this, so the barak is a policy that should be supported.

Name : Alma Aghnia Fauziya

Class : XI-7

Absent : 04

I agree with KDM'S Policy of Creating barak for Students who are Considered problematic or "Naughty and rebel". In this Case, barak is a special dormitory like Place where Students with discipline problems are guided, trained, and supervised. Sometimes for 3 days, a week, or more depending on their behavior

Our arguments are:

1. Guidance and Second Chance – The barak offers guidance instead of punishment or expulsion, giving students the opportunity to change.

2. Character Building and Reform – Through discipline, teamwork, and daily routines, the program shapes responsibility, respect, and moral values.

3. Proven Success and Positive Impact – Alumni testimonies and students’ experiences show real improvements, even giving them a sense of belonging and purpose.

4. A Leader Who Is Close to the Community – The barracks prove that Dedi Mulyadi is a leader who gets out and meets people. He doesn't just stay in an office; he sees and understands what his community is going through. He often visits the barracks to talk to people and share things, which builds a real connection. This shows that a leader can make a big difference with a simple, human approach, rather than with big, expensive projects.

These arguments are supported by facts and data.

1. Program Launch

On May 1–2, 2025, West Java officially launched a military-style barrack program in Purwakarta, designed for high school students with behavioral problems. The program involves structured daily routines supervised by multidisciplinary teams, including educators, psychologists, medical staff, and religious mentors.

(Source: Politika.co.id, Antara Jabar)

2. Scale and Duration

The program prepared 40 barracks across West Java and is scheduled to run for up to 6 months, with the first phase lasting 14 days.

(Source: Kabar Majalengka)

3. Budget and Participants

The provincial government allocated Rp 6 billion to support the program, targeting 900 students. The first wave enrolled around 350 students.

(Source: Kompas Bandung)

4. Activities and Content

Students undergo training in discipline, nationalism, anti-drugs education, spiritual guidance, marching drills, and first aid. The aim is character building, not militarization, with a focus on restoring students’ positive values and healthy lifestyles.

(Source: Bappeda Jabar, PPID Jabar)

5. Human Rights Compliance

The Ministry of Law and Human Rights in West Java confirmed that the program does not violate human rights, since it requires parental consent and is not based on forced militarization.

(Source: Politika.co.id)

So the conclusion is, the barak program by Dedi Mulyadi is very useful because it helps solve youth problems and keeps culture alive. In the barak, young people learn discipline, teamwork, and new skills, so they stay away from negative activities. Many of them become more independent and responsible. No other program gives results like this, so the barak is a policy that should be supported.

Class: XI-10

Absent Number: 03

1. Statement

We strongly disagree with the policy that requires students to arrive at school at 6:30 a.m. This would make students study while still sleepy and hungry. They would have to wake up much earlier than usual, which directly affects their mood and motivation to learn. It also disturbs their sleeping hours. On top of that, long distances to school and the lack of public transportation at that early time make things even harder for both students and teachers. Meanwhile, in Singapore, the government bans all levels of education, even universities, from starting classes before 7:30 a.m. For middle and high school, the recommended start time is 8:00–8:15. So, the government should review this policy because it cuts students’ sleeping time and could even cause chronic sleep problems, like insomnia or emotional issues.

2. Arguments

Argument 1 Starting school too early actually harms students. It makes them sleep less, lose focus, become more vulnerable to mental health problems, and study outside the ideal learning hours of 7:00–11:00 when the brain is still fresh. Instead of improving achievement, it lowers both learning quality and student health.

Argument 2 Besides harming students, this policy also affects safety and family life. Students would have to leave home while it’s still dark, and parents would be forced to wake up much earlier, which could even cause family conflicts. Clearly, this policy creates more problems than solutions.

3. Rebuttal

Policymakers need to realize that improving education is not about making school start earlier. It’s about seeing students as whole human beings who need enough sleep, energy, and space to grow. Education is not about who arrives the earliest, but about who goes home with more understanding.

4. Conclusion

This policy is not educational at all because it makes students tired, unfocused, and more likely to get sick, while also burdening families. Discipline doesn’t mean waking up in the dark; it means giving students the chance to learn in a healthy, fresh, and ready condition. School is not a factory, students are not workers, and learning is not just about showing up earlier.

Class : Xl-10

Absent : 21

Statement :

I disagree with the governor’s ban on study tours because this activity is an essential part of the learning process that provides students with direct and in-depth learning experiences. A total ban on study tours would eliminate opportunities for students to broaden their perspectives, develop social skills, and maintain learning motivation—things that are difficult to achieve through classroom learning alone.

Arguments :

- Study tours have educational value that cannot be replaced by classroom instruction. Through direct visits, students gain real experiences that strengthen their understanding of academic material.

- Study tours also promote the development of social skills such as cooperation, communication, and independence, which are important for character building.

- Banning study tours generally risks causing boredom and a decrease in student motivation because learning becomes monotonous.

- If the ban is related to safety or the pandemic, a better solution would be to implement strict health protocols rather than banning the entire activity.

- Budget savings could be managed with careful planning and by seeking sponsors or institutional partnerships, so study tours can continue without burdening the regional budget.

Rebuttal :

- If the concern is safety, a ban is not always effective because other activities also carry risks; therefore, education and supervision are more important.

- If it is due to the pandemic, the current health situation might have improved with vaccines and protocols, so the ban should be adjusted according to real conditions, not a total ban.

- A total ban without considering educational needs could have long-term negative impacts on human resource quality.

Conclusion :

The governor’s ban on study tours should not be carried out as a total ban without thorough evaluation. Study tours are a vital part of the education process that supports both cognitive and social aspects of students. It is better to replace the ban with regulation and strict protocols to ensure the activities continue safely and effectively for the long-term benefit of education. A full ban can harm children’s development and lower the quality of learning. Therefore, the wise approach is to regulate, not prohibit, study tours.

Class: XI-7

Absent Number: 27

I disagree with the idea that students have to attend school at 6:30 a.m. because it is too early for teenagers. Many studies show that students need enough sleep to stay healthy and focused in class. If school starts too early, students will feel sleepy, less productive, and it can even affect their mental health. I believe school should start later, around 7:30 or 8:00 a.m., so students can have more rest and learn more effectively.

Supporting Arguments

Argument 1: Health and Sleep

First of all, students need enough sleep to stay healthy and focused. According to health experts, teenagers need at least 8–9 hours of sleep per night. If school starts at 6:30 a.m., most students will have to wake up around 4:30 or 5:00 a.m. This will force them to sleep less, which can lead to fatigue, stress, and even long-term health problems. Lack of sleep is also linked to depression and anxiety among students.

Argument 2: Academic Performance

Starting school too early negatively affects students' learning ability. When students are sleepy, they cannot concentrate well in class. Research shows that students perform better academically when school starts later, around 8:00 or 8:30 a.m. A tired student cannot absorb knowledge effectively, and this will harm the quality of education.

Argument 3: Safety and Practical Issues

Starting school at 6:30 a.m. raises safety concerns. Many students must travel in the dark early morning, which increases the risk of accidents or crimes. Furthermore, public transportation is often not fully available at such an early time, causing difficulties for students who depend on it. Parents, especially mothers, feel burdened with early morning preparations, including preparing breakfast and taking care of other children. This can be a hassle, especially for families with many children or young children.

Argument 4: Evidence from Developed Countries

The disadvantages of a 6:30 a.m. school start policy in developed countries include the risk of disrupting children's physical and mental health, decreased sleep quality, reduced concentration, and a misalignment with biological rhythms, as evidenced by numerous studies and statements from psychologists and neuroscientists. Developed countries like the United States, Finland, Japan, and South Korea have much later school start times typically around 7:30 to 8:30 a.m., or even later.

Conclusion (Closing Statement):

In conclusion, starting school at 6:30 a.m. is not good for students because it is unhealthy, unproductive, and unsafe. Schools should start later to help students stay healthy, focus better in class, and travel more safely. Many developed countries like the United States, Finland, Japan, and South Korea already start school later, around 7:30 to 8:30 a.m., and it works better for students. That is why we reject the proposal to start school at 6:30 a.m.

Class: XI.10

Absent number: 20

I agree that the government should prohibit holding study tours. Before we start our arguments, let us explain what a study tour is. A study tour is an educational trip where students go outside the school to learn something new, for example visiting museums, factories, or historical places. The purpose is to give students more experience and knowledge beyond the classroom.

1. Statement

However, even though study tours can be fun and educational, they also bring some serious

problems. This is why we, as the agree/pro team, support the governor's decision to prevent schools from having study tours.

2. Argument

First, safety is the most important thing. When students go on a study tour, accidents can happen on the way, like bus crashes or getting lost. By not allowing study tours, the governor is protecting students from dangerous situations.

Second, study tours usually cost a lot of money not all families ca afford it. This can create inequality between students. If there is no study tour, every student can feel equal and no one will be left our because of money.

Third, Schools can still give students new experiences without going far. For example, schools can invite guest speakers, use virtual tours, or organize local educational activities.

These are cheaper, safer, and still give valuable lessons.

•Not all parents have enough money to pay their childern to go on study tours.

•Although the purpose of a study tours is to learn, such as visiting museums and historical places. These era we can use social media platforms like youtube, instagram, tiktok, to learn visually. So students can learn widely without having to spend a lot of money.

•Based on my personal experience, during my study tour, i didn't really learn much about the places i visited. Instead, i learned more by watching youtube. So why we have to doing study tour when we can learn trough youtube.

1. Ineffective Cost: Study tours often require a significant amount of money for transportation, accommodation, and other activities. By abolishing study tours, schools can save costs and allocate them to more effective activities.

2. Time Constraint: Study tours can take up a lot of time and disrupt the academic schedule of students. By abolishing study tours, schools can prioritize academic activities and improve the quality of education.

3. Limited Benefits: Study tours may not always provide significant benefits to students. By abolishing study tours, schools can focus on more beneficial activities and improve the quality of education.

4. Safety and Security Concerns: Study tours can pose safety and security risks to students, especially if they are conducted in unfamiliar places. By abolishing study tours, schools can reduce risks and ensure student safety.

5. Technological Advancements: With the advancement of technology, schools can conduct learning activities more effectively and efficiently without having to organize study tours. By abolishing study tours, schools can save costs and improve the quality of education.

3. Conclusions (Closing Statement)

The last statement from us is the ban on study tours is the right step. because it prevents students from the risk of accidents and motivates school to provide other learning activities that are safer, cheaper, and more useful.

Class: XI-7

Absent Number: 14

TOPIC : No homework for students.

I stand agreeing with the statement that students should not be given homework. I believe homework creates more harm than benefit for students’ development, health, and learning quality.

(-) Supporting Arguments

1. Student Health and Mental Well-being

Research from Stanford University shows that 56% of students see homework as their main source of stress. Too much homework reduces sleeping hours, with many students sleeping less than 7 hours per night. This leads to fatigue, anxiety, and even decreased motivation.

2. Effective Learning Can Happen at School

The Governor of West Java, Kang Dedi Mulyadi (KDM), recently removed homework for students in his province. He argued that learning should be finished at school, while home should be a place to rest, bond with family, and grow socially. He even involved 600 child psychologists to ensure that this policy supports children’s mental and academic growth.

3. Equity and Fairness

Not every student has the same facilities at home. Some may lack internet, a quiet place to study, or parental guidance. This means homework can create educational inequality, making disadvantaged students fall further behind.

4. Time for Holistic Development

Without homework, students have more time for extracurriculars, sports, hobbies, and family. This balance is essential for building creativity, teamwork, and life skills that are just as important as academics.

(-) Solutions

The solustions of this case is the school time need to be reduces, example : go to school later than now or back from school earlier, because homework is taking their time, they need extra time for that.

And another solution is doing fun and educative activities at school to change homework effectively

(-) Closing Statement

As we already know, West Java goverment has a new regulation for all school in West Java. Our governer Dedi Mulyadi has formally eliminated homework in 2025. It can be happen because : Many students felt they didn't had enough time to rest, to quality time with family, or even exploring themselves.

We can see that homework isn't good solution for students.

So we here with the solutions :

1) Doing fun and educative activities at school to change homework effectively

2) School time need to be reduces

So we are absolutely agree with our debate topic : No homework for students. And from our arguments and opinions, i think our team should win this debate because our team has good arguments and solutions.

Thank you

Class: XI-10

Absent Number: 09

Link Google Drive

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1teD4jiCVIL5Xv2H8zJc8ycwEwlxeg5c_

Arguments:

So first of all, Not all students live Close to school or have access to reliable Public transportation, For many, riding a motorcycle is a practical Solution to avoid tardiness and Improve mobility. A total bad ban may lead to unfairness and falls to educate wisely

Opinion 💬

1. We disagree, in our opinion

A total ban is unfair to Students who meet the requirements Some Students are of legal age, have a valid lisense, and ride Responsibly. Banning them treats all students the same, Ignoring Individual circumstances.

2. Better to regunate and supervise than to ban outright Schools can Implement a Permit System for example, only upperclassmen with licenses and parental consent may bring motorcycles. this is more educational than a blanket prohibition

3. Schools can manage Parking zones and staggered entry times chstrif 3 If well-managed, motorcycles dont have to be disrutive Schools can organize parking Systems, Stagger arrival times. or work with Security Personnel to maintain order

4. Motorcyles use can teach responsibility and road ethics Students who ride must Follow traffic rules, maintain their 4 venicies, and ride respectfully. This can be a real-world lesson In responsibility and character development

5. Motorcycles are practical For Students living Far From School Many Students live in rural or Suburban areas where public transport is unavailable motorcycles help them arrive on time. without burdening working Parents.

Conclusion/Closing Statement:

Instead of a total ban, School Should adapt thoughtful and flexible Policies with Pernies. Supr vision, an d education Students can reniain Safe and responsible without Feeling overly restricted. Education is not Just about prohibitions it's about trust, guidance, and character growth.

Class: XI-10

Absent Number: 4

• statement

I disagree with the idea that students should not be allowed to go outside after 9:00 PM. Such a rule is too strict, limits students' freedom, and doesn't take into account individual needs or responsibilities.

• Argument

Not all activities after 9:00 PM are negative or dangerous. Some students may have valid reasons to be out, such as attending study groups, extracurricular activities, or working part-time jobs. Completely restricting their movement shows a lack of trust and fails to teach them how to manage their time and make responsible decisions.

• Rebuttal

Supporters of this rule might say it is necessary for students’ safety. While safety is important, it can be maintained through other methods like requiring permission, setting boundaries, or offering guidance. Over-controlling students does not prepare them for real-life responsibilities.

• Conclusion

In conclusion, students should not be completely banned from going outside after 9:00 PM. Instead of strict restrictions, schools should focus on building trust, encouraging responsibility, and providing safety education. A balanced approach is more effective than a rigid curfew.

We strongly disagree with the policy that requires students to arrive at school at 6:30 a.m. This would make students study while still sleepy and hungry. They would have to wake up much earlier than usual, which directly affects their mood and motivation to learn. It also sidturbs their sleeping hours. On top of that, long distance to school and lack of public transportation at that early time make things even harder for both students and teacgers meanwhile, in Singapore, the government bans all levels of education, even cause chronic sleep problems, like insomnia or emotional issue

2. Arguments

Arguments 1 starting school too early actually harus students. It makes them sleep less, lose focus, become nore vulnerable to mental health problems, and study outside the ideal learning hours of 7:00-11:00 when the brain is still fresh. Instead of improving achievement, it lowers both learning quality and student health

Argument 2 besides

Harming students, this policy also affects safety and family life. Students would have to leave home while it's still dark, and parents would be forced to wake up much earlier, which could, this policy creates more problems than solutions.

3. Rebuttal

Policy makes need to realize that improving education is not about making school start earlier. It's about seeing students as while human beings whi need enough sleep, energy, and space to grow. Education is not about who arrives the earliest, but about who goes home with more understanding.

4. Conclusion

This policy is not education at all because it makes students tired, unfocused, and more likely to get sick, while also burdening families. Disipline doesn't mean waking up in the dark; it means giving students the chance to learn in a healthy, fresh, and ready condition. School is not a factory, students are not workers, and learning is not just about showing up earlier.

Class : Xl-10

Absent : 21

Statement :

I disagree with the governor’s ban on study tours because this activity is an essential part of the learning process that provides students with direct and in-depth learning experiences. A total ban on study tours would eliminate opportunities for students to broaden their perspectives, develop social skills, and maintain learning motivation—things that are difficult to achieve through classroom learning alone.

Arguments :

- Study tours have educational value that cannot be replaced by classroom instruction. Through direct visits, students gain real experiences that strengthen their understanding of academic material.

- Study tours also promote the development of social skills such as cooperation, communication, and independence, which are important for character building.

- Banning study tours generally risks causing boredom and a decrease in student motivation because learning becomes monotonous.

- If the ban is related to safety or the pandemic, a better solution would be to implement strict health protocols rather than banning the entire activity.

- Budget savings could be managed with careful planning and by seeking sponsors or institutional partnerships, so study tours can continue without burdening the regional budget.

Rebuttal :

- If the concern is safety, a ban is not always effective because other activities also carry risks; therefore, education and supervision are more important.

- If it is due to the pandemic, the current health situation might have improved with vaccines and protocols, so the ban should be adjusted according to real conditions, not a total ban.

- A total ban without considering educational needs could have long-term negative impacts on human resource quality.

Conclusion :

The governor’s ban on study tours should not be carried out as a total ban without thorough evaluation. Study tours are a vital part of the education process that supports both cognitive and social aspects of students. It is better to replace the ban with regulation and strict protocols to ensure the activities continue safely and effectively for the long-term benefit of education. A full ban can harm children’s development and lower the quality of learning. Therefore, the wise approach is to regulate, not prohibit, study tours.

Class : XI-10

Absent : 14

Opening / Argument:

Good morning. We, the opposition team, disagree with the motion ‘Students are not allowed to go outside after 09.00 PM.’ We believe that this rule is too strict and not suitable for all students.

First, not all activities at night are negative. Some students may join study groups, extra classes, or religious activities. Second, some students help their parents in family businesses that end late. If we forbid them completely, it will limit their opportunities and responsibilities. Third, what really matters is not the time, but how wisely students use it. Therefore, we oppose this rule.

Rebuttal:

We respect the proposition’s argument that this rule can protect students. But in reality, safety does not only depend on time. Danger can also happen during the day. A strict curfew for all students is not fair because many students are responsible and can manage their own time. Instead of forbidding them, schools and parents should guide and educate them about safety and responsibility.

Closing:

In conclusion, students need freedom to grow and learn responsibility. With proper guidance, they can still be safe even after 09.00 PM. Strict restrictions will only limit their opportunities. That is why we strongly oppose the motion. Thank you.

Class: XI-10

Absent: 35

Arguments:

Not all students live close to school or have access to reliable public transportation. For many, riding a motorcycle is a practical solution to avoid tardiness and improve mobility. A total ban may lead to unfairness and fail to educate wisely.

We disagree in our opinion:

1. A total ban is unfair to students who meet the requirements. Since students are of legal age, have a valid license and ride responsibly, banning them treats students unfairly and ignores individual circumstances.

2. Better to regulate and supervise than to ban outright. Schools can make a permit system – for example, only upperclassmen with licenses and parental consent may bring motorcycles. This is more educational than a blanket prohibition.

3. Schools can manage parking zones and staggered entry times. If well managed, motorcycles don’t have to be disruptive. Schools can organize parking systems, stagger arrival times, or work with security personnel to maintain order.

4. Motorcycle use can teach responsibility and road ethics. Students who ride must follow traffic rules, maintain their vehicles, and ride respectfully. This can be a real-world lesson in responsibility and character development.

5. Motorcycles are practical for students living far from school. Many students live in rural or suburban areas where public transport is unavailable. Motorcycles help them arrive on time without burdening working parents.

Conclusion:

Instead of a total ban, schools should adapt thoughtful and flexible policies. With permits, supervision, and education, students can remain safe and responsible without feeling overly restricted. Education is not just about prohibitions — it’s about trust, guidance, and character growth.

class:XI-10

absent:16

Arguments

Not all students live close to School are harm ACCAIS to reliable public transportation, for Nary, riding a motorcycia is a practical Solution to avoid tradiness and Iniprove mobility. A tatar ban may lead to unfairness and Faus to educate wisely.

*we disagree in our opinion

1.A total ban is unfair to Students who never the requirements. Sonce Students are of legal age, have a valid license and ride responsibly. Baning them treats an Studings the soner, ignoring individual Circumstances. 2.Better to regulate and supervise than to ban outright. Schools con a permit System - For exonpo, Only upperclassmen with licenses and parental consent May bring Motorcycles - This is more aducational than a blanket Prohibition

3.Schools can

manage Parking Zones and Staggered entry times. If well managees, Motorcycles don't have to be disruptive. Schoo15 con organize Parking Sistem Stagger arrival time, of work with Security Personnel to to Maintain a order 4.Motorcycle use Ban teach responsibility and road ethics. Students who ride Must Follow trafic rules, Maintain their vehicles, an ride respectfully. This can be a real-world Lesson in responsibility and character development.

5.Motorcycles are

practical for Stadens living Far Fron School Many Students live in rural or Suburban greas where public transport is unavaiable motor Cycirs help them arrive on tiner withour burdening working Parents. *Conclusion

Instead of a total

ban, School Should

adapt thoughtful

and flexible Policies

with Pernies. Supr

vision, an d

education Students

can reniain Safe and

responsible without

Feeling overly

restricted.

Arguments

-Not all parents

practical for Stadens living Far Fron School Many Students live in rural or Suburban greas where public transport is unavaiable motor Cycirs help them arrive on tiner withour burdening working Parents. *Conclusion

about prohibitions-It's about trust, Education is not Just guidance, and character growth.

Name: Adli Adhyaksa Yusuf

Class: XI-7

Absent No : 1

I am on the side that agrees with the topic, which is about not bringing our motorcycle to school. I believe this rule is important for the safety and discipline of students.

Supporting Arguments

1. I agree with the rule of not bringing motorcycles to school because it can be dangerous for students. Many students are still underage and do not have enough driving experience. Riding a motorcycle requires responsibility and full concentration, but students at a young age may not be ready for this. If they bring motorcycles, the risk of accidents on the way to school is very high. This could cause injuries, even death, and of course, it would be a big loss for the family and the school community.

2. Instead of bringing motorcycles, students can use other types of transportation to come to school. For example, they can use public transportation such as buses, angkot, or school shuttle services. Some students can also ride bicycles or walk if their house is close to the school. This way, they can still arrive safely without risking their lives by riding a motorcycle. Public transportation is also more environmentally friendly and helps reduce traffic congestion around the school.

Conclusion

In our country, the law states that students are only allowed to ride motorcycles if they are at least seventeen years old and already have a driving license.

Therefore, students who are still under seventeen should not be allowed to bring their motorcycles to school. If their home is far from school, they can use alternative transportation such as buses or school shuttle services. By following this rule, students will be safer, more disciplined, and will learn responsibility step by step.

Name: Elga listifania

Class: XI-7

Absent No: 11

I am on the side that agrees with the topic, which is about not bringing our motorcycle to school. I believe this rule is important for the safety and discipline of students.

Supporting Arguments

1. I agree with the rule of not bringing motorcycles to school because it can be dangerous for students.

Many students are still underage and do not have enough driving experience. Riding a motorcycle requires responsibility and full concentration, but students at a young age may not be ready for this. If they bring motorcycles, the risk of accidents on the way to school is very high. This could cause injuries, even death, and of course, it would be a big loss for the family and the school community.

2. Instead of bringing motorcycles, students can use other types of transportation to come to school. For example, they can use public transportation such as buses, angkot, or school shuttle services. Some students can also ride bicycles or walk if their house is close to the school. This way, they can still arrive safely without risking their lives by riding a motorcycle. Public transportation is also more environmentally friendly and helps reduce traffic congestion around the school.

Conclusion

In our country, the law states that students are only allowed to ride motorcycles if they are at least seventeen years old and already have a driving license.

Therefore, students who are still under seventeen should not be allowed to bring their motorcycles to school. If their home is far from school, they can use alternative transportation such as buses or school shuttle services. By following this rule, students will be safer, more disciplined, and will learn responsibility step by step.

Class: Xl.7

Absent number: 17

I disagree with the implementation of military barracks for students.

First, this program is still new, so the preparation might not be well-planned.

Second, it could increase the risk of bullying among students.

Third, students might fall behind in their lessons because they spend too much time in the barracks.

Fourth, it reduces quality time with their parents and families.

Lastly, living under strict rules for a long period could make students feel pressured and stressed.

Supporting argument

Usually, barracks are filled with so-called “naughty” students, so bullying might happen inside the barracks, or when students go outside they could also be bullied because they were placed in the barracks.

Second, students might fall behind in their studies. Even though there are lessons in the barracks, the learning targets are different from their classmates, which can disadvantage the students themselves.

Third, they may feel pressured because they have to follow a military lifestyle that is very different from their own way of life.

And also, even though this policy is made by the government, children’s right to education is disturbed.

In addition, the facilities in the barracks may not be fully ready because the program is still new, so students’ comfort and learning quality can be affected.

Living in the barracks also makes students lose precious time with their parents, while family support is very important for their growth.

Not all students are the same , some may be naughty, but others are not, and putting them together in the same place might make the problem worse instead of solving it.

Lastly, strict rules and pressure in the barracks could even cause long-term trauma, making students feel afraid, stressed, and emotionally unstable

Conclusion(closing statement)

In conclusion, the idea of putting students in military barracks is not an effective solution. Instead of improving discipline, it may cause new problems such as bullying, learning loss, emotional pressure, lack of family time, and even trauma. Therefore, I strongly disagree with the implementation of military barracks for students, because education should focus on guidance, support, and equal opportunities for every child.

Thank you.

Name: Regin Setiawan

Class: XI-7

Absent number: 30

I disagree with the implementation of military barracks for students.

First, this program is still new, so the preparation might not be well-planned.

Second, it could increase the risk of bullying among students.

Third, students might fall behind in their lessons because they spend too much time in the barracks.

Fourth, it reduces quality time with their parents and families.

Lastly, living under strict rules for a long period could make students feel pressured and stressed.

Supporting argument

Usually, barracks are filled with so-called “naughty” students, so bullying might happen inside the barracks, or when students go outside they could also be bullied because they were placed in the barracks.

Second, students might fall behind in their studies. Even though there are lessons in the barracks, the learning targets are different from their classmates, which can disadvantage the students themselves.

Third, they may feel pressured because they have to follow a military lifestyle that is very different from their own way of life.

And also, even though this policy is made by the government, children’s right to education is disturbed.

In addition, the facilities in the barracks may not be fully ready because the program is still new, so students’ comfort and learning quality can be affected.

Living in the barracks also makes students lose precious time with their parents, while family support is very important for their growth.

Not all students are the same , some may be naughty, but others are not, and putting them together in the same place might make the problem worse instead of solving it.

Lastly, strict rules and pressure in the barracks could even cause long-term trauma, making students feel afraid, stressed, and emotionally unstable

Conclusion(closing statement)

In conclusion, the idea of putting students in military barracks is not an effective solution. Instead of improving discipline, it may cause new problems such as bullying, learning loss, emotional pressure, lack of family time, and even trauma. Therefore, I strongly disagree with the implementation of military barracks for students, because education should focus on guidance, support, and equal opportunities for every child.

Thank you.

Class: XI-7

Absent No: 12

•opening statement (kontra/disagree)

"Good morning everyone, today, i strongly agree that homework is important for student. Homework helps us riview the lessons, teaches respon sibility, and prepares us for the future. sometimes, even right after the class ends and the teacher leaves, some students al ready forget the lesson. with out homework students may become lazy and forget what they babe learned theefore i be lieve homework should exist in school"

•Second Speaker

-i respect your opinion, but i disagree. you say homework makes students tired, but actually homework jelas students remember the lesson. Sometimes, even right after class, students al ready forget the material. with homework, they can prectice again at home. Homework is not a burden, it is away to make Learning stronger

- yes, there are regulations, but rules are not always. Education is not only abaut reles, abaut results. Hemework has proven benefits for students, so we should not just follow a rele without thinking of the real impact

-"stres does not come from homework it self, but from bad time management. If students learn to manage their time, homework becomes a use ful practice, not stres"

•conclusion

My opinion is that homework can actually increase students’ grades, because it gives them more practice. So, if students feel too busy, the solution is not to remove homework, but to reduce the length of school lessons. That way, students still have enough time to rest, but also keep the benefit of homework

Class:XI - 10

Student number:10

Student Should Not Allowed to Go Outside Afther 9pm

We agree that student should not go outside afther 9pm. This rule is very important to ensure safety,health and discipline among student.

Supporting argument

1.Safety reasons

At night, the risk of accidents, crimes, or other dangers is higher. Limiting outdoor activity after 9 p.m. helps protect students from potential harm.

2.Better health

Staying out late can disturb students’ sleep schedules. By being home earlier, they can rest properly and maintain good physical and mental health.

Conclusion

Afther all of that. Student should not go outside afther 9pm. Because at night there a risk of accidents,crime or other dangers. And then you should have Better health because youre not staying out late.

Name: Regin Setiawan

Class: XI-7

Absent number: 30

I disagree with the implementation of military barracks for students.

First, this program is still new, so the preparation might not be well-planned.

Second, it could increase the risk of bullying among students.

Third, students might fall behind in their lessons because they spend too much time in the barracks.

Fourth, it reduces quality time with their parents and families.

Lastly, living under strict rules for a long period could make students feel pressured and stressed.

Supporting argument

Usually, barracks are filled with so-called “naughty” students, so bullying might happen inside the barracks, or when students go outside they could also be bullied because they were placed in the barracks.

Second, students might fall behind in their studies. Even though there are lessons in the barracks, the learning targets are different from their classmates, which can disadvantage the students themselves.

Third, they may feel pressured because they have to follow a military lifestyle that is very different from their own way of life.

And also, even though this policy is made by the government, children’s right to education is disturbed.

In addition, the facilities in the barracks may not be fully ready because the program is still new, so students’ comfort and learning quality can be affected.

Living in the barracks also makes students lose precious time with their parents, while family support is very important for their growth.

Not all students are the same , some may be naughty, but others are not, and putting them together in the same place might make the problem worse instead of solving it.

Lastly, strict rules and pressure in the barracks could even cause long-term trauma, making students feel afraid, stressed, and emotionally unstable

Conclusion(closing statement)

In conclusion, the idea of putting students in military barracks is not an effective solution. Instead of improving discipline, it may cause new problems such as bullying, learning loss, emotional pressure, lack of family time, and even trauma. Therefore, I strongly disagree with the implementation of military barracks for students, because education should focus on guidance, support, and equal opportunities for every child.

Thank you.

Class: XI-7

Absent Number: 13

I disagree with the idea that students have to attend school at 6:30a.m. because it is too early for teenagers. Many studies show that students need enough sleep to stay healthy and focused in class. If school starts too early, students will feel sleepy, less productive, and it can even affect their mental health. I believe school should start later, around 7:30 or 8:00 a.m., so students can have more rest and learn more effectively.

Supporting Arguments

Argument 1: Health and Sleep

First of all, students need enough sleep to stay healthy and focused. According to health experts, teenagers need at least 8–9 hours of sleep per night. If school starts at 6:30 a.m., most students will have to wake up around 4:30 or 5:00 a.m. This will force them to sleep less, which can lead to fatigue, stress, and even long-term health problems. Lack of sleep is also linked to depression and anxiety among students.

Argument 2: Academic Performance

Starting school too early negatively affects students' learning ability. When students are sleepy, they cannot concentrate well in class. Research shows that students perform better academically when school starts later, around 8:00 or 8:30 a.m. A tired student cannot absorb knowledge effectively, and this will harm the quality of education.

Argument 3: Safety and Practical Issues

Starting school at 6:30 a.m. raises safety concerns. Many students must travel in the dark early morning, which increases the risk of accidents or crimes. Furthermore, public transportation is often not fully available at such an early time, causing difficulties for students who depend on it. Parents, especially mothers, feel burdened with early morning preparations, including preparing breakfast and taking care of other children. This can be a hassle, especially for families with many children or young children.

Argument 4: Evidence from Developed Countries

The disadvantages of a 6:30 a.m. school start policy in developed countries include the risk of disrupting children's physical and mental health, decreased sleep quality, reduced concentration, and a misalignment with biological rhythms, as evidenced by numerous studies and statements from psychologists and neuroscientists. Developed countries like the United States, Finland, Japan, and South Korea have much later school start times typically around 7:30 to 8:30 a.m., or even later.

Conclusion (Closing Statement):

In conclusion, starting school at 6:30 a.m. is not good for students because it is unhealthy, unproductive, and unsafe. Schools should start later to help students stay healthy, focus better in class, and travel more safely. Many developed countries like the United States, Finland, Japan, and South Korea already start school later, around 7:30 to 8:30 a.m., and it works better for students. That is why we reject the proposal to start school at 6:30 a.m.

Class: XI-10

Absent: 1

Arguments:

Not all students live close to school or have access to reliable public transportation. For many, riding a motorcycle is a practical solution to avoid tardiness and improve mobility. A total ban may lead to unfairness and fail to educate wisely.

We disagree in our opinion:.

1.A total ban is unfair to Students who never the requirements. Sonce Students are of legal age, have a valid license and ride responsibly. Baning them treats an Studings the soner, ignoring individual Circumstances.

2.Better to regulate and supervise than to ban outright. Schools con a permit System - For exonpo, Only upperclassmen with licenses and parental consent May bring Motorcycles - This is more aducational than a blanket Prohibition

3.Schools can manage Parking Zones and Staggered entry times. If well managees, Motorcycles don't have to be disruptive. Schoo15 con organize Parking Sistem Stagger arrival time, of work with Security Personnel to to Maintain a order

4.Motorcycle use Ban teach responsibility and road ethics.

Students who ride Must Follow trafic rules, Maintain their vehicles, an ride respectfully. This can be a real-world Lesson in responsibility and character development.

5.Motorcycles are practical for Stadens living Far Fron School Many Students live in rural or Suburban greas where public transport is unavaiable motor Cycirs help them arrive on tiner withour burdening working Parents.

*Conclusion

Instead of a total ban, School Should adapt thoughtful and flexible Policies with Pernies.

Supr vision, an d education Students can reniain Safe and responsible without Instead of a total ban, School Should adapt thoughtful and flexible Policies with Pernies.

Supr vision, an d education Students can reniain Safe and responsible without Feeling overly restricted.

Education is not Just about prohibitions-It's about trust, guidance, and character growth.

Name: Deca Chania Julianti

Class: XI-7

Absent Number: 08

Agree Team

My Opinion:

I'm agree with this program because it will increase students’ discipline, give them more time in the morning to socialize, finish assignments, and do other positive activities. For Muslim students, it is also suitable since they already wake up early for morning prayers. For other students, this habit will help them get used to waking up early. Moreover, this program can help to reduce traffic jams in the morning.

Supporting Arguments:

1. Better concentration and productivity: According to a study by the American Psychological Association (2020), students’ brains tend to be more alert and active in the early hours of the morning. This shows that the early morning is the golden hour of learning.

2. More free time in the afternoon: A survey conducted by the Indonesian Ministry of Education and Culture (2022) revealed that more than 65% of students reported that finishing school earlier gave them more opportunities to join extracurricular activities.

3. Time management and solutions: With good time management, students can sleep earlier and wake up earlier, making their mornings more productive. If students face sleep problems, solutions can be applied, such as reducing homework and ending school earlier (for example, at 2.30 PM) so they still have enough time to rest.

4. Parental and transportation support: Parents can support their children by taking them to school. If they are busy, students can use ride-hailing services like GrabBike or public transportation. As another solution, schools or the government can provide free public transportation for students so they can arrive on time without extra costs.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, starting school at 6.30 AM is a beneficial program because it improves discipline, enhances concentration and productivity during the golden hours of learning, and provides more time in the afternoon for extracurricular activities or rest. With proper time management, strong parental support, and good transportation facilities, this program will create a more effective, healthier, and disciplined learning environment for students.

Class: XI-7

Absent Number: 13

I disagree with the idea that students have to attend school at 6:30a.m. because it is too early for teenagers. Many studies show that students need enough sleep to stay healthy and focused in class. If school starts too early, students will feel sleepy, less productive, and it can even affect their mental health. I believe school should start later, around 7:30 or 8:00 a.m., so students can have more rest and learn more effectively.

Supporting Arguments

Argument 1: Health and Sleep

First of all, students need enough sleep to stay healthy and focused. According to health experts, teenagers need at least 8–9 hours of sleep per night. If school starts at 6:30 a.m., most students will have to wake up around 4:30 or 5:00 a.m. This will force them to sleep less, which can lead to fatigue, stress, and even long-term health problems. Lack of sleep is also linked to depression and anxiety among students.

Argument 2: Academic Performance

Starting school too early negatively affects students' learning ability. When students are sleepy, they cannot concentrate well in class. Research shows that students perform better academically when school starts later, around 8:00 or 8:30 a.m. A tired student cannot absorb knowledge effectively, and this will harm the quality of education.

Argument 3: Safety and Practical Issues

Starting school at 6:30 a.m. raises safety concerns. Many students must travel in the dark early morning, which increases the risk of accidents or crimes. Furthermore, public transportation is often not fully available at such an early time, causing difficulties for students who depend on it. Parents, especially mothers, feel burdened with early morning preparations, including preparing breakfast and taking care of other children. This can be a hassle, especially for families with many children or young children.

Argument 4: Evidence from Developed Countries

The disadvantages of a 6:30 a.m. school start policy in developed countries include the risk of disrupting children's physical and mental health, decreased sleep quality, reduced concentration, and a misalignment with biological rhythms, as evidenced by numerous studies and statements from psychologists and neuroscientists. Developed countries like the United States, Finland, Japan, and South Korea have much later school start times typically around 7:30 to 8:30 a.m., or even later.

Conclusion (Closing Statement):

In conclusion, starting school at 6:30 a.m. is not good for students because it is unhealthy, unproductive, and unsafe. Schools should start later to help students stay healthy, focus better in class, and travel more safely. Many developed countries like the United States, Finland, Japan, and South Korea already start school later, around 7:30 to 8:30 a.m., and it works better for students. That is why we reject the proposal to start school at 6:30 a.m.

Name:Nindiya Regina Fazrin

Class: XI-10

Absent: 18

Debate Topic

Students should not be allowed to ride or bring motorcycles to school.

My Opinion

I agree with this restriction.

Supporting Arguments

1. Lack of Driving License Many students are not old enough to legally obtain a driver's license.

Riding a motorcycle without one is against the law and poses a danger to themselves and others.

2. Risk of Accidents

Students often lack sufficient driving experience. This increases the likelihood of traffic accidents, especially during busy hours when going to or leaving school.

3. More Orderly School Environment

Without personal vehicles, the school area becomes safer, less congested, and easier for teachers and security staff to monitor.

Conclusion

Banning students from bringing motorcycles to school is a wise decision to ensure safety, order, and comfort for everyone. A school should be a place for learning-not one filled with traffic risks.

Name: Wahidah nurjanah

Class:XI-10

Absent:33

Statement:

I disagree with the governor's ban on study tours because this activity is an essential part of the learning process that provides students with direct and in-depth learning experiences. A total ban on study tours would eliminate opportunities for students to broaden their perspectives, develop social skills,and maintain learning motivation -things that are difficult to achieve through classroom learning alone.

Arguments:

- Study tours have educational value that cannot be replaced by classroom instruction. Through direct visits, students gain real experiences that strengthen their understanding of academic material.

Study tours also promote the development of social skills such as cooperation, communication, and independence, which are important for characterbuilding.

Banning study tours generally risks causing boredom and a decrease in student motivation because learning becomes monotonous.

If the ban is related to safety or the pandemic, a better solution would be to implement strict health protocols rather than banning the entire activity.

Budget savings could be managed with careful planning and by seeking sponsors or institutional partnerships, so study tours can continue without burdening the regional budget.Rebuttal:

- If the concern is safety, a ban is not always effective because other activities also carry risks; therefore, education and supervision are more important.

If it is due to the pandemic, the current health situation might have improved with vaccines and protocols, so the ban should be adjusted according to real conditions, not a total ban.

- A total ban without considering educational needs could have long-term negative impacts on human resource quality.

Conclusion:The governor's ban

on study tours should not be carried out as a total ban without thorough evaluation. Study tours are a vital part of the education process that supports both cognitive and social aspects of students. It is better to replace the ban with regulation and strict protocols to ensure the activities continue safely and effectively for the long-term benefit of education. A full ban can harm children's development and lower the quality of learning. Therefore, the wise approach is to regulate, not

prohibit, study tours.

Class : XI-10

Absen Number : 19

We agree that student should not go outside afther 9pm. This rule is very important to ensure safety,health and discipline among student.

Supporting argument

1.Safety reasons

At night, the risk of accidents, crimes, or other dangers is higher. Limiting outdoor activity after 9 p.m. helps protect students from potential harm.

2.Better health

Staying out late can disturb students’ sleep schedules. By being home earlier, they can rest properly and maintain good physical and mental health.

Conclusion

Afther all of that. Student should not go outside afther 9pm. Because at night there a risk of accidents,crime or other dangers. And then you should have Better health because youre not staying out late.

Class: XI-10

Absent: 01

Arguments:

Not all students live close to school or have access to reliable public transportation. For many, riding a motorcycle is a practical solution to avoid tardiness and improve mobility. A total ban may lead to unfairness and fail to educate wisely.

We disagree in our opinion:.

1.A total ban is unfair to Students who never the requirements. Sonce Students are of legal age, have a valid license and ride responsibly. Baning them treats an Studings the soner, ignoring individual Circumstances.

2.Better to regulate and supervise than to ban outright. Schools con a permit System - For exonpo, Only upperclassmen with licenses and parental consent May bring Motorcycles - This is more aducational than a blanket Prohibition

3.Schools can manage Parking Zones and Staggered entry times. If well managees, Motorcycles don't have to be disruptive. Schoo15 con organize Parking Sistem Stagger arrival time, of work with Security Personnel to to Maintain a order

4.Motorcycle use Ban teach responsibility and road ethics.

Students who ride Must Follow trafic rules, Maintain their vehicles, an ride respectfully. This can be a real-world Lesson in responsibility and character development.

5.Motorcycles are practical for Stadens living Far Fron School Many Students live in rural or Suburban greas where public transport is unavaiable motor Cycirs help them arrive on tiner withour burdening working Parents.

*Conclusion

Instead of a total ban, School Should adapt thoughtful and flexible Policies with Pernies.

Supr vision, an d education Students can reniain Safe and responsible without Instead of a total ban, School Should adapt thoughtful and flexible Policies with Pernies.

Supr vision, an d education Students can reniain Safe and responsible without Feeling overly restricted.

Education is not Just about prohibitions-It's about trust, guidance, and character growth.

Class: XI-10, Nomer: 07

Topic:

Students may not use vehicles to school

Statement:

We strongly believe that students should not be allowed to use motor vehicles to go to school.

Argument:

First, it reduces the risk of traffic accidents. Many students are underage and do not yet have enough driving experience.

Second, banning motor vehicles helps the environment by reducing air pollution and traffic congestion around schools.

Third, walking, cycling, or using public transportation can promote a healthier lifestyle and discipline among students.

Rebuttal:

The opposing team may argue that motor vehicles save time. However, safety is far more important than a few minutes saved. With better public transportation and proper scheduling, students can still arrive on time without risking their lives.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, prohibiting motor vehicles for students is the best way to protect their safety, the environment, and encourage healthier habits.

Statement: We strongly believe that students should not be allowed to use motor vehicles to go to school. Argument: First, it reduces the risk of traffic accidents. Many students are underage and do not yet have enough driving experience. Second, banning motor vehicles helps the environment by reducing air pollution and traffic congestion around schools. Third, walking, cycling, or using public transportation can promote a healthier lifestyle and discipline among students. Rebuttal: The opposing team may argue that motor vehicles save time. However, safety is far more important than a few minutes saved. With better public transportation and proper scheduling, students can still arrive on time without risking their lives. Conclusion: In conclusion, prohibiting motor vehicles for students is the best way to protect their safety, the environment, and encourage healthier habits.

Opening Statement:

I agree that student should not go outside afther 9pm. This rule is very important to ensure safety,health and discipline among student.

Supporting argument

1.Safety reasons

At night, the risk of accidents, crimes, or other dangers is higher. Limiting outdoor activity after 9 p.m. helps protect students from potential harm.

2.Better health

Staying out late can disturb students’ sleep schedules. By being home earlier, they can rest properly and maintain good physical and mental health.

Conclusion

Afther all of that. Student should not go outside afther 9pm. Because at night there a risk of accidents,crime or other dangers. And then you should have Better health because youre not staying out late.

Class: Xl-10

Absent: 25

Debate Topic Students should not be allowed to ride or bring motorcycles to school.

My Opinion I agree with this restriction.

Supporting Arguments 1. Lack of Driving License Many students are not old enough to legally obtain a driver's license. Riding a motorcycle without one is against the law and poses a danger to themselves and others.

2. Risk of Accidents Students often lack sufficient driving experience. This increases the likelihood of traffic accidents, especially during busy hours when going to or leaving school.

3. More Orderly School Environment Without personal vehicles, the school area becomes safer, less congested, and easier for teachers and security staff to monitor.

Conclusion Banning students from bringing motorcycles to school is a wise decision to ensure safety, order, and comfort for everyone. A school should be a place for learning-not one filled with traffic risks.

Class : XI-9

Absent Number : 04

1. Statement

   I disagree because banning study tours actually harms students, as this activity has many benefits that cannot be replaced by classroom learning.

2. Supporting Arguments

   • Study tours provide direct learning experiences. Students can see cultural, historical, and scientific aspects firsthand, making the knowledge more meaningful than just reading books.

   • Study tours strengthen the relationship between students and teachers. This activity builds better cooperation, teamwork, and communication.

   • Study tours help students become more independent, responsible, and open-minded because they face real-life situations outside of school.

   • Study tours increase cultural awareness. Students can learn to appreciate diversity, value local traditions, and understand the importance of tolerance in society.

   • Real-life experiences make the material stick better than just reading a book or listening to a teacher's explanation.

   • A different learning environment gives students a fresh perspective, making them more interested in the subject matter.

3. Conclusion/Closing Statement

   Study tours should not be prohibited because they offer many benefits that cannot be replaced by classroom learning. Thru study tours, students gain more meaningful direct learning experiences, strengthen social relationships, increase independence and openness, foster cultural awareness, and make subject matter easier to understand and more engaging. Therefore, study tours play an important role in shaping students who are more knowledgeable, tolerant, and prepared for real life.

Class: XI-9

Absent Number: 21

Link:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GTWzxzntn2ZVYJ6QBg6X8gSuhhgN1EFi/view?usp=drivesdk

Statement

The policy that requires students to arrive at school at 06.30 am is an inappropriate and potentially detrimental step. This policy ignores the science behind adolescent sleep patterns, burdens students and their families with unnecessary stress, and can ultimately hinder, rather than improve, academic success.

Argument

This policy raises various deep problems that need to be considered:

1. Contrary to the Natural Sleep Patterns of Teenagers Biologically, teenagers have different circadian rhythms. The hormone melatonin—which regulates sleep—starts to be produced more slowly at night and stops more slowly in the morning. This means that teenagers naturally tend to sleep late at night and need to wake up more in the afternoon to get enough sleep, which is about 8-10 hours per night. With the start time of school at 06.30, students must wake up between 04.30 or 05.00 in the morning. It is almost impossible to meet their sleep needs, which results in chronic sleep deprivation. This lack of sleep is not a trivial problem; it is a condition that can seriously interfere with brain development and cognitive function.

2. Negative Impact on Academic Performance Lack of sleep has a direct effect on the brain. When students don't get enough sleep, it's harder for them to concentrate, process new information, and remember lessons. A tired brain will function more slowly, making it difficult for students to absorb the subject matter in the first grade. This is ironic, because the first lesson is often a core subject such as Mathematics or Science that requires high concentration. Lack of sleep can also cause students to be more irritable, less motivated, and have a slower reaction time. So, instead of increasing discipline and success, this policy actually creates a real obstacle to academic achievement.

3. Triggering Mental and Physical Health Problems The pressure to wake up very early, coupled with lack of sleep, can increase stress and anxiety levels in students. Prolonged lack of sleep can trigger more serious mental health problems, such as depression and anxiety disorders. Physically, lack of sleep can weaken the immune system, making students more susceptible to disease. In addition, there are studies that associate lack of sleep with the risk of obesity, diabetes, and other long-term health problems.

4. Logistics Burden for Family and Community This policy not only affects students but also the whole family. Parents have to wake up early to prepare their children and take them to school. For families who rely on public transportation, this early morning can be a big logistical challenge, especially in areas with limited transportation services. In addition, not all parents have a flexible work schedule to accommodate such an early delivery time.

Conclusion

Overall, although the intention behind this policy may be good—to instill discipline and use time efficiently—the impact is far more harmful than good. This policy ignores clear scientific evidence about adolescent sleep needs and can harm students' health, mental well-being, and academic performance. Therefore, it is time for schools to consider a more realistic and scientific start time to support student development holistically.

Class : XI-9

Student number : 05

1. Statement :

Military Barracks. As the affirmative side, we firmly believe that military barracks are essential to maintaining a strong, organized, and effective military force. They are not just buildings they are the foundation of discipline, unity, and national security. In the following arguments, we will show you why military barracks are not only beneficial but necessary for a nation's defense system.

2. Arguments

Argument 1 : Living in barracks teaches soldiers discipline and fosters a strong sense of unity. These values are critical in military operations where trust and cooperation can save lives.

Argument 2 : Living in military barracks provides soldiers with a support network. Being surrounded by fellow service members helps reduce feelings of isolation, stress, and homesickness especially for new recruits or those far from their families. It builds morale and emotional resilience.

3. Rebuttal

Some might argue that military barracks are outdated, too expensive, or restrict personal freedom.

However, national defense is a top priority, and investing in barracks is an investment in safety and preparedness. Additionally, military life is based on structure and discipline—barracks support this environment, not hinder it. Freedom must sometimes be balanced with responsibility, especially in service to one’s country.

4. Conclusion

In conclusion, military barracks play a vital role in ensuring a well-prepared, disciplined, and unified military force. The benefits they provide in terms of security, efficiency, and training far outweigh the criticisms. For any nation that values its sovereignty and stability, maintaining military barracks is not just beneficial it is essential.

Name: Naufal Fakhir Miftahudin

Class: XI-9

Absent number: 24

1. Statement

   Free food programs are often seen as a quick solution to reduce hunger and improve nutrition, but in reality they are not an effective and permanent way to solve these problems. Such programs may provide temporary relief, yet they fail to address the root causes of malnutrition and poverty, which are mainly related to lack of education, limited job opportunities, and poor economic conditions.

2. Argument

   The main problem with free food programs is that the food provided is not always of good quality, and without strict safety checks, there is a higher risk of food poisoning and other health problems. In addition, the food can quickly become stale and unhealthy, especially if stored in hot conditions, as steam from the food can lead to bacteria growth. Beyond health issues, free food programs also waste a large amount of government money that could be better allocated to education, job creation, or other sectors that truly support sustainable development. Furthermore, the wages of workers may be reduced because a significant portion of the state budget is directed to funding these programs, which worsens the already difficult economic condition of Indonesian workers.

3. Rebuttal

   Although free food may seem helpful to reduce hunger in the short term, it only creates dependency among people. Instead of empowering citizens to be independent, it makes them rely on government aid. In addition, such programs open the door to corruption and misuse of funds.

4. Conclusion

   In conclusion, while free food programs may look beneficial and helpful for the poor in the beginning, they are not a sustainable solution. These programs risk creating dependency, wasting government funds, and even encouraging corruption. Instead of continuously spending money on short-term relief, the government should prioritize long-term investments such as education, job creation, health facilities, and sustainable community development. By doing so, people can become more independent, improve their standard of living, and gradually reduce poverty in a more permanent way.

Class:XI.10

Topic :students are not allowed to go out side after 09.00 pm

Opening

I disagree with the rule that states students are not allowed to go out after 9:00 PM. This rule seems to overly restrict students' freedom and does not consider individual needs and responsibilities.

Statment

Firstly, every student has different schedules and needs. Some may need to study in groups until late at night, while others may want to pursue hobbies or extracurricular activities that can only be done at night. Strictly regulating curfew hours could hinder their potential and creativity.

Secondly, students need to learn to manage their time and responsibilities themselves. By giving them reasonable freedom, they can develop personal discipline and time management skills better than being restricted by rigid rules.

Thirdly, security and supervision can be improved without having to prohibit students from going out after a certain hour. Parents and schools can work together to ensure students' safety without excessively limiting their activities.

Closing

Therefore, I believe that strict curfew rules are not effective and can actually have a negative impact on students' development. A balance of freedom and responsibility would be more beneficial for their growth.

Name : Juan Amar Hasbi

Class : XI-7

Absent No :18

I am on the side that agrees with the topic, which is about not bringing our motorcycle to school. I believe this rule is important for the safety and discipline of students.

Supporting

Arguments

1. I agree with the rule of not bringing motorcycle to school because it can be dangerous for students. Many students are still undrage and do not have enough driving experience. Riding a motorcycle requires responsibility and full concentration, but students at a young age may not be ready for this. If they bring motorcycle, the risk of accidents on the way to school is very high, this could cause injuries, even death, and of course, ir would be a big loss for the family and the school community

2. Instead of bringing

motorcyclestudents can use other types of trasnportation to come to school, for example, they can use public transportation such as buses, angkot, or school shuttle services. Some students can also ride bicycles or walk if their hause is close to the school. This way, they can still arrive safety without risking their lives by riding a motorcycle. Public transportation is also more enviromentally friendly and hleps congestion around the school.

Conclusion

In air country, the law states that students are only allowed to ride motorcycle if they are at least seventeen years oldand already have a driving license not be allowed to bring their motorcycle to school. If their home is far from school, they can use alternaive transportation such as buses or school shuttle services. By following this rule, students wil be safer, more disciplined, and Wil learn responsibility step by step

Grade : XI-10

No : 22

Statement:

I oppose the governor’s decision to prohibit study tours because these activities play an important role in the learning process. Study tours give students direct, meaningful experiences that cannot be fully replaced by classroom lessons. Completely eliminating them would reduce opportunities for students to expand their knowledge, build social abilities, and keep their learning spirit alive.

Arguments:

Study tours provide educational benefits that are difficult to achieve through textbooks alone. By visiting places directly, students gain real-life experiences that strengthen their understanding of what they study.

Such activities also encourage the growth of social competencies like teamwork, communication, and independence, which are essential for character development.

Removing study tours could lead to boredom and lower motivation, since learning would feel repetitive and less engaging.

If the ban is based on safety or health concerns, the wiser step would be to apply strict supervision and health guidelines instead of canceling the entire program.

Regarding financial issues, costs can be managed through careful planning, fundraising, or partnerships, so study tours can still be carried out without putting too much burden on the budget.

Rebuttal:

If safety is the concern, banning is not the best solution since every activity carries risks; proper guidance and supervision are far more effective.

If the reason is the pandemic, today’s conditions have improved with vaccines and health measures, so the policy should be adjusted instead of enforcing a total prohibition.

A full ban that ignores the educational importance may negatively affect students’ long-term development and the quality of human resources.

Conclusion:

The governor’s policy of fully banning study tours should be reconsidered. These activities are a crucial part of education, supporting both academic learning and social development. A more balanced solution would be to regulate them with clear guidelines and safety measures, rather than eliminating them altogether. Prohibition could harm students’ growth and reduce learning quality, while proper regulation would allow study tours to contin

ue safely and effectively.

Name : Sela Andriyana

Class : XI-9

Absent Number : 32

1. Statement

I disagree because banning study tours actually harms students, as this activity has many benefits that cannot be replaced by classroom learning.

2. Supporting Argumentasi

- Direct Learning Experience

Study tours provide students with real-world learning opportunities. Instead of only reading books, they can directly observe history, culture, and science. This makes knowledge more meaningful, practical, and memorable.

- Strengthening Relationships

Study tours strengthen the bonds between students and teachers. Through shared experiences, they build teamwork, cooperation, and better communication, which are essential for personal and academic growth.

- Developing Independence and Responsibility

By facing real-life situations outside school, students learn to be more independent, responsible, and open-minded. These skills are crucial for preparing them to face challenges in the future.

- Cultural Awareness

Unlike virtual reality, study tours provide authentic cultural experiences. Students learn to respect diversity, appreciate local traditions, and understand the importance of tolerance in society.

- Addressing Concerns

Some people argue that study tours are expensive and risky. However, the solution is not to prohibit them. Instead, schools can manage them better: choose affordable destinations, ensure safety measures, and provide equal opportunities so that all students can participate.

3. Conclusion/Closing Statement

If study tours are banned, students will lose a good chance to learn outside the classroom. Study tours not only add knowledge but also teach teamwork, independence, and tolerance. With good planning like choosing cheap places, keeping safety, and giving fair chances study tours can be useful and fun. So, instead of banning them, study tours should be improved and managed well so every student can enjoy the benefits.

Name : Bunga Mauliana

Class : XI-9

Absent Number : 06

1. Statement

First of all, I disagree because banning study tours actually harms students, as this activity has many benefits that cannot be replaced by classroom learning.

2. Supporting Arguments

To begin with, study tours provide direct learning experiences. Students can see history, culture, and science in real life, which makes knowledge more meaningful than just reading books.

Moreover, study tours help students to be more independent, responsible, and open-minded because they face real-life situations outside school.

In addition, study tours strengthen relationships among students and teachers. They build teamwork, cooperation, and better communication.

Furthermore, virtual reality technology cannot give the same cultural awareness. On study tours, students can learn to respect diversity, appreciate local traditions, and understand the importance of tolerance in society.

On the other hand, I understand that some people say study tours are expensive and risky. However, the solution is not to ban them. Instead, the solution is to manage them better: choose affordable destinations, ensure safety, and make sure all students can participate fairly.

3. Conclusion

In conclusion, it can be said that banning study tours is not the right solution. In fact, study tours have many important benefits, both academically and socially, and also for students' character. With proper management, such as choosing accessible destinations, paying attention to safety, and ensuring the participation of all students, study tours can still be conducted without burdening or endangering them. Therefore, study tours should not be banned, but rather regulated to be an effective, safe, and beneficial educational activity for all students.

Class : XI-9

Student Number : 3

Task 1

1. Statement :

I totally agree with this topic "Students are demanded to arrive at school at 06:30 AM. Because, this policy was introduced by Kang Dedi Mulyadi, a prominent West Java leader, to improve student discipline and productivity.

2. Arguments :

a. By startinbg at 06:30 AM, students will travel before the busiest rush hour, which helps minimize congestion and allows smoother transportation for everyone.

b. By starting at 06:30, students will finishing their school earlier and will gives students more free time in the afternoon because they back at home at 3:00 PM. Sp they will have free time for join extracurricular activity, develop talents, spend time with family, or even rest earlier in the evening. This balance times supports holistic education, not just academics.

c. Research, including an electroencephalogram (EEG) Study on high school students, suggests that morning at 06:30 AM is the best time for learning and tasks requiring higher brain activity.

3. Conclusion :

   In conclusion, i'm still agree with this policy by Kang Dedi Mulyadi because, the policy requiring students in West Java to arrive at school by 6:30 AM is a forward-thinking step toward building a more disciplined, responsible, and productive generation. Also many studies prove that the brain works more effectively and energetic after a good night's rest. As i said before, by starting school at 06:3o AM and back at home at 3:00 PM, they will maximize their time to rest. Also, by learning earlier, they will maximize their peak concentration time and absorbs lessons more effectively.

Task 2

Poster Design

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxt6L5aNk/6vnqs5MaoByw5eVg5b86Yw/edit?utm_content=DAGxt6L5aNk&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class : XI-9

Absent Number : 04

Topic : The Free Lunch From Government.

Full Name : Nadinda Ardiawinata Suryadi

Grade : XI-9

Student Number : 22

‎

‎Statement:

‎ Healthy food can protect the body from various non-communicable diseases, such as heart disease, diabetes and cancer.

‎ However, in reality, not everyone can afford to buy nutritious food, so with the existence of Free Nutritious Food they are helped to fulfill their right to get healthy and nutritious food.

‎

‎Arguments 1:

‎ With this programs, parents especially those from low income families no longer have to worry about the lost of their children's meals at school, so they can allocate their income to other needs.

‎

‎Arguments 2:

‎ If only children from wealthy families can afford to health food, there will be a generational. Gap this program bridges the gap so that all children have an equal opportunity to grow optimaly.

‎

‎Arguments 3:

‎ Nutritious food is a basic right of every child. The state is obliged to ensure that an children receive adequate nutrition. As this is part of the right to a healty life, which is protected by low.

‎

‎Conclusion:

‎ As a pro team, we emphasize that free nutritious meals is not just a program, but an investment in the nation with healthy. Intelligent, and empowered children, Indonesia has a stronger future. Therefore, we fully support this program to achieve indonesia's golden generation.

Task 2

Class : XI-9

Absent : 29

Statement :

I disagree, many student come late to school because they didn’t get enough rest. They should wake up early for school, that will make they feel sleepy and not focus while studying. Student need more rest for getting a good condition for studying, when school start at 6.30 that will bother their condition.

Argument 1 :

Research from neuroscientists suggests that the optimal study time is between 9:00 and 10:00 AM. Therefore, the notion that starting at 6:30 AM improves focus is a misconception.

Argument 2 :

In foreign countries, schools start at 8:00 AM, and this significantly maximizes students thinking skills and improves their focus. From this, we can see that the 6:30 AM school start policy is highly ineffective in improving student focus.

Argument 3 :

Student will sleepy when the class start, because they haven’t enough rest and to early go to school. They go home at 3.00 PM, and they should do their extracurricular or another activity until night. What if their home is far from school, they need wake up more quickly from usual.

Argument 4 :

But if they haven't enough rest thats will make they still sleepy and not focus during the study. Because they should back at 3 PM and if they have lot activities that they should to do at the day, that will make they still feel tired and not effective.

conclusion:

Starting school too early isn't necessary, as this will negatively impact their health. There are many more effective ways to improve focus, discipline, and other skills. Starting school too early can cause stress, disrupt sleep patterns, and make them feel sleepy during lessons. The government should be more realistic about school start times so that students can adjust to them, and prioritize their well-being.

Link : https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxtgXEo7I/qxziejIt6g-boXX06kCmHQ/edit?utm_content=DAGxtgXEo7I&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

XI.9

Class: XI-9

Absent Number: 20

Topics : The Free Lunch From Govertment

‎

‎Statement:

‎ Healthy food can protect the body from various non-communicable diseases, such as heart disease, diabetes and cancer.

‎ However, in reality, not everyone can afford to buy nutritious food, so with the existence of Free Nutritious Food they are helped to fulfill their right to get healthy and nutritious food.

‎

‎Arguments 1:

‎ With this programs, parents especially those from low income families no longer have to worry about the lost of their children's meals at school, so they can allocate their income to other needs.

‎

‎Arguments 2:

‎ If only children from wealthy families can afford to health food, there will be a generational. Gap this program bridges the gap so that all children have an equal opportunity to grow optimaly.

‎

‎Arguments 3:

‎ Nutritious food is a basic right of every child. The state is obliged to ensure that an children receive adequate nutrition. As this is part of the right to a healty life, which is protected by low.

‎

‎Conclusion:

‎ As a pro team, we emphasize that free nutritious meals is not just a program, but an investment in the nation with healthy. Intelligent, and empowered children, Indonesia has a stronger future. Therefore, we fully support this program to achieve indonesia's golden generation.

Poster Design Canva Link:

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxt4w2eIk/IfWiRGw6_sD0I82M1tkReg/edit?utm_content=DAGxt4w2eIk&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class : XI-9

Absent Number : 27

-Statement

I agree with the ban on study tours because, even though study tours can provide some benefits, the risks and negative impacts are greater and more urgent to be considered.

-Supporting Arguments

1. Safety Concerns

Study tours often involve long trips by bus or other transportation, which can increase the risk of accidents. The safety of students must be the first priority of schools and the government.

2. Financial Burden

Study tours require quite high costs. This can burden parents, especially those from lower-income families, and create inequality among students.

3. Discipline and Focus

Study tours sometimes shift students’ focus away from learning. Instead of concentrating on school subjects, students may be more focused on the entertainment aspects of the trip.

4. Alternative Learning

The benefits of study tours can actually be replaced with other activities such as virtual field trips, inviting guest speakers, or school-based projects that are more affordable, safe, and equally educational.

-Conclusion

In conclusion, banning study tours is a wise decision because it prevents accidents, reduces the financial burden on parents, and keeps students focused on learning. Schools can still provide meaningful experiences through safer and more affordable alternatives

Class : XI-9

Absent Number : 32

Class: XI-9

Student Number: 16

Statement:

I believe that sending bad students to military barracks is an effective way to reform their behavior and instill discipline that traditional schools often fail to provide.

Argument:

Military barracks offer a structured, disciplined environment where respect, responsibility, and self-control are core values. Many students labeled as “bad” often suffer from a lack of structure, poor role models, or chaotic home environments. A military-style setting can remove them from negative influences and teach them essential life skills such as punctuality, teamwork, and respect for authority. These qualities not only improve their behavior but also prepare them for adult life.

There is also evidence that programs with military-style discipline have helped reduce juvenile delinquency and recidivism. For students who disrupt learning environments and refuse to respond to conventional punishment, this method could be a last resort that actually works.

Rebuttal (to the opposing side):

Opponents argue that sending students to military barracks is too harsh and could harm their mental health. However, the intention is not punishment but rehabilitation. These programs can be adjusted to focus on growth, mentorship, and positive discipline rather than fear or abuse. Many so-called “bad” students need clear boundaries and adult support – and military barracks can offer both, in a controlled and focused environment that schools often cannot provide due to overcrowding or lack of resources.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, while it may seem extreme to some, military barracks provide a valuable opportunity to reform students who have consistently failed to respond to traditional education and discipline methods. With the right oversight and support, these programs can turn troubled youth into responsible, respectful, and productive individuals. It’s better to intervene early with a structured approach than to wait for their behavior to worsen and lead to long-term consequences.

Class : XI-9

Absent number : 24

Class : XI-9

Absent Number : 31

Statement:

‎ Healthy food can protect the body from various non-communicable diseases, such as heart disease, diabetes and cancer.

‎ However, in reality, not everyone can afford to buy nutritious food, so with the existence of Free Nutritious Food they are helped to fulfill their right to get healthy and nutritious food.

‎

‎Arguments 1:

‎ With this programs, parents especially those from low income families no longer have to worry about the lost of their children's meals at school, so they can allocate their income to other needs.

‎

‎Arguments 2:

‎ If only children from wealthy families can afford to health food, there will be a generational. Gap this program bridges the gap so that all children have an equal opportunity to grow optimaly.

‎

‎Arguments 3:

‎ Nutritious food is a basic right of every child. The state is obliged to ensure that an children receive adequate nutrition. As this is part of the right to a healty life, which is protected by low.

‎

‎Conclusion:

‎ As a pro team, we emphasize that free nutritious meals is not just a program, but an investment in the nation with healthy. Intelligent, and empowered children, Indonesia has a stronger future. Therefore, we fully support this program to achieve indonesia's golden generation.

Class: XI-9

Student Number: 26

Task 1

1. Statement:

I totally agree with this topic "Students are demanded to arrive at school at 06:30 AM. Because, this policy was introduced by Kang Dedi Mulyadi, a prominent West Java leader, to improve student discipline and productivity.

2. Arguments:

a. By startinbg at 06:30 AM, students will travel before the busiest rush hour, which helps minimize congestion and allows smoother transportation for everyone.

b. By starting at 06:30, students will finishing their school earlier and will gives students more free time in the afternoon because they back at home at 3:00 PM. Sp they will have free time for join extracurricular activity, develop talents, spend time with family, or even rest earlier in the evening. This balance times supports holistic education, not just academics.

c. Research, including an electroencephalogram (EEG) Study on high school students, suggests that morning at 06:30 AM is the best time for learning and tasks requiring higher brain activity.

3. Conclusion:

In conclusion, i'm still agree with this policy by Kang Dedi Mulyadi because, the policy requiring students in West Java to arrive at school by 6:30 AM is a forward-thinking step toward building a more disciplined, responsible, and productive generation. Also many studies prove that the brain works more effectively and energetic after a good night's rest As i said before, by starting school at 06:30 AM and back at home at 3:00 PM, they will maximize their time to rest. Also, by learning earlier, they will maximize their peak concentration time and absorbs lessons more effectively.

Task 2

Poster design

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxthIgckc/PrU6aUGVP9sYV1AZV5iwaQ/edit?utm_content=DAGxthIgckc&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Name : Muhamad Desan Saepulloh

Class : XI-9

Absent Number : 19

1.Statment

"Military barracks are not suitable for children in West Java because they limit freedom, harm psychological growth, reduce social interaction, and replace creative education with rigid discipline, which may cause isolation and distrust in society."

2."Growing up in military barracks exposes children to strict rules and early indoctrination, which can hinder their critical thinking and prevent them from developing a balanced, independent identity."

3.The military barracks environment is not suitable for children's ages and carries a high risk of physical and psychological violence, which violates the basic principles of children's rights.

4."Placing children in military barracks disregards their right to a nurturing environment, as it forces them into premature exposure to militarism instead of allowing them to grow naturally in supportive families and communities."

Conclusion: Growing up in military barracks can restrict children’s freedom of thought, as strict rules and early indoctrination hinder the development of an independent and well-balanced identity.

Name:Geisya Amelia

Class:XI-9

Absent Number:12

🔗Link:

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxty5m0UM/rrN4PgbZhZAJ2iqYnXpIww/edit?utm_content=DAGxty5m0UM&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

1.Statement:

I agree that starting school at 6:30 can reduce traffic jams during rush hour, encourage discipline in students who wake up earlier, and potentially increase children's intelligence through more regular sleep and waking up earlier.

2.Argument:

•Building Discipline and Character: This policy is believed to instill discipline and self-discipline in students from an early age, which is an important asset for the future.

•Optimizing Time: Students who leave early have more time to utilize and begin learning activities more effectively.

•Building a Positive Work Ethic: The habit of waking up early and arriving on time can be the first step in developing a work ethic and a productive spirit.

3.Conclusion

The conclusion from the 6:30 AM school start time policy is the formation of discipline, habituation to a culture of waking up early, and preparation of a resilient young generation for the future.

Class : XI-9

Absent Number : 06

Name:Geisya Amelia

Class:XI-9

Absent Number:12

🔗Link:

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxty5m0UM/rrN4PgbZhZAJ2iqYnXpIww/edit?utm_content=DAGxty5m0UM&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

1.Statement:

I agree that starting school at 6:30 can reduce traffic jams during rush hour, encourage discipline in students who wake up earlier, and potentially increase children's intelligence through more regular sleep and waking up earlier.

2.Argument:

•Building Discipline and Character: This policy is believed to instill discipline and self-discipline in students from an early age, which is an important asset for the future.

•Optimizing Time: Students who leave early have more time to utilize and begin learning activities more effectively.

•Building a Positive Work Ethic: The habit of waking up early and arriving on time can be the first step in developing a work ethic and a productive spirit.

3.Conclusion

The conclusion from the 6:30 AM school start time policy is the formation of discipline, habituation to a culture of waking up early, and preparation of a resilient young generation for the future.

class: XI-9

absen number: 34

Topic: Students are demandesd to arrive at 06:30 AM.

Task 1

1. Statement:

I totally agree with this topic "Students are demanded to arrive at school at 06:30 AM. Because, this policy was introduced by Kang Dedi Mulyadi, a prominent West Java leader, to improve student discipline and productivity.

2. Arguments:

a. By startinbg at 06:30 AM, students will travel before the busiest rush hour, which helps minimize congestion and allows smoother transportation for everyone.

b. By starting at 06:30, students will finishing their school earlier and will gives students more free time in the afternoon because they back at home at 3:00 PM. Sp they will have free time for join extracurricular activity, develop talents, spend time with family, or even rest earlier in the evening. This balance times supports holistic education, not just academics.

c. Research, including an electroencephalogram (EEG) Study on high school students, suggests that morning at 06:30 AM is the best time for learning and tasks requiring higher brain activity.

3. Conclusion:

In conclusion, i'm still agree with this policy by Kang Dedi Mulyadi because, the policy requiring students in West Java to arrive at school by 6:30 AM is a forward-thinking step toward building a more disciplined, responsible, and productive generation. Also many studies prove that the brain works more effectively and energetic after a good night's rest As i said before, by starting school at 06:30 AM and back at home at 3:00 PM, they will maximize their time to rest. Also, by learning earlier, they will maximize their peak concentration time and absorbs lessons more effectively.

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxtgIT0o0/L0FXjVzIw0sSHMHOsX-PkQ/edit?utm_content=DAGxtgIT0o0&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class : XI-9

Absent Number : 25

Statement

I agree with the ban on study tours because, even though study tours can provide some benefits, the risks and negative impacts are greater and more urgent to be considered.

Supporting Arguments

1. Safety Concerns

Study tours often involve long trips by bus or other transportation, which can increase the risk of accidents. The safety of students must be the first priority of schools and the government.

2. Financial Burden

Study tours require quite high costs. This can burden parents, especially those from lower-income families, and create inequality among students.

3. Discipline and Focus

Study tours sometimes shift students’ focus away from learning. Instead of concentrating on school subjects, students may be more focused on the entertainment aspects of the trip.

4. Alternative Learning

The benefits of study tours can actually be replaced with other activities such as virtual field trips, inviting guest speakers, or school-based projects that are more affordable, safe, and equally educational.

Conclusion

In conclusion, banning study tours is a wise decision because it prevents accidents, reduces the financial burden on parents, and keeps students focused on learning. Schools can still provide meaningful experiences through safer and more affordable alternatives.

Class:XI-9

Absent Number:14

link:

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxtgJaMKU/kMSUhTWYoZwgt4BzkuBjWw/edit?utm_content=DAGxtgJaMKU&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

•Stetament

Requiring students to arrive at 6:30 a.m. is not an effective policy because it forces them to wake up too early, which reduces their sleep and negatively affects their health. This lack of rest can lower concentration and make the learning process less effective, especially in the first lessons of the day. In addition, the rule creates extra challenges for students who live far from school, as they must leave home very early and face safety risks on the way. Therefore, instead of supporting discipline and learning, such an early start time may actually harm students’ well-being and academic performance.

•supporting argument

1. Lack of Sufficient Rest

Arriving at school by 6:30 a.m. means students must wake up very early, which often reduces their sleep time. This lack of rest can cause fatigue, poor focus, and long-term health problems.

2. Lower Academic Performance

When students are still sleepy in the morning, their concentration decreases. As a result, the first lessons of the day may not be effective, leading to weaker academic performance overall.

3. Burden for Students Living Far Away

Students who live far from school are at a greater disadvantage. They must wake up much earlier and travel in unsafe conditions, especially when it is still dark. This creates unnecessary stress and risks.

4. Negative Effect on Motivation

Being forced to start school too early can make students feel unmotivated. Instead of starting the day with energy, they may feel tired, discouraged, and less enthusiastic about learning.

•conclusion

In conclusion, requiring students to arrive at 6:30 a.m. is not beneficial. It reduces their sleep, affects health, lowers focus during lessons, and creates extra difficulties for those who live far from school. Instead of supporting learning, this rule may harm students’ well-being and academic performance.

XI.9

Absen : 36

Class : XI-9

Absen Number : 23

Statement

I disagree with the use of military barracks for children in West Java because this approach limits freedom, damages psychological development, reduces social interaction, and replaces creative education with rigid discipline, which can lead to isolation and mistrust in the community.

Arguments

1. Placing children in military barracks disregards their right to a nurturing environment, as it forces them into premature exposure to militarism instead of allowing them to grow naturally in supportive families and communities.

2. The military barracks environment is not suitable for children's ages and carries a high risk of physical and psychological violence, which violates the basic principles of children's rights.

3. Growing up in military barracks exposes children to strict rules and early indoctrination, which can hinder their critical thinking and prevent them from developing a balanced, independent identity.

4. This policy also raises concerns that parents will neglect their positive parenting responsibilities by entrusting their children to barracks.

Conclusion: Growing up in military barracks can restrict children’s freedom of thought, as strict rules and early indoctrination hinder the development of an independent and well-balanced identity

Class : XI-9

Absent Number : 27

Class : XI-9

Absent Number: 33

1.Statement

I disagree because banning study tours actually harms students, as this activity has many benefits that cannot be replaced by classroom learning.

2.Supporting Arguments

- Study tours provide direct learning experiences. Students can see cultural, historical, and scientific aspects firsthand, making the knowledge more meaningful than just reading books.

- Study tours strengthen the relationship between students and teachers. This activity builds better cooperation, teamwork, and communication.

- Study tours help students become more independent, responsible, and open-minded. They face real-life situations outside of school.

- Study tours increase cultural awareness. Students can learn to appreciate diversity, value local traditions, and understand the importance of tolerance in society.

- Visiting real places during study tours helps students remember lessons better than just reading about them in textbooks.

- A new environment outside the classroom gives students fresh experiences, making them more excited to learn.

3.Conclusion:

Study tours are highly beneficial for students because they connect theory with practice while providing real-life experiences that cannot be found in the classroom. In addition to broadening knowledge, study tours also foster independence, responsibility, and social skills. Through this activity, students not only gain academic knowledge but also essential life skills that are valuable for their future.

Class : XI-9

Class : XI-9

Absen Number : 23

Name: Na'ifah anggini thalita

Class: XI 7

Absent Number: 25

1. Statement

We strongly disagree with the policy that requires students to arrive at school at 06:30 a.m. This would make students study while still sleepy and hungry. They would have to wake up much earlier than usual, which directly affects their mood and motivation to learn. It also disturbs their sleeping hours. On top of that, distances to school and the lack of public transportation at that early time make things even harder for both students and teachers.

Meanwhile, in Singapore, the government bans all levels of education, even universities, from starting classes before 07:30 a.m. For middle and high school, the recommended start time is 08:00–08:15. So, the government should review this policy because it cuts students’ sleeping time and could even cause chronic sleep problems, like insomnia or emotional issues.

2. Arguments. ⁠

Starting school too early actually harms students. It makes them sleep less, lose focus, become more vulnerable to mental health problems, and study outside the ideal learning hours of 07:00–11:00 when the brain is still fresh. Instead of improving achievement, it lowers both learning quality and student health.Besides harming students, this policy also affects safety and family life. Students would have to leave home while it’s still dark, and parents would be forced to wake up much earlier, which could even cause family conflicts. Clearly, this policy creates more problems than solutions.

3. Rebuttal

Policymakers need to realize that improving education is not about making school start earlier. It’s about seeing students as whole human beings who need enough sleep, energy, and space to grow. Education is not about who arrives the earliest, but about who goes home with more understanding.

4. Conclusion

This policy is not educational at all because it makes students tired, unfocused, and more likely to get sick, while also burdening families. Discipline doesn’t mean waking up in the dark; it means giving students the chance to learn in a healthy, fresh, and ready condition. School is not a factory, students are not workers, and learning is not just about showing up earlier.

Class: XI-9

Absent Number 17

1. Statement:

Starting school at 6:30 AM is a good policy because it promotes discipline, maximizes learning time, and encourages students to develop the healthy habit of waking up early.

2. Arguments :

-Trains Time Discipline.

Arriving early helps students build strong habits of punctuality and responsibility, which are essential for their future careers.

-Boosts Productivity.

Morning is the brain’s most alert time, making it easier for students to concentrate and absorb new material effectively.

-Reduces Traffic Congestion.

Coming to school before rush hour helps students avoid traffic jams, resulting in less stress and lateness.

-Provides More Learning Time.

Starting the day earlier allows more time for both academic lessons and extracurricular activities.

-Builds a Strong Work Ethic

Waking up early and starting the day with purpose teaches students self-discipline and motivation.

3. Conclusion:

Demanding students to arrive at school by 06.30 can positively influence their discipline, learning efficiency, and daily routines. Although it may require adjustment at first, the long-term benefits for personal growth and academic success are worth the effort.

•Poster

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxuM7e1gk/638QbvRYDEdCCqyDiYFiaQ/edit

Class : XI-9

Absent Number : 33

Class:XI-9

Absent Number:1

Statement:

Requiring students to arrive at school by 6:30 a.m. is not ideal for their well-being or academic performance. Research consistently shows that teenagers need more sleep for healthy development, and early start times can lead to chronic sleep deprivation. This not only affects concentration and learning but also increases the risk of stress, anxiety, and health issues. Instead of promoting discipline, such early arrival times may reduce students’ motivation and engagement. Schools should prioritize students’ mental and physical health by adopting more reasonable schedules that align with their natural sleep cycles.

Let me know if you'd like it to sound more formal, casual, or if it’s for a specific context like a debate or essay.

Opposing Argument: Students Should Not Be Required to Arrive at School by 6:30 AM

Requiring students to arrive at school as early as 6:30 AM is not only unreasonable, but it can also negatively affect their health, academic performance, and overall well-being. Numerous studies have shown that adolescents need more sleep than adults, ideally 8 to 10 hours per night. However, having to wake up extremely early to be at school by 6:30 forces students to cut their sleep short, leading to chronic sleep deprivation.

This lack of sleep can result in poor concentration, memory problems, and increased stress, all of which hinder the learning process.

Counter-conclusion:

While many argue that allowing young children to use gadgets can support learning and early exposure to technology, the negative impacts far outweigh the benefits. Excessive gadget use can hinder a child’s social, emotional, and physical development. Therefore, gadget use among young children should be strictly limited and closely supervised by parents to prevent long-term harm.

Name : Indra Rustandi

Class : XI-9

Absent number : 13

1. Statement

Free food programs are often seen as a quick solution to reduce hunger and improve nutrition, but in reality they are not an effective and permanent way to solve these problems. Such programs may provide temporary relief, yet they fail to address the root causes of malnutrition and poverty, which are mainly related to lack of education, limited job opportunities, and poor economic conditions.

2. Argument

The main problem with free food programs is that the food provided is not always of good quality, and without strict safety checks, there is a higher risk of food poisoning and other health problems. In addition, the food can quickly become stale and unhealthy, especially if stored in hot conditions, as steam from the food can lead to bacteria growth. Beyond health issues, free food programs also waste a large amount of government money that could be better allocated to education, job creation, or other sectors that truly support sustainable development.

Furthermore, the wages of workers may be reduced because a significant portion of the state budget is directed to funding these programs, which worsens the already difficult economic condition of Indonesian workers.

3. Rebuttal

Although free food may seem helpful to reduce hunger in the short term, it only creates dependency among people. Instead of empowering citizens to be independent, it makes them rely on government aid. In addition, such programs open the door to corruption and misuse of funds.

4. Conclusion

In conclusion, while free food programs may look beneficial and helpful for the poor in the beginning, they are not a sustainable solution. These programs risk creating dependency, wasting government funds, and even encouraging corruption. Instead of continuously spending money on short-term relief, the government should prioritize long-term investments such as education, job creation, health facilities, and sustainable community development. By doing so, people can become more independent, improve their standard of living, and gradually reduce poverty in a more permanent way

class: XI-7

absent: 5

argument

By riding a motorbike to school, students can save time traveling to and from school. This is especially important for students who live far from school, as they can use less travel time and have more time for other activities. Furthermore, students can set their own schedules and have greater flexibility.

argument 2

It's hard to save more money when using a motorcycle they can buy petrol and buy petrol for 1 week cheaper than using public transport for 1 week, so the remaining money can be used for other needs

Rebuttal

We, the opposing team, disagree with the pro-campaign team's argument that bringing a motorcycle to school disrupts students' focus. We believe that students can manage their time and activities effectively.

Conclusion

Thus, the policy of students bringing motorbikes to school can be the right choice for students who need independence and flexibility in traveling to school, and can save money and time.

Class : XI-7

Absent : 19

I agree with KDM'S Policy of Creating barak for Students who are Considered problematic or "Naughty and rebel". In this Case, barak is a special dormitory like Place where Students with discipline problems are guided, trained, and supervised. Sometimes for 3 days, a week, or more depending on their behavior

Our arguments are:

1. Guidance and Second Chance – The barak offers guidance instead of punishment or expulsion, giving students the opportunity to change.

2. Character Building and Reform – Through discipline, teamwork, and daily routines, the program shapes responsibility, respect, and moral values.

3. Proven Success and Positive Impact – Alumni testimonies and students’ experiences show real improvements, even giving them a sense of belonging and purpose.

4. A Leader Who Is Close to the Community – The barracks prove that Dedi Mulyadi is a leader who gets out and meets people. He doesn't just stay in an office; he sees and understands what his community is going through. He often visits the barracks to talk to people and share things, which builds a real connection. This shows that a leader can make a big difference with a simple, human approach, rather than with big, expensive projects.

These arguments are supported by facts and data.

1. Program Launch

On May 1–2, 2025, West Java officially launched a military-style barrack program in Purwakarta, designed for high school students with behavioral problems. The program involves structured daily routines supervised by multidisciplinary teams, including educators, psychologists, medical staff, and religious mentors.

(Source: Politika.co.id, Antara Jabar)

2. Scale and Duration

The program prepared 40 barracks across West Java and is scheduled to run for up to 6 months, with the first phase lasting 14 days.

(Source: Kabar Majalengka)

3. Budget and Participants

The provincial government allocated Rp 6 billion to support the program, targeting 900 students. The first wave enrolled around 350 students.

(Source: Kompas Bandung)

4. Activities and Content

Students undergo training in discipline, nationalism, anti-drugs education, spiritual guidance, marching drills, and first aid. The aim is character building, not militarization, with a focus on restoring students’ positive values and healthy lifestyles.

(Source: Bappeda Jabar, PPID Jabar)

5. Human Rights Compliance

The Ministry of Law and Human Rights in West Java confirmed that the program does not violate human rights, since it requires parental consent and is not based on forced militarization.

(Source: Politika.co.id)

So the conclusion is, the barak program by Dedi Mulyadi is very useful because it helps solve youth problems and keeps culture alive. In the barak, young people learn discipline, teamwork, and new skills, so they stay away from negative activities. Many of them become more independent and responsible. No other program gives results like this, so the barak is a policy that should be supported.

Class : XI-9

Absent number : 9

Statement :

I disagree with the rule that students must arrive at 6.30 AM to school. Waking up too early makes students lack sleep, feel tired, and lose focus in class. Students actually need more rest to be healthy and ready to learn.

Argument 1 :

Health experts say teenagers need at least 8 hours of sleep every night. If school starts at 6.30, most students cannot meet this need and it will disturb their health and academic performance.

Argument 2 :

Not all students live near the school. Some of them spend a long time on the road. Demanding them to arrive at 6.30 AM will cause stress and unfair conditions.

Argument 3 :

Starting school earlier does not mean better learning results. The key is effective teaching and students’ motivation, not how early they arrive.

Conclusion :

In conclusion, demanding students to arrive at 6.30 AM gives more disadvantages than benefits. It affects their health, increases stress, and does not guarantee academic improvement. Schools should focus on quality learning instead of forcing students to come too early.

Class : XI-9

Absent number : 9

Statement :

I disagree with the rule that students must arrive at 6.30 AM to school. Waking up too early makes students lack sleep, feel tired, and lose focus in class. Students actually need more rest to be healthy and ready to learn.

Argument 1 :

Health experts say teenagers need at least 8 hours of sleep every night. If school starts at 6.30, most students cannot meet this need and it will disturb their health and academic performance.

Argument 2 :

Not all students live near the school. Some of them spend a long time on the road. Demanding them to arrive at 6.30 AM will cause stress and unfair conditions.

Argument 3 :

Starting school earlier does not mean better learning results. The key is effective teaching and students’ motivation, not how early they arrive.

Conclusion :

In conclusion, demanding students to arrive at 6.30 AM gives more disadvantages than benefits. It affects their health, increases stress, and does not guarantee academic improvement. Schools should focus on quality learning instead of forcing students to come too early.

Class : XI-9

Absent Number : 28

• Statement

Statement

I agree with the study tour ban imposed by the Governor of West Java, Mr. Dedi Mulyadi. This ban can prevent accidents and ensure student safety. It also reduces the financial burden on parents, who are often forced to borrow money to allow their children to participate.

• Arguments

Study tours do allow us to see the outside world and learn firsthand. Even if they were banned, there are alternatives that can provide a similar experience without having to go on a to gain knowledge without having to go on an expensive and risky study tour.

• Conclusion

Study tours are prohibited for several key reasons : First, they often place a financial burden on parents, even forcing them to go into debt or sell assets, even though education should not increase a family's financial burden. Second, study tours often resemble picnics our tourism activities more than educational activities with academic and moral foundations. Third, study safety is a crucial consideration, given the numerous accident involving study tour groups.

Class : XI-8

Absent Number : 13

1. Statement

We firmly believe that students should not be allowed to bring and wear makeup to school. School is a place where young people come to learn, grow, and develop both academically and personally. It should be an environment that prioritizes education, self-confidence, and equality — not one that encourages competition based on appearance or pressures students to look a certain way. At a time in their lives when teens are still building their identity and self-esteem, we believe it's crucial to reduce outside pressures that distract from their natural growth. Saying no to makeup in school helps maintain a space where students can focus on what truly matters — learning, friendships, and becoming confident in who they are beyond how they look

2. Argument

Schools are institutions meant for learning and personal development, not for promoting physical appearance or beauty standards. Allowing makeup can create distractions in the classroom, promote superficial values, and even lead to social pressure, bullying, or low self-esteem among students who cannot afford or choose not to wear makeup. By prohibiting makeup, schools foster an environment of equality, focus, and self-acceptance.

3. Rebuttal

Some may argue that makeup is a form of self-expression and helps boost confidence. However, true self-confidence should come from one’s abilities, knowledge, and character — not from appearance. Schools can encourage healthy self-expression through arts, writing, and extracurriculars without relying on cosmetics. In an academic setting, minimizing unnecessary distractions supports the primary goal: education.

4. Conclusion

In conclusion, banning makeup in schools helps maintain focus, promotes equality among students, and protects them from the negative social impacts of appearance-based judgments. For the sake of academic integrity and emotional well-being, students should not be allowed to bring or wear makeup to school.

Class: Xl-8

Absen: 06

1. Statement

We firmly believe that students should not be allowed to bring and wear makeup to school. School is a place where young people come to learn, grow, and develop both academically and personally. It should be an environment that prioritizes education, self-confidence, and equality — not one that encourages competition based on appearance or pressures students to look a certain way. At a time in their lives when teens are still building their identity and self-esteem, we believe it's crucial to reduce outside pressures that distract from their natural growth. Saying no to makeup in school helps maintain a space where students can focus on what truly matters — learning, friendships, and becoming confident in who they are beyond how they look.

2. Argument

Schools are institutions meant for learning and personal development, not for promoting physical appearance or beauty standards. Allowing makeup can create distractions in the classroom, promote superficial values, and even lead to social pressure, bullying, or low self-esteem among students who cannot afford or choose not to wear makeup. By prohibiting makeup, schools foster an environment of equality, focus, and self-acceptance.

3. Rebuttal

Some may argue that makeup is a form of self-expression and helps boost confidence. However, true self-confidence should come from one’s abilities, knowledge, and character — not from appearance. Schools can encourage healthy self-expression through arts, writing, and extracurriculars without relying on cosmetics. In an academic setting, minimizing unnecessary distractions supports the primary goal: education.

4. Conclusion

In conclusion, banning makeup in schools helps maintain focus, promotes equality among students, and protects them from the negative social impacts of appearance-based judgments. For the sake of academic integrity and emotional well-being, students should not be allowed to bring or wear makeup to school.1. Statement We firmly believe that students should not be allowed to bring and wear makeup to school. School is a place where young people come to learn, grow, and develop both academically and personally. It should be an environment that prioritizes education, self-confidence, and equality — not one that encourages competition based on appearance or pressures students to look a certain way. At a time in their lives when teens are still building their identity and self-esteem, we believe it's crucial to reduce outside pressures that distract from their natural growth. Saying no to makeup in school helps maintain a space where students can focus on what truly matters — learning, friendships, and becoming confident in who they are beyond how they look

2. Argument Schools are institutions meant for learning and personal development, not for promoting physical appearance or beauty standards. Allowing makeup can create distractions in the classroom, promote superficial values, and even lead to social pressure, bullying, or low self-esteem among students who cannot afford or choose not to wear makeup. By prohibiting makeup, schools foster an environment of equality, focus, and self-acceptance.

3. Rebuttal Some may argue that makeup is a form of self-expression and helps boost confidence. However, true self-confidence should come from one’s abilities, knowledge, and character — not from appearance. Schools can encourage healthy self-expression through arts, writing, and extracurriculars without relying on cosmetics. In an academic setting, minimizing unnecessary distractions supports the primary goal: education.

4. Conclusion In conclusion, banning makeup in schools helps maintain focus, promotes equality among students, and protects them from the negative social impacts of appearance-based judgments. For the sake of academic integrity and emotional well-being, students should not be allowed to bring or wear makeup to school.

Class:XI-8

Absen: 08

1. Statement

We firmly believe that students should not be allowed to bring and wear makeup to school. School is a place where young people come to learn, grow, and develop both academically and personally. It should be an environment that prioritizes education, self-confidence, and equality — not one that encourages competition based on appearance or pressures students to look a certain way. At a time in their lives when teens are still building their identity and self-esteem, we believe it's crucial to reduce outside pressures that distract from their natural growth. Saying no to makeup in school helps maintain a space where students can focus on what truly matters — learning, friendships, and becoming confident in who they are beyond how they look

2. Argument

Schools are institutions meant for learning and personal development, not for promoting physical appearance or beauty standards. Allowing makeup can create distractions in the classroom, promote superficial values, and even lead to social pressure, bullying, or low self-esteem among students who cannot afford or choose not to wear makeup. By prohibiting makeup, schools foster an environment of equality, focus, and self-acceptance.

3. Rebuttal

Some may argue that makeup is a form of self-expression and helps boost confidence. However, true self-confidence should come from one’s abilities, knowledge, and character — not from appearance. Schools can encourage healthy self-expression through arts, writing, and extracurriculars without relying on cosmetics. In an academic setting, minimizing unnecessary distractions supports the primary goal: education.

4. Conclusion

In conclusion, banning makeup in schools helps maintain focus, promotes equality among students, and protects them from the negative social impacts of appearance-based judgments. For the sake of academic integrity and emotional well-being, students should not be allowed to bring or wear makeup to school. So that's why we strongly aggre that we should banned from wearing makeup.

Class: XI-8

Absent: 12

Statement:

I'm from proposition team, and now im gonna deliver strong point about why im agree that students are not allowed to wear and bring makeup to school. The first point is im argue that makeup distracts for learning, the primary purpose of is education. When students focus on their appearance - applying, touching up, or source of distraction in class, especially if students feel preasured to look a certain way.

Argument:

The second point is reintorces unhealthy beauty standards, because allowing makaup up in schools encourage young people to believe their cun natural apprecance is not acceptabile.

Rebuttal:

Just like many workplaces have dress codes to promote professionalism, schools should maintain a smiliar standard. Makeup is generally not needed in academic environmens. By prohibiting it, schools help set the tone that learning and personal development matter more than physical appearance.

Conclusion:

Without the preassure to wear makeup, students can focus more on getting enough studying, eating, breakfast, and arriving to school on time. It promotes a healthier and more balanced life style, especially for teens who already deal with the stresses of growing up.

Solution:

Instead of banning makeup entirely, schools can educate students about proper grooming and self-confidence. Workshops on self-esteem and hygiene could help students understand that beauty is not only skin-deep. If necessary, schools could implement a light makeup policy for older students, ensuring it doesn't distract from learning.

Class: XI-8

Absent: 12

Class': Xl-8

Absen:06

Class: XI-8

Absent: 08

Class : XI 8

Absent Number : 33

(i disagree)

Arguments :

I disagree with the motion because with the rule that forbids Student From bringing motor cycle to school for students who Live far away or in areas with limited Public transportation, Motorcycle are the most eficient and affordable way to get to school. completely banning motor cycle regulations to ensure safety rather than Prohibting.

Supporting Arguments :

1.Efficiency & Time-Saving

Motorcycles are the fastest, most practical, and efficient transport for students who live far away.

They help avoid traffic jams, delays, and save travel time.

2.Cost-Effective

Riding a motorcycle is cheaper than using public transportation. Not all areas have access to public transport, and if available, it is often expensive.

3.Independence

Not all students have parents who can drive them to school every day. Motorcycles allow students to be more independent.

4.Driving License Solution

Students who don’t have a driving license can be encouraged to apply for one.

5.Parking Solution

The school can collaborate with local residents to provide parking areas.

Parking fees can be used to support school needs or benefit the community.

Conclusion :

In conclusion, a total ban on motorcyle is not the right Solution. Motorcycle help students Save time, reduce cost , an build responsibility, as long as clear safet rules are applied.

Class : XI 8

Absent : 33

class:XI-8

absent number:27

we’re gonna debate about “wearing flippers in school area is not allowed” our opinion is we strongly disagree about this statement because flippers are needed for student who want to go to the mosque for wudhu and because now it’s a rainy season so flippers are also needed for protecting our shoes from get wet,so we can use flippers for a replacement and our shoes can stay dry and some medical studies in bournermouth university have shown that wearing flippers can reduce presure on the feet and improve our blood circulation.flippers are also needed because we live in tropical climate which is the temparature is usually quite high so wearing shoes all day long during school can make our feet damp and it also can causes desease like foot corn and wearing shoes all day long can make our foot smell stinky so we can use flippers to make our foot not too damp and still smell normal.and not all student can afford shoes flippers are more cheap and affordable and education should be equal for everyone not based on fashion or ability to buy certain shoes and from the persoective of comfort filppers are more comfortable to wear especially in hot weather and for students who walk to school many school emphasize that wearing flippers in the school area is not disciplined and not polite but disciplined and politeness are not determined by footwear they are determined by students attitude and behavior but if some students scared of get injured while wearing flippers in heavy activiter like sports or PE (physical education) we can still use shoes for protecting our shoes but that doesn’t mean flippers are not allowed to use in school area so we totally and strongly disagree that wearing flippers in school area is not allowed

canva link poster about no smoking:

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxyJlvxpQ/bQTRo_9_DP7UPqDl7EQR8Q/edit?utm_content=DAGxyJlvxpQ&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class: XI-8

Absent number: 02

we’re gonna debate about “wearing flippers in school area is not allowed” our opinion is we strongly disagree about this statement because flippers are needed for student who want to go to the mosque for wudhu and because now it’s a rainy season so flippers are also needed for protecting our shoes from get wet,so we can use flippers for a replacement and our shoes can stay dry and some medical studies in bournermouth university have shown that wearing flippers can reduce presure on the feet and improve our blood circulation.flippers are also needed because we live in tropical climate which is the temparature is usually quite high so wearing shoes all day long during school can make our feet damp and it also can causes desease like foot corn and wearing shoes all day long can make our foot smell stinky so we can use flippers to make our foot not too damp and still smell normal.and not all student can afford shoes flippers are more cheap and affordable and education should be equal for everyone not based on fashion or ability to buy certain shoes and from the persoective of comfort filppers are more comfortable to wear especially in hot weather and for students who walk to school many school emphasize that wearing flippers in the school area is not disciplined and not polite but disciplined and politeness are not determined by footwear they are determined by students attitude and behavior but if some students scared of get injured while wearing flippers in heavy activiter like sports or PE (physical education) we can still use shoes for protecting our shoes but that doesn’t mean flippers are not allowed to use in school area so we totally and strongly disagree that wearing flippers in school area is not allowed.

canva link poster about no smoking : https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxyJYrcvw/x3Az9FlVXYhGkFQTAoJMtg/edit?utm_content=DAGxyJYrcvw&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class: XI-8

Absent: 14

Pro Team (Agree)

• Statement

We as the proposition team are fully agree with the motion that “THBT wearing flipflops in school area is not allowed”.

First of all, let us tell the definition from the keywords of the motion.

Wearing -> the act of having clothes, shoes, etc. on your body.

Flipflops -> a type of light sandal with a V-shaped strap that goes between your toes.

School Area -> place for students to study.

And we also have set the limitation for this debate is: Only happen in SMAN 1 Subang.

Ladies and Gentleman, as we all know that in SMAN 1 Subang itself, many students wearing flipflops mainly for preparing to pray. But, lots of students also use flipflops to go to canteen, or to the toilet. This mainly caused because students are too lazy to wear their shoes. Now, this can cause a lots of problems such as:

A. Making the school image decreased.

B. Inappropriate, not polite, and not in accordance with ethics.

C. Unhygienic and have bigger potential to make the school dirty and untidy.

By those problems, the school itself have made a clear rules to not allowed wearing flipflops in school area. Since we all know that SMAN 1 Subang is the best school in Subang, and we as the students must reflect the best behavior.

Now, why is this important to discuss?

1. Because discipline in small things, like following the rules, will shape our character and responsibility in bigger things in the future.

2. Because the image and reputation of our school depends on us, the students. If we behave properly and dress appropriately, we show respect to ourselves, our teachers, and our school.

• Argument

That’s why we as the Proposition team are fully agree with the motion that “THBT wearing flipflops in school area is not allowed”. We have 5 main arguments on why we agree with the motion.

A. There is already a clear school rules.

In School rules book Clause 7 No. 3 tells that wearing flipflops in school area is not allowed. With this clear school rules student must follow this rules with no exception. The rules is made to be obeyed and not to be violated, that’s why if you said that wearing flipflops is fine because flip flops doesnt define your behavior, but if you have violate the school rules, it's the same as you not being disciplined with school rules.

B. Making the school image decreased in front of guest (executive, officials, regent, academicians, etc.)

The wearing of sandals by students on school grounds can create an impression of lack of discipline and untidiness in the eyes of visiting guests. Schools are educational institutions that also reflect the attitudes, ethics, and culture of order among their students. When guests see students wearing sandals, they may perceive the school as not emphasizing neatness and discipline in its dress code. This can tarnish the school's image in the eyes of external parties, especially if the guests are from official agencies, the business world, or other schools with whom they are collaborating.

C. Flipflops is inappropriate, not polite, and not in accordance with ethics.

We as the Indonesia people, of course. Have a very high norms and ethics that we have to follow and upholds. Therefore, in formal or respectful situations like in school area, it is important to dress properly as a sign of respect for ourselves and for others. Using flipflops in such contexts can be seen as neglecting cultural values and showing a lack of seriousness. As a society that highly values manners and decency, we should always maintain our appearance in a way that reflects discipline, respect, and responsibility.

D. Have bigger potential to make the school dirty and untidy.

By the research of environmental study by University of Gadjah Mada, shows that flipflops are 35% have more chance to easily get dirty than shoes. This caused by the the material that makes up flipflops is plastic, and plastic cant absorb any liquid/water based (for example: mud, murky water, etc). And also flipflops usually do not have a proper place for storage. Unlike formal shoes that are placed neatly on shoe racks, flipflops are often left scattered around. This makes the environment look messy and untidy. A messy appearance not only disturbs the eyes but also reflects a lack of discipline and order.

E. Flipflops do not provide proper protection for the feet.

A study published in the Journal of Foot and Ankle Research (2019) found that students who frequently wear flipflops are 1.5 times more likely to suffer minor foot injuries such as cuts, stubbed toes, or abrasions compared to those wearing closed shoes. Unlike shoes, flip-flops leave most parts of the feet uncovered, which increases the risk of injuries such as cuts, scrapes, or stubbed toes. In addition, they offer very little support, making students more vulnerable to accidents, especially when walking on rough surfaces or during crowded activities. By requiring students to wear shoes, the school ensures better safety and reduces the chance of foot injuries.

Ladies and Gentlemen, based on the data and facts that we have explained, it is very clear that wearing flipflops in the school area brings more harm than benefit.

We have shown that:

• There is already a clear school regulation that must be obeyed by all students without exception.

• Wearing flipflops can decrease the school’s image in front of guests and officials.

• It is inappropriate and against ethics, especially in a formal environment like school.

• Research proves that flipflops have a 35% higher chance of getting dirty and being left scattered, making the school look messy and untidy.

• Studies show that flipflops increase the risk of injuries by 1.5 times compared to shoes, because they do not provide proper protection.

From all of these reasons, we can conclude that the prohibition of flipflops in SMAN 1 Subang is not just a matter of rules, but also about discipline, ethics, cleanliness, safety, and the good image of our school.

Therefore, we, as the Proposition team, firmly stand that wearing flipflops in the school area should not be allowed.

Class : XI-8

Absent Number : 34

Pro Team (Agree)

Statement

We as the proposition team are fully agree with the motion that “THBT wearing flipflops in school area is not allowed”.

First of all, let us tell the definition from the keywords of the motion.

Wearing -> the act of having clothes, shoes, etc. on your body.

Flipflops -> a type of light sandal with a V-shaped strap that goes between your toes.

School Area -> place for students to study.

And we also have set the limitation for this debate is: Only happen in SMAN 1 Subang.

Ladies and Gentleman, as we all know that in SMAN 1 Subang itself, many students wearing flipflops mainly for preparing to pray. But, lots of students also use flipflops to go to canteen, or to the toilet. This mainly caused because students are too lazy to wear their shoes. Now, this can cause a lots of problems such as:

A. Making the school image decreased.

B. Inappropriate, not polite, and not in accordance with ethics.

C. Unhygienic and have bigger potential to make the school dirty and untidy.

By those problems, the school itself have made a clear rules to not allowed wearing flipflops in school area. Since we all know that SMAN 1 Subang is the best school in Subang, and we as the students must reflect the best behavior.

Now, why is this important to discuss?

Because discipline in small things, like following the rules, will shape our character and responsibility in bigger things in the future.

Because the image and reputation of our school depends on us, the students. If we behave properly and dress appropriately, we show respect to ourselves, our teachers, and our school.

Argument

That’s why we as the Proposition team are fully agree with the motion that “THBT wearing flipflops in school area is not allowed”. We have 5 main arguments on why we agree with the motion.

A. There is already a clear school rules.

In School rules book Clause 7 No. 3 tells that wearing flipflops in school area is not allowed. With this clear school rules student must follow this rules with no exception. The rules is made to be obeyed and not to be violated, that’s why if you said that wearing flipflops is fine because flip flops doesnt define your behavior, but if you have violate the school rules, it's the same as you not being disciplined with school rules.

B. Making the school image decreased in front of guest (executive, officials, regent, academicians, etc.)

The wearing of sandals by students on school grounds can create an impression of lack of discipline and untidiness in the eyes of visiting guests. Schools are educational institutions that also reflect the attitudes, ethics, and culture of order among their students. When guests see students wearing sandals, they may perceive the school as not emphasizing neatness and discipline in its dress code. This can tarnish the school's image in the eyes of external parties, especially if the guests are from official agencies, the business world, or other schools with whom they are collaborating.

C. Flipflops is inappropriate, not polite, and not in accordance with ethics.

We as the Indonesia people, of course. Have a very high norms and ethics that we have to follow and upholds. Therefore, in formal or respectful situations like in school area, it is important to dress properly as a sign of respect for ourselves and for others. Using flipflops in such contexts can be seen as neglecting cultural values and showing a lack of seriousness. As a society that highly values manners and decency, we should always maintain our appearance in a way that reflects discipline, respect, and responsibility.

D. Have bigger potential to make the school dirty and untidy.

By the research of environmental study by University of Gadjah Mada, shows that flipflops are 35% have more chance to easily get dirty than shoes. This caused by the the material that makes up flipflops is plastic, and plastic cant absorb any liquid/water based (for example: mud, murky water, etc). And also flipflops usually do not have a proper place for storage. Unlike formal shoes that are placed neatly on shoe racks, flipflops are often left scattered around. This makes the environment look messy and untidy. A messy appearance not only disturbs the eyes but also reflects a lack of discipline and order.

E. Flipflops do not provide proper protection for the feet.

A study published in the Journal of Foot and Ankle Research (2019) found that students who frequently wear flipflops are 1.5 times more likely to suffer minor foot injuries such as cuts, stubbed toes, or abrasions compared to those wearing closed shoes. Unlike shoes, flip-flops leave most parts of the feet uncovered, which increases the risk of injuries such as cuts, scrapes, or stubbed toes. In addition, they offer very little support, making students more vulnerable to accidents, especially when walking on rough surfaces or during crowded activities. By requiring students to wear shoes, the school ensures better safety and reduces the chance of foot injuries.

Ladies and Gentlemen, based on the data and facts that we have explained, it is very clear that wearing flipflops in the school area brings more harm than benefit.

We have shown that:

There is already a clear school regulation that must be obeyed by all students without exception.

Wearing flipflops can decrease the school’s image in front of guests and officials.

It is inappropriate and against ethics, especially in a formal environment like school.

Research proves that flipflops have a 35% higher chance of getting dirty and being left scattered, making the school look messy and untidy.

Studies show that flipflops increase the risk of injuries by 1.5 times compared to shoes, because they do not provide proper protection.

From all of these reasons, we can conclude that the prohibition of flipflops in SMAN 1 Subang is not just a matter of rules, but also about discipline, ethics, cleanliness, safety, and the good image of our school.

Therefore, we, as the Proposition team, firmly stand that wearing flipflops in the school area should not be allowed.

Class: XI-8

Absent: 14

Poster Link: https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxyauICx8/V992hROyQqKWI_6tECsGtA/edit?utm_content=DAGxyauICx8&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class : XI-8

Absent Number : 03

1 . Statement

i dissagree with the rule that forbides from riding motorbikes. or many students, especially those who live far away from school, motorbikes are the most efficient and pratical transportation . prohibiting them from using motorbikes would only create new difficulties instead f solving problems

2 . Arguments

Argument 1 : public transportation is not always available, especially in rural in suburban areas . ever if it exists, it is often expensive and not on time, Riding a motorbike helps students save both money and time.

Argument 2 : motorbikes allow students to be more independent. not all parents can drives their children to school everyday because of work , by riding motorbikes students can manage their schedule more easily

Argument 3 : with proper training and a legal driving license , students can learn responsibility and discipline throught riding . instead of banning it, schools should encourage safety education and the use of helmets.

3 . Rebuttal

some people say that students riding motorbikes increasess the risk of accident. whilw this is true . the solution is not to forbid motorbikes completely. the real solution is strict enforcementof traffic rulles, safety campaigns, and ensuring that only students with legal driving licenses are allowed to ride.

4 . Conclusion

in conclusion, forbidding students from riding motorbikes is not a fair of effective policy. motorbikes are affordablle, pratical, and often the only transportation oftion for many students. what schools and authorities should do is promote safe riding habits, not simply ban the

Class : XI-8

Absent Number : 03

Class : XI-8

Absent Number : 30

Pro Team (Agree)

Statement

We as the proposition team are fully agree with the motion that “THBT wearing flipflops in school area is not allowed”.

First of all, let us tell the definition from the keywords of the motion.

Wearing -> the act of having clothes, shoes, etc. on your body.

Flipflops -> a type of light sandal with a V-shaped strap that goes between your toes.

School Area -> place for students to study.

And we also have set the limitation for this debate is: Only happen in SMAN 1 Subang.

Ladies and Gentleman, as we all know that in SMAN 1 Subang itself, many students wearing flipflops mainly for preparing to pray. But, lots of students also use flipflops to go to canteen, or to the toilet. This mainly caused because students are too lazy to wear their shoes. Now, this can cause a lots of problems such as:

A. Making the school image decreased.

B. Inappropriate, not polite, and not in accordance with ethics.

C. Unhygienic and have bigger potential to make the school dirty and untidy.

By those problems, the school itself have made a clear rules to not allowed wearing flipflops in school area. Since we all know that SMAN 1 Subang is the best school in Subang, and we as the students must reflect the best behavior.

Now, why is this important to discuss?

Because discipline in small things, like following the rules, will shape our character and responsibility in bigger things in the future.

Because the image and reputation of our school depends on us, the students. If we behave properly and dress appropriately, we show respect to ourselves, our teachers, and our school.

Argument

That’s why we as the Proposition team are fully agree with the motion that “THBT wearing flipflops in school area is not allowed”. We have 5 main arguments on why we agree with the motion.

A. There is already a clear school rules.

In School rules book Clause 7 No. 3 tells that wearing flipflops in school area is not allowed. With this clear school rules student must follow this rules with no exception. The rules is made to be obeyed and not to be violated, that’s why if you said that wearing flipflops is fine because flip flops doesnt define your behavior, but if you have violate the school rules, it's the same as you not being disciplined with school rules.

B. Making the school image decreased in front of guest (executive, officials, regent, academicians, etc.)

The wearing of sandals by students on school grounds can create an impression of lack of discipline and untidiness in the eyes of visiting guests. Schools are educational institutions that also reflect the attitudes, ethics, and culture of order among their students. When guests see students wearing sandals, they may perceive the school as not emphasizing neatness and discipline in its dress code. This can tarnish the school's image in the eyes of external parties, especially if the guests are from official agencies, the business world, or other schools with whom they are collaborating.

C. Flipflops is inappropriate, not polite, and not in accordance with ethics.

We as the Indonesia people, of course. Have a very high norms and ethics that we have to follow and upholds. Therefore, in formal or respectful situations like in school area, it is important to dress properly as a sign of respect for ourselves and for others. Using flipflops in such contexts can be seen as neglecting cultural values and showing a lack of seriousness. As a society that highly values manners and decency, we should always maintain our appearance in a way that reflects discipline, respect, and responsibility.

D. Have bigger potential to make the school dirty and untidy.

By the research of environmental study by University of Gadjah Mada, shows that flipflops are 35% have more chance to easily get dirty than shoes. This caused by the the material that makes up flipflops is plastic, and plastic cant absorb any liquid/water based (for example: mud, murky water, etc). And also flipflops usually do not have a proper place for storage. Unlike formal shoes that are placed neatly on shoe racks, flipflops are often left scattered around. This makes the environment look messy and untidy. A messy appearance not only disturbs the eyes but also reflects a lack of discipline and order.

E. Flipflops do not provide proper protection for the feet.

A study published in the Journal of Foot and Ankle Research (2019) found that students who frequently wear flipflops are 1.5 times more likely to suffer minor foot injuries such as cuts, stubbed toes, or abrasions compared to those wearing closed shoes. Unlike shoes, flip-flops leave most parts of the feet uncovered, which increases the risk of injuries such as cuts, scrapes, or stubbed toes. In addition, they offer very little support, making students more vulnerable to accidents, especially when walking on rough surfaces or during crowded activities. By requiring students to wear shoes, the school ensures better safety and reduces the chance of foot injuries.

Ladies and Gentlemen, based on the data and facts that we have explained, it is very clear that wearing flipflops in the school area brings more harm than benefit.

We have shown that:

There is already a clear school regulation that must be obeyed by all students without exception.

Wearing flipflops can decrease the school’s image in front of guests and officials.

It is inappropriate and against ethics, especially in a formal environment like school.

Research proves that flipflops have a 35% higher chance of getting dirty and being left scattered, making the school look messy and untidy.

Studies show that flipflops increase the risk of injuries by 1.5 times compared to shoes, because they do not provide proper protection.

From all of these reasons, we can conclude that the prohibition of flipflops in SMAN 1 Subang is not just a matter of rules, but also about discipline, ethics, cleanliness, safety, and the good image of our school.

Therefore, we, as the Proposition team, firmly stand that wearing flipflops in the school area should not be allowed.

Class : XI-8

Student Number : 24

Pro Team (Agree)

Statement

We as the proposition team are fully agree with the motion that “THBT wearing flipflops in school area is not allowed”.

First of all, let us tell the definition from the keywords of the motion.

Wearing -> the act of having clothes, shoes, etc. on your body.

Flipflops -> a type of light sandal with a V-shaped strap that goes between your toes.

School Area -> place for students to study.

And we also have set the limitation for this debate is: Only happen in SMAN 1 Subang.

Ladies and Gentleman, as we all know that in SMAN 1 Subang itself, many students wearing flipflops mainly for preparing to pray. But, lots of students also use flipflops to go to canteen, or to the toilet. This mainly caused because students are too lazy to wear their shoes. Now, this can cause a lots of problems such as:

A. Making the school image decreased.

B. Inappropriate, not polite, and not in accordance with ethics.

C. Unhygienic and have bigger potential to make the school dirty and untidy.

By those problems, the school itself have made a clear rules to not allowed wearing flipflops in school area. Since we all know that SMAN 1 Subang is the best school in Subang, and we as the students must reflect the best behavior.

Now, why is this important to discuss?

Because discipline in small things, like following the rules, will shape our character and responsibility in bigger things in the future.

Because the image and reputation of our school depends on us, the students. If we behave properly and dress appropriately, we show respect to ourselves, our teachers, and our school.

Argument

That’s why we as the Proposition team are fully agree with the motion that “THBT wearing flipflops in school area is not allowed”. We have 5 main arguments on why we agree with the motion.

A. There is already a clear school rules.

In School rules book Clause 7 No. 3 tells that wearing flipflops in school area is not allowed. With this clear school rules student must follow this rules with no exception. The rules is made to be obeyed and not to be violated, that’s why if you said that wearing flipflops is fine because flip flops doesnt define your behavior, but if you have violate the school rules, it's the same as you not being disciplined with school rules.

B. Making the school image decreased in front of guest (executive, officials, regent, academicians, etc.)

The wearing of sandals by students on school grounds can create an impression of lack of discipline and untidiness in the eyes of visiting guests. Schools are educational institutions that also reflect the attitudes, ethics, and culture of order among their students. When guests see students wearing sandals, they may perceive the school as not emphasizing neatness and discipline in its dress code. This can tarnish the school's image in the eyes of external parties, especially if the guests are from official agencies, the business world, or other schools with whom they are collaborating.

C. Flipflops is inappropriate, not polite, and not in accordance with ethics.

We as the Indonesia people, of course. Have a very high norms and ethics that we have to follow and upholds. Therefore, in formal or respectful situations like in school area, it is important to dress properly as a sign of respect for ourselves and for others. Using flipflops in such contexts can be seen as neglecting cultural values and showing a lack of seriousness. As a society that highly values manners and decency, we should always maintain our appearance in a way that reflects discipline, respect, and responsibility.

D. Have bigger potential to make the school dirty and untidy.

By the research of environmental study by University of Gadjah Mada, shows that flipflops are 35% have more chance to easily get dirty than shoes. This caused by the the material that makes up flipflops is plastic, and plastic cant absorb any liquid/water based (for example: mud, murky water, etc). And also flipflops usually do not have a proper place for storage. Unlike formal shoes that are placed neatly on shoe racks, flipflops are often left scattered around. This makes the environment look messy and untidy. A messy appearance not only disturbs the eyes but also reflects a lack of discipline and order.

E. Flipflops do not provide proper protection for the feet.

A study published in the Journal of Foot and Ankle Research (2019) found that students who frequently wear flipflops are 1.5 times more likely to suffer minor foot injuries such as cuts, stubbed toes, or abrasions compared to those wearing closed shoes. Unlike shoes, flip-flops leave most parts of the feet uncovered, which increases the risk of injuries such as cuts, scrapes, or stubbed toes. In addition, they offer very little support, making students more vulnerable to accidents, especially when walking on rough surfaces or during crowded activities. By requiring students to wear shoes, the school ensures better safety and reduces the chance of foot injuries.

Ladies and Gentlemen, based on the data and facts that we have explained, it is very clear that wearing flipflops in the school area brings more harm than benefit.

We have shown that:

There is already a clear school regulation that must be obeyed by all students without exception.

Wearing flipflops can decrease the school’s image in front of guests and officials.

It is inappropriate and against ethics, especially in a formal environment like school.

Research proves that flipflops have a 35% higher chance of getting dirty and being left scattered, making the school look messy and untidy.

Studies show that flipflops increase the risk of injuries by 1.5 times compared to shoes, because they do not provide proper protection.

From all of these reasons, we can conclude that the prohibition of flipflops in SMAN 1 Subang is not just a matter of rules, but also about discipline, ethics, cleanliness, safety, and the good image of our school.

Therefore, we, as the Proposition team, firmly stand that wearing flipflops in the school area should not be allowed.

Class : XI - 1

Absent Number : 21

Debate topic : Students are not allowed to ride / bring motorcycles

Debate Writing

The Topic of the Debate:

“Students are not allowed to ride or bring motorcycles to school.”

Our Opinion:

We strongly disagree with this topic, because prohibiting students from riding motorcycles to school will bring more disadvantages than benefits.

Supporting Arguments:

Rebutal and Supporting Arguments :

Motorcycles save time. Public transport is often unreliable, while motorcycles help students arrive on time and stay disciplined.

Motorcycles are cheaper. Public transport costs daily, but motorcycles only need fuel, which saves parents’ money.

Motorcycles teach independence and responsibility. Students learn to manage themselves instead of relying on parents.

Motorcycles are not always unsafe. Accidents can happen anywhere, even on public transport, which also has risks like reckless drivers or overcrowding.

Fifth, in rural areas, motorcycles are often the only way to reach school due to limited public transport.

Conclusion:

In short, banning motorcycles is not the solution. Motorcycles save time, reduce costs, teach responsibility, and are necessary in many areas. Safety can be improved with rules and discipline, not prohibition. Therefore, we strongly disagree with this motion.

Debate Writing and Poster

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1WCrh3LL1712ArDPZOeSpFc6EELkFMtXB

Name: Kirania Farzana Khairunnisa

Student Number: 18

Class: XI-1

Statement:

I disagree with the regulation that prevents schools to hold study tours. While the government’s concern about safety and economic issues is understandable, completely banning study tours removes many valuable opportunities for students to learn beyond the classroom.

Supporting Arguments:

First, study tours provide students with real-life learning experiences that cannot always be gained inside the classroom. By visiting historical sites, science centers, or cultural places, students can better understand the lessons they have learned at school.

Second, study tours improve social skills and teamwork. During the trip, students must learn to cooperate, respect schedules, and be responsible for themselves and others. This is an important aspect of character building.

Third, study tours can motivate students and make learning more enjoyable. School activities can sometimes feel monotonous, so a study tour offers a refreshing way to study while still being educational.

Although I understand that the government of West Java prevented study tours because of safety, economy, and accident concerns, I believe solutions can be made. For example, schools can choose affordable and safe destinations, involve parents in preparation, and work together with local authorities to ensure student safety.

Conclusion:

Preventing schools from holding study tours is not the most effective solution. Study tours play an important role in education, character development, and student motivation. Rather than prohibiting them entirely, the government and schools should focus on creating safer, cheaper, and more organized study tour programs. With proper management, students can continue to enjoy the benefits of study tours without putting their safety or family finances at risk.

No Smoking Poster: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1o9M5n4l3I0GpZmXYTvZO4MOzTosueLp9/view?usp=drivesdk

Name: Galih Ikhrya Fajri

Class and Attendance Number: XI-1, 14

Link Google Drive :

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1mc6i7WwX_Y9tdI6arxHtGEYaf6Gidx-9

1. Statement

We strongly agree with the policy that requires students to arrive at school at 06.30 am. This policy is not a punishment, but a preparation. It builds discipline, maximizes learning potential, and prepares students for real-life challenges. Starting early is not only about waking up, but about shaping character, responsibility, and resilience qualities that are essential for future success.

2. Arguments

Argument 1: Discipline and responsibility training.

Arriving at 06.30 develops students’ time management and self-discipline. They must organize their sleep schedule, prepare themselves earlier, and arrive on time. These habits are crucial in the real world, where work and responsibilities often begin early in the morning. Early routines shape students into resilient, responsible individuals rather than passive learners.

Argument 2: Morning hours are the most productive for learning.

Scientific studies prove that the human brain works at its peak performance in the early hours of the day. Concentration, memory retention, and problem-solving skills are all higher in the morning. That is why major exams and national assessments are usually scheduled in the morning. By starting school at 06.30, students gain maximum benefit from this golden window of productivity.

Argument 3: Early start improves time management and reduces procrastination.

When students begin their day at 06.30, they learn to organize tasks earlier and avoid wasting time in the morning. A study published in the Journal of Educational Psychology (2019) found that students who start their routines earlier are 30% more likely to complete homework on time compared to late starters. This shows that an earlier schedule helps students become more responsible and reduces the tendency to delay tasks.

Argument 4: Global competitiveness and national productivity.

Many high-achieving countries, such as Japan and South Korea, begin school very early, some even before 07.00. Their students are recognized globally for discipline and academic achievement. By requiring students to arrive at 06.30, Indonesia is not making life harder, but rather preparing its youth to compete with countries that already practice strict discipline in education. Discipline in waking up early is directly connected to discipline in life and work.

3. Rebuttal

The opposing team may argue that early school hours reduce students’ sleeping time and harm their health. But the real issue is lifestyle, not schedule. Many students stay awake late at night because of gadgets or entertainment, not because of school. If students practice a healthy routine, such as sleeping earlier and reducing screen time, they can still achieve sufficient rest. Waking up early does not harm health; in fact, it improves mental discipline and helps the body adapt to a healthier daily rhythm.

4. Conclusion

This policy is not about forcing students to wake up early; it is about preparing them to become disciplined, productive, and resilient individuals. Learning at 06.30 allows students to benefit from the most effective hours of the day, trains responsibility, and aligns education with real-life challenges. Education is not only about knowledge, but also about character. And character is built when we are challenged, not when we stay in comfort.

Schools build future leaders, and leaders do not wake up late.

Class : XI - 1

Absent Number : 10

1. Statement :

I don’t agree with the rule that students must arrive before 6:30 a.m., because I think it’s not effective. Coming to school that early makes students lose sleep, have less time to get ready, and sometimes skip breakfast all of which affect their focus in class. And for students who live far away and need more than 30 minutes to get to school, it’s clearly a big problem. Schools should set a more reasonable arrival time so students have enough time to prepare.

2. Arguments

Argument 1 : Circadian Rhythm Disorder and Sleep Deprivation.

According to American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), teenagers need 8 to 10 hours of sleep every night. Average teenager have trouble sleeping because of Circadian Rhythm that changes frequently, and it will causes sleep deprivation. Then, starting school at 06:30 forces students to wake up much earlier, often between 04:30 and 05:30. Lack of sleep makes students sleepy in class that affecting concentration, memory, problem solving, and other.

Argument 2 : Negative Impact on Physical and Mental Health

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found a strong link between early school hours and health problems in teenagers. Sleep deprivation caused by early school hours is associated with an increased risk of mental health problems such as anxiety and depression.

Argumen 3 : Decreased Quality and Effectiveness of Learning

6:30a a.m is the time when most teenage brains are not fully "awake". As a result, they are not ready to receive the subject matter. A study from the University of Oxford showed that school hours that start later at 8:00 can improve students' average test scores. This proves that adjusting the school schedule to the biological rythm.

Rebuttal :

True discipline is about self management, not only wake up early. Many people that success in career dont st their day at 06:30. because they have flexible schedules and productive. Based on fact, we as teenagers recommended to start a lesson from eight to prevent lack of sleep. Wake up early isn't a solution to avoid traffic jam, the real solution is increasing public transportation, using bicycle, or other.

Conclusion :

Based on the above reasons, starting school at 06:30 is not only ineffective, but also harmful to students. These schedules interfere with physical and mental health, hinder learning ability, and ultimately reduce students' potential. Our priority should be to create an optimal learning environment, and that starts with respecting students' biological needs,

Class : XI - 1

Absent Number : 10

1. Statement :

I don’t agree with the rule that students must arrive before 6:30 a.m., because I think it’s not effective. Coming to school that early makes students lose sleep, have less time to get ready, and sometimes skip breakfast all of which affect their focus in class. And for students who live far away and need more than 30 minutes to get to school, it’s clearly a big problem. Schools should set a more reasonable arrival time so students have enough time to prepare.

2. Arguments

Argument 1 : Circadian Rhythm Disorder and Sleep Deprivation.

According to American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), teenagers need 8 to 10 hours of sleep every night. Average teenager have trouble sleeping because of Circadian Rhythm that changes frequently, and it will causes sleep deprivation. Then, starting school at 06:30 forces students to wake up much earlier, often between 04:30 and 05:30. Lack of sleep makes students sleepy in class that affecting concentration, memory, problem solving, and other.

Argument 2 : Negative Impact on Physical and Mental Health

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found a strong link between early school hours and health problems in teenagers. Sleep deprivation caused by early school hours is associated with an increased risk of mental health problems such as anxiety and depression.

Argumen 3 : Decreased Quality and Effectiveness of Learning

6:30a a.m is the time when most teenage brains are not fully "awake". As a result, they are not ready to receive the subject matter. A study from the University of Oxford showed that school hours that start later at 8:00 can improve students' average test scores. This proves that adjusting the school schedule to the biological rythm.

Rebuttal :

True discipline is about self management, not only wake up early. Many people that success in career dont st their day at 06:30. because they have flexible schedules and productive. Based on fact, we as teenagers recommended to start a lesson from eight to prevent lack of sleep. Wake up early isn't a solution to avoid traffic jam, the real solution is increasing public transportation, using bicycle, or other.

Conclusion :

Based on the above reasons, starting school at 06:30 is not only ineffective, but also harmful to students. These schedules interfere with physical and mental health, hinder learning ability, and ultimately reduce students' potential. Our priority should be to create an optimal learning environment, and that starts with respecting students' biological needs

Smoking desain :

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzJlktkY/YcawBZdtUptA_wm1bWiIOA/view?utm_content=DAGxzJlktkY&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=uniquelinks&utlId=h72e75d35e8

Class: XI-1

absent number:27

Topic: “Students are not allowed to ride or bring motorcycles to school.”

1. Statement

We strongly disagree with this topic, because prohibiting students from riding motorcycles to school will bring more disadvantages than benefits.

2. Arguments and Supporting Arguments

First, motorcycles save time. Public transport is often unreliable, while motorcycles help students arrive on time and stay disciplined.

Second, motorcycles are cheaper. Public transport costs daily, but motorcycles only need fuel, which saves parents’ money.

Third, motorcycles teach independence and responsibility. Students learn to manage themselves instead of relying on parents.

Fourth, motorcycles are not always unsafe. Accidents can happen anywhere, even on public transport, which also has risks like reckless drivers or overcrowding.

Fifth, in rural areas, motorcycles are often the only way to reach school due to limited public transport.

Conclusion:

In short, banning motorcycles is not the solution. Motorcycles save time, reduce costs, teach responsibility, and are necessary in many areas. Safety can be improved with rules and discipline, not prohibition. Therefore, we strongly disagree with this motion.

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1wu3oMNiQpGxxSSpIb6LUeYZmSpr3qTy9

Class : XI-1

Absent Number : 22

Statement :

We disagree with the policy that forces students to arrive at school by 6:30 a.m. Such an early schedule negatively affects students’ health, concentration, and overall well-being. Teenagers biologically need more sleep because of their growth stage. Waking up too early leads to sleep deprivation, which reduces academic performance and motivation. A good education system should support students’ physical and mental health, not sacrifice it.

Argument 1 :

Starting school too early contradicts scientific research on sleep. According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, teenagers should not start school before 8:30 a.m. because their biological clock is different from adults. Forcing them to start at 6:30 means they lose up to 2 hours of essential rest every day. This causes fatigue, poor memory retention, and even risks like depression or anxiety.

Argument 2 :

Early school time also creates social and family burdens. Parents who work night shifts or live far away must adjust their routines drastically, often leading to stress and conflict at home. In rural areas, students who rely on public transport or who cycle to school face safety risks because they must travel when it is still dark. Instead of improving discipline, this policy brings more difficulties.

Rebuttal :

Policymakers might argue that early school hours teach discipline. However, discipline should not come at the cost of students’ health. True discipline is about being responsible, managing time, and learning effectively—not about sacrificing sleep. If other countries like Finland and Singapore, which are known for their excellent education systems, can start school later and still achieve high performance, then Indonesia should also reconsider this outdated policy.

Conclusion :

Requiring students to arrive at 6:30 a.m. does not increase discipline or achievement, but instead harms health, family harmony, and even safety. Education should focus on creating a supportive environment where students can learn in their best condition. School is not a factory, and students are not machines. Therefore, starting school later is a smarter, healthier, and more effective policy for the future of education.

Name : Keiysa Havitina Nurbaety

Class and absent : XI-1 (17)

1. Statements :

This study tour activity can enrich students' learning experiences, provide insights and knowledge not acquired in the classroom, and develop soft skills such as teamwork and time management. This allows students to directly observe the relationship between the learning material and the object.

2. Argumen :

Disagree that, Study tours are more than just sightseeing trips; they are part of the teaching and learning process at school. These activities take place outside the classroom, visiting various educational attractions, such as museums, national parks, historical sites, cultural sites, and more.

And that, Study tours have lots of benefits, like:

1. Getting experiences you can’t find in the classroom.

2. Learning directly from real sources.

3. Having fun and exciting experiences.

4. Making learning more interesting.

5. Becoming more aware of the environment.

6. Discovering and growing your personal interests.

Conclusion :

The conclusion means that a study tour is not just a fun trip, but an important part of learning. It helps students connect theory with real life, broaden their knowledge, build character, increase motivation to learn, raise environmental awareness, and discover personal interests. In short, study tours play an important role in enriching students’ learning experiences.

Class : Xl-1

Absent Number : 13

1. Statement :

   I agree with the motion “school are prevented to hold a study tour " often bring more disadvantages than benefits

2. Argument :

   Argument 1 : study tours put a financial burden on parents. Transportation, accommodation, and entrance fees can cost hundreds of thousands to millions of rupiah. Not all families can afford these expenses, which creates social inequality among students.

   Argument 2 : study tours do not always provide significant educational benefits. In many cases, the main purpose of the trip turns into recreation rather than learning. As a result, the true mission of schools as educational institutions is not fully achieved

   Argument 3 : study tours also involve high safety risks. We often hear news about bus accidents during study tours that cause casualties. This proves that such activities can potentially endanger students.

3. Conclusion :

   Based on these reasons, I firmly state that schools should prohibit study tours. Instead, schools can organize educational activities within the local environment that are safer, more affordable, and still meaningful for students. Therefore, banning study tours does not reduce learning experiences, but rather protects students and eases parents’ financial burden.

Class : XI-1

Absen Number : 26

1. Statement :

I agree with the use of chat gpt and ai for educational purpose because it provides many benefits. Ai can give personalized learning support by offering instant explanations and feedback, something teacher can't always provide to every student at once. It also increase acces to knowledge, allowing students from different areas to learn anytime and anywhere. A study in computers and education 2022 even showed that students using Ai chatbots improved their participation and performance. Therefore, Ai like ChatGPT can make learning easier, more engaging and more effective.

2. Argument :

Argument 1 :

Chat gpt/Ai gives quick answers and explanation so students can understand easier.

Argument 2 :

Using Chat gpt/Ai can save the time for teacher and student because it can summarize text generate.

Argument 3 :

It is easy to acces and can answer many question. Student can learn anytime, not only in class.

Argument 4 :

ChatGpt/Ai can make learning more fun because it use technology that students like.

3. Conclusion :

The use chatgpt/ai for education brings many advantages. it helps students learn faster, save time, provides easy access to knowledge, and make learning more fun. and than, chatgpt/ai can support both teachers and students in creating a better learning.

Class : XI-1

Number Absent : 31

Topic: "Schools are prevented to hold a study tour."

1. Statement

The debate over banning school study tours is a critical one, and our position is clear: we vehemently oppose this policy. It's a short-sighted and misguided attempt to eliminate risk by sacrificing a core component of modern education. School trips are not frivolous outings; they are essential for bridging the gap between theoretical classroom knowledge and practical, real-world experience. By preventing schools from holding them, we are limiting students' potential and undermining the very purpose of a holistic education. This policy is a detriment to student growth and academic development.

2. Arguments

Argument 1: Study tours provide irreplaceable experiential learning.

Education is not confined to the four walls of a classroom. Study tours connect theoretical knowledge with practical, real-world application. A history lesson on ancient Rome becomes real when students walk through the Colosseum. A biology class on marine ecosystems gains meaning when students can see a coral reef in person. This hands-on learning approach solidifies understanding and makes lessons more memorable than any textbook or lecture ever could. A 2014 study by the Student and Youth Travel Association (SYTA) found that students who participated in educational travel had higher GPAs and were more likely to attend college. This proves that these trips are not a distraction from academics but a powerful tool to enhance them.

Argument 2: Study tours cultivate essential life skills and global awareness.

Beyond academic benefits, study tours are crucial for developing "soft skills" that are vital for future success. Students learn to be independent, adaptable, and resourceful while navigating new environments. They learn how to manage their time and money and collaborate with peers outside of a traditional school setting. A 2016 study in the Journal of School Health reported that students on school trips showed significant improvements in teamwork and leadership. Furthermore, these tours expose students to diverse cultures and new perspectives, which promotes empathy and breaks down stereotypes. By interacting with different communities, students develop a sense of global citizenship a skill increasingly important in our interconnected world. A 2017 study by the American Council on Education (ACE) found that students who took part in a study tour were 25% more likely to pursue a career in a related field after graduation, demonstrating the direct link between experiential learning and future success.

3. Rebuttal

The argument that study tours are too risky or expensive completely misses the point. The solution to these challenges is not to ban them outright but to manage the risks and find equitable solutions. Banning these trips is an overreaction that punishes all students for the failures of a few. We must focus on implementing stricter safety regulations, comprehensive risk assessments, and flexible payment plans or scholarship programs. We cannot allow fear to dictate our educational policies and prevent students from experiencing the world firsthand.

4. Conclusion

In conclusion, prohibiting school study tours is a flawed policy that robs students of a critical component of their education. These trips are vital for transforming classroom theory into real-world knowledge, fostering essential life skills, and promoting cultural understanding. Instead of eliminating these opportunities, we should work to make them safer and more accessible for everyone. A school’s responsibility is to prepare students for the future, and that includes giving them a chance to step outside their comfort zone and learn beyond the classroom walls.

And here is the link to my digital poster: https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzJI9TLk/xf59XdNFCEFfybshz9J6dA/edit?utm_content=DAGxzJI9TLk&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Have a nice day and thank you Mrs.

Name:Ilmira inaya.

Class:11-8.

Absent:15.

Statement

We as the proposition team are fully agree with the motion that “THBT wearing flipflops in school area is not allowed”.

First of all, let us tell the definition from the keywords of the motion.

Wearing -> the act of having clothes, shoes, etc. on your body.

Flipflops -> a type of light sandal with a V-shaped strap that goes between your toes.

School Area -> place for students to study.

And we also have set the limitation for this debate is: Only happen in SMAN 1 Subang.

Ladies and Gentleman, as we all know that in SMAN 1 Subang itself, many students wearing flipflops mainly for preparing to pray. But, lots of students also use flipflops to go to canteen, or to the toilet. This mainly caused because students are too lazy to wear their shoes. Now, this can cause a lots of problems such as:

A. Making the school image decreased.

B. Inappropriate, not polite, and not in accordance with ethics.

C. Unhygienic and have bigger potential to make the school dirty and untidy.

By those problems, the school itself have made a clear rules to not allowed wearing flipflops in school area. Since we all know that SMAN 1 Subang is the best school in Subang, and we as the students must reflect the best behavior.

Now, why is this important to discuss?

Because discipline in small things, like following the rules, will shape our character and responsibility in bigger things in the future.

Because the image and reputation of our school depends on us, the students. If we behave properly and dress appropriately, we show respect to ourselves, our teachers, and our school.

Argument

That’s why we as the Proposition team are fully agree with the motion that “THBT wearing flipflops in school area is not allowed”. We have 5 main arguments on why we agree with the motion.

A. There is already a clear school rules.

In School rules book Clause 7 No. 3 tells that wearing flipflops in school area is not allowed. With this clear school rules student must follow this rules with no exception. The rules is made to be obeyed and not to be violated, that’s why if you said that wearing flipflops is fine because flip flops doesnt define your behavior, but if you have violate the school rules, it's the same as you not being disciplined with school rules.

B. Making the school image decreased in front of guest (executive, officials, regent, academicians, etc.)

The wearing of sandals by students on school grounds can create an impression of lack of discipline and untidiness in the eyes of visiting guests. Schools are educational institutions that also reflect the attitudes, ethics, and culture of order among their students. When guests see students wearing sandals, they may perceive the school as not emphasizing neatness and discipline in its dress code. This can tarnish the school's image in the eyes of external parties, especially if the guests are from official agencies, the business world, or other schools with whom they are collaborating.

C. Flipflops is inappropriate, not polite, and not in accordance with ethics.

We as the Indonesia people, of course. Have a very high norms and ethics that we have to follow and upholds. Therefore, in formal or respectful situations like in school area, it is important to dress properly as a sign of respect for ourselves and for others. Using flipflops in such contexts can be seen as neglecting cultural values and showing a lack of seriousness. As a society that highly values manners and decency, we should always maintain our appearance in a way that reflects discipline, respect, and responsibility.

D. Have bigger potential to make the school dirty and untidy.

By the research of environmental study by University of Gadjah Mada, shows that flipflops are 35% have more chance to easily get dirty than shoes. This caused by the the material that makes up flipflops is plastic, and plastic cant absorb any liquid/water based (for example: mud, murky water, etc). And also flipflops usually do not have a proper place for storage. Unlike formal shoes that are placed neatly on shoe racks, flipflops are often left scattered around. This makes the environment look messy and untidy. A messy appearance not only disturbs the eyes but also reflects a lack of discipline and order.

E. Flipflops do not provide proper protection for the feet.

A study published in the Journal of Foot and Ankle Research (2019) found that students who frequently wear flipflops are 1.5 times more likely to suffer minor foot injuries such as cuts, stubbed toes, or abrasions compared to those wearing closed shoes. Unlike shoes, flip-flops leave most parts of the feet uncovered, which increases the risk of injuries such as cuts, scrapes, or stubbed toes. In addition, they offer very little support, making students more vulnerable to accidents, especially when walking on rough surfaces or during crowded activities. By requiring students to wear shoes, the school ensures better safety and reduces the chance of foot injuries.

Ladies and Gentlemen, based on the data and facts that we have explained, it is very clear that wearing flipflops in the school area brings more harm than benefit.

We have shown that:

There is already a clear school regulation that must be obeyed by all students without exception.

Wearing flipflops can decrease the school’s image in front of guests and officials.

It is inappropriate and against ethics, especially in a formal environment like school.

Research proves that flipflops have a 35% higher chance of getting dirty and being left scattered, making the school look messy and untidy.

Studies show that flipflops increase the risk of injuries by 1.5 times compared to shoes, because they do not provide proper protection.

From all of these reasons, we can conclude that the prohibition of flipflops in SMAN 1 Subang is not just a matter of rules, but also about discipline, ethics, cleanliness, safety, and the good image of our school.

Therefore, we, as the Proposition team, firmly stand that wearing flipflops in the school area should not be allowed.

Name:Ilmira inaya.

Class:11-8.

Absent:15.

Class : XI-10

Statement :

“Good morning everyone. Today we are debating the policy of a night curfew for students. We strongly believe that this policy is not the right solution. Instead of solving problems, it limits students’ freedom, reduces opportunities for positive activities, and ignores the real causes of juvenile delinquency.”

Arguments

Argument 1: A curfew can actually reduce students’ opportunities to learn responsibility. If they are always restricted from going out at night, they will not develop self-control or decision-making skills. Instead of preparing them for adulthood, it makes them more dependent on rules.

Argument 2: The policy may also harm community life. Many students are active in positive evening activities such as religious gatherings, tutoring, or youth organizations. A strict curfew prevents them from joining these constructive events, which are important for personal growth.

Argument 3: A night curfew may create tension between students and authorities. Instead of building trust, it may lead to feelings of rebellion. Students may see the rule as unfair and try to break it secretly, which could increase conflict rather than reduce it.

Rebuttal

While curfews are intended to keep students safe, safety should not mean overprotection. True discipline comes from guidance, education, and trust, not simply from restrictions. Limiting students’ freedom at night may solve surface-level problems, but it ignores the need for long-term character building.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the night curfew policy is not the best solution for guiding students. It reduces their independence, blocks access to positive evening activities, and risks damaging trust between youth and society. A more effective approach is to empower students with education, create safe youth programs, and strengthen family and community support so they can grow responsibly without feeling overly restricted.

CLASS: XI-1

NO: 12

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1j1fIa4IKh0xWFGDuk1QxAgE2MZypfEMi

1. Statement

I disagree with the idea that students should not be allowed to bring motorcycles to school, because this rule will not solve the problem but will actually make students face more difficulties. If this rule is applied, many students will waste a lot of time waiting for public transportation that is often late, spend more money every day to pay for bus or angkot fares. This situation can make students arrive late, become tired. For example, in suburban and rural areas, public transportation is not always available or reliable, and sometimes the only way for students to reach school on time is by using their motorcycle. That is why banning motorcycles is not a fair or practical solution. A better way is to make strict rules for students who bring motorcycles, such as always wearing helmets, having a valid license, and following traffic rules. Schools can also work together with parents to make sure students ride responsibly and safely. In this way, students can still get the benefits of using motorcycles without causing bigger problems.

2. Arguments

Firstly, motorcycles save a lot of time. Public transportation is often late and unreliable, making students come late to class. With motorcycles, students can arrive on time, which helps them be more disciplined and consistent.

Secondly, some people say motorcycles are dangerous. But accidents can happen in any transportation, even in overcrowded angkot or reckless buses. If students wear helmets, have licenses, and obey rules, riding motorcycles can be safe.

Lastly, in many rural or suburban areas, public transportation is rare or unreliable. For these students, motorcycles are not just a choice but the only way to reach school. Without them, education access becomes more difficult

3. Rebuttal

Some people may argue that allowing students to bring motorcycles will increase the risk of accidents. While that concern is valid, banning motorcycles does not solve the problem. Accidents happen not only because of students, but also because of bad road conditions and other reckless drivers. Instead of banning, schools and parents should work together to make sure students who ride motorcycles have licenses, wear helmets, and follow traffic rules. This way, safety can still be maintained without limiting students’ mobility.

4. Conclusion

In conclusion, banning students from bringing motorcycles to school will only create more problems rather than solving them. Motorcycles are an effective, affordable, and necessary means of transportation for many students, especially those who live far from school or in areas with poor public transport. Instead of removing this option, schools should focus on teaching responsibility, giving strict rules, and ensuring students follow safety measures. By doing this, students can enjoy the benefits of using motorcycles—such as saving time, saving money, and learning independence—while still staying safe on the road. Therefore, the solution is not prohibition, but regulation and guidance.

Class : XI-1

Number : 1

1. Statement

To start our argumentasi, as we know our governour Mr. Dedi Mulyadi replase a new rule that student aren't allowed to ride or bring motorcycle to school. We totally agree with this new rule because at the first place, those who don't have a driver's lisensi are not even allowed to ride it

Yet, there's a lot of student to still ride a motorcycle to school anyway, maybe the cons team will say "What about the student whose far from school" or "The student who don't have sombong to bring them to school?". So guys, there's a thing called publik transportation. And if you don't want to use publik transportation, we can use online gojek such as Gojek or Grab. But, if we use public transportation we can reduce emisting polution for the enkironment. And that's with we agree with this new rute.

2. Argument

Violations of the Law and Safety the main reason students should not be allowed to ride motorcycles to school is because most of them are not yet old enough to hold a driver's license (SIM). Riding a motor vehicle without a license is a violation of the law. Furthermore, a lack of experience and understanding of traffic rules increases the risk of accidents, endangering the lives of both students and other road users. The school's top priority is to ensure the safety of its students, and allowing them to ride motorcycles without a license contradicts this principle.

The argument that students who live far away or who don't have parents to drive them has no other options is completely false. Currently, many transportation alternatives are available and safe. Students can use public transportation such as buses or public transportation (angkot), which are more environmentally friendly and affordable. Furthermore, there are also online transportation services like Gojek or Grab, which offer convenience and safety, with professional and registered drivers. Using these alternatives also indirectly teaches students to adapt to the public transportation system, reducing congestion and air pollution.

Social and Disciplinary Impacts: Allowing students to ride motorcycles to school can also lead to social and disciplinary problems. The large number of motorcycles in school areas can lead to unorganized parking, noise, and the potential for unhealthy competition among students. Furthermore, students' focus can be divided between riding their motorcycles and studying. By not bringing motorcycles to school, students can focus more on learning activities and interacting socially with their peers.

Therefore, we fully support the ban on bringing motorcycles to school as an appropriate measure to ensure safety, enforce the law, and create a better school environment for all students.

3. Rebuttal

The opposing argument may suggest that banning motorcycles creates a financial burden on students, as online transportation and public transit can be costly, especially for those from low-income families. While this concern is understandable, it overlooks the much greater financial risk of an accident. The cost of medical treatment and vehicle repairs from an accident, which is more likely without a license and proper training, far outweighs the daily expense of public or online transportation. Furthermore, using public transportation often qualifies students for special discounts, and pooling rides with friends via online services can make it more affordable. The school could also consider a subsidized public transport pass for students who demonstrate financial need, ensuring the new rule does not become a barrier to education.

4. Conclusion

Overall, the ban on motorcycles to school is a crucial decision based on the top priorities of safety and legal compliance. This regulation directly addresses the serious problem of a large proportion of students lacking a driver's license, significantly reducing the risk of road accidents. While challenges related to convenience and cost may exist, available alternative transportation options offer much safer and more sustainable solutions. Thus, this policy not only protects students from harm but also teaches them to make responsible choices, ultimately creating a safer school environment for the entire community.

Poster desain : https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzO6Io6I/QjPkihDe20bnuhDHvGrhjQ/edit?utm_content=DAGxzO6Io6I&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class: XI-1

Absent Number: 03

Topic: Students need to be at School 6:30 AM -> Agree

Statement:

Schools set a rule requiring students to arrive at school at 6:30 AM. This program was initiated by Kang Dedi Mulyadi. Although some students feel that this rule is quite demanding because they have to leave home earlier, in fact the program has a noble purpose and brings many benefits in terms of academics, personal development, and spiritual practices.

Supporting Arguments:

First, arriving earlier provides advantages in learning. According to research by the Educational Research Center (Ministry of Education and Culture, 2022), students who come earlier show 25% higher learning readiness compared to those who arrive late. In the early morning, the body and mind are still fresh, which makes concentration and memory more optimal. In addition, the time before the bell rings can be used to review materials, prepare books, or participate in morning literacy activities.

Second, arriving at 6:30 AM brings benefits for oneself. By being accustomed to arriving on time, students are trained to be disciplined, responsible, and better at managing their daily schedules. They are also free from the stress of rushing in the morning. This calmer emotional state helps students start the school day with greater enthusiasm and readiness to learn.

Third, arriving earlier provides an opportunity to perform worship at home, especially for Muslim students, who make up the majority of Indonesia’s population (86.7% according to BPS 2020). Students can perform the Fajr prayer with their families, read the Qur’an, or pray before leaving for school. Such spiritual activities in the morning have been proven to bring peace of mind, increase motivation to learn, and strengthen religious character. A study by the University of Indonesia (2019) found that students who regularly worship in the morning tend to have a more positive attitude and greater consistency in academic activities.

Conclusion:

By arriving at school at 6:30 AM, as encouraged by Kang Dedi Mulyadi’s program, students gain many benefits: improved concentration and memory, stronger self-discipline, and the opportunity to perform worship at home first. This rule is not merely about punctuality, but also about shaping a generation that is intelligent, disciplined, and morally upright in line with the values of Indonesian society.

Name : Karin Berlian Febriani

Class : XI-1

Absent : 16

• Statement:

I agree that AI is being used for educational purposes. AI helps students grasp material more quickly, provides instant explanations, and provides personalized learning. The risk of dependency is not a reason to reject it, because, like calculators of old, AI is simply a tool. With teacher guidance, AI can actually make education more modern, inclusive, and relevant to the future.

• Supporting arguments :

1. First, AI is capable of providing instant explanations and diverse perspectives that teachers might not have time to explain in class. This allows students to grasp difficult concepts more quickly.

2. Second, dependency can actually be overcome with teacher guidance and clear rules. Just as calculators were once thought to discourage students from calculating, they are now recognized as essential tools for learning advanced mathematics. Similarly, AI is merely a tool, while control remains with the students and educators.

3. Third, AI helps create more personalized learning. Students who are struggling can ask questions at any time, without having to wait for a teacher. This increases motivation and self-confidence.

4. Fourth, in the digital age, skills in using AI are actually future competencies. By accustoming students to using AI wisely, we are preparing them for the world of work and real life, which will indeed be surrounded by intelligent technology.

• Conclusion :

So, although there is a risk of dependency, this is not a reason to reject AI. On the contrary, AI should continue to be utilized because its primary purpose is to advance education, provided that its use is guided and supervised to ensure it remains educational, not merely facilitating.

Class : XI-1

Number : 36

1. Statement

To start our argumentasi, as we know our governour Mr. Dedi Mulyadi replase a new rule that student aren't allowed to ride or bring motorcycle to school. We totally agree with this new rule because at the first place, those who don't have a driver's lisensi are not even allowed to ride it

Yet, there's a lot of student to still ride a motorcycle to school anyway, maybe the cons team will say "What about the student whose far from school" or "The student who don't have sombong to bring them to school?". So guys, there's a thing called publik transportation. And if you don't want to use publik transportation, we can use online gojek such as Gojek or Grab. But, if we use public transportation we can reduce emisting polution for the enkironment. And that's with we agree with this new rute.

2. Argument

Violations of the Law and Safety the main reason students should not be allowed to ride motorcycles to school is because most of them are not yet old enough to hold a driver's license (SIM). Riding a motor vehicle without a license is a violation of the law. Furthermore, a lack of experience and understanding of traffic rules increases the risk of accidents, endangering the lives of both students and other road users. The school's top priority is to ensure the safety of its students, and allowing them to ride motorcycles without a license contradicts this principle.

The argument that students who live far away or who don't have parents to drive them has no other options is completely false. Currently, many transportation alternatives are available and safe. Students can use public transportation such as buses or public transportation (angkot), which are more environmentally friendly and affordable. Furthermore, there are also online transportation services like Gojek or Grab, which offer convenience and safety, with professional and registered drivers. Using these alternatives also indirectly teaches students to adapt to the public transportation system, reducing congestion and air pollution.

Social and Disciplinary Impacts: Allowing students to ride motorcycles to school can also lead to social and disciplinary problems. The large number of motorcycles in school areas can lead to unorganized parking, noise, and the potential for unhealthy competition among students. Furthermore, students' focus can be divided between riding their motorcycles and studying. By not bringing motorcycles to school, students can focus more on learning activities and interacting socially with their peers.

Therefore, we fully support the ban on bringing motorcycles to school as an appropriate measure to ensure safety, enforce the law, and create a better school environment for all students.

3. Rebuttal

The opposing argument may suggest that banning motorcycles creates a financial burden on students, as online transportation and public transit can be costly, especially for those from low-income families. While this concern is understandable, it overlooks the much greater financial risk of an accident. The cost of medical treatment and vehicle repairs from an accident, which is more likely without a license and proper training, far outweighs the daily expense of public or online transportation. Furthermore, using public transportation often qualifies students for special discounts, and pooling rides with friends via online services can make it more affordable. The school could also consider a subsidized public transport pass for students who demonstrate financial need, ensuring the new rule does not become a barrier to education.

4. Conclusion

Overall, the ban on motorcycles to school is a crucial decision based on the top priorities of safety and legal compliance. This regulation directly addresses the serious problem of a large proportion of students lacking a driver's license, significantly reducing the risk of road accidents. While challenges related to convenience and cost may exist, available alternative transportation options offer much safer and more sustainable solutions. Thus, this policy not only protects students from harm but also teaches them to make responsible choices, ultimately creating a safer school environment for the entire community.

Class : XI-1

Number : 36

1. Statement

To start our argumentasi, as we know our governour Mr. Dedi Mulyadi replase a new rule that student aren't allowed to ride or bring motorcycle to school. We totally agree with this new rule because at the first place, those who don't have a driver's lisensi are not even allowed to ride it

Yet, there's a lot of student to still ride a motorcycle to school anyway, maybe the cons team will say "What about the student whose far from school" or "The student who don't have sombong to bring them to school?". So guys, there's a thing called publik transportation. And if you don't want to use publik transportation, we can use online gojek such as Gojek or Grab. But, if we use public transportation we can reduce emisting polution for the enkironment. And that's with we agree with this new rute.

2. Argument

Violations of the Law and Safety the main reason students should not be allowed to ride motorcycles to school is because most of them are not yet old enough to hold a driver's license (SIM). Riding a motor vehicle without a license is a violation of the law. Furthermore, a lack of experience and understanding of traffic rules increases the risk of accidents, endangering the lives of both students and other road users. The school's top priority is to ensure the safety of its students, and allowing them to ride motorcycles without a license contradicts this principle.

The argument that students who live far away or who don't have parents to drive them has no other options is completely false. Currently, many transportation alternatives are available and safe. Students can use public transportation such as buses or public transportation (angkot), which are more environmentally friendly and affordable. Furthermore, there are also online transportation services like Gojek or Grab, which offer convenience and safety, with professional and registered drivers. Using these alternatives also indirectly teaches students to adapt to the public transportation system, reducing congestion and air pollution.

Social and Disciplinary Impacts: Allowing students to ride motorcycles to school can also lead to social and disciplinary problems. The large number of motorcycles in school areas can lead to unorganized parking, noise, and the potential for unhealthy competition among students. Furthermore, students' focus can be divided between riding their motorcycles and studying. By not bringing motorcycles to school, students can focus more on learning activities and interacting socially with their peers.

Therefore, we fully support the ban on bringing motorcycles to school as an appropriate measure to ensure safety, enforce the law, and create a better school environment for all students.

3. Rebuttal

The opposing argument may suggest that banning motorcycles creates a financial burden on students, as online transportation and public transit can be costly, especially for those from low-income families. While this concern is understandable, it overlooks the much greater financial risk of an accident. The cost of medical treatment and vehicle repairs from an accident, which is more likely without a license and proper training, far outweighs the daily expense of public or online transportation. Furthermore, using public transportation often qualifies students for special discounts, and pooling rides with friends via online services can make it more affordable. The school could also consider a subsidized public transport pass for students who demonstrate financial need, ensuring the new rule does not become a barrier to education.

4. Conclusion

Overall, the ban on motorcycles to school is a crucial decision based on the top priorities of safety and legal compliance. This regulation directly addresses the serious problem of a large proportion of students lacking a driver's license, significantly reducing the risk of road accidents. While challenges related to convenience and cost may exist, available alternative transportation options offer much safer and more sustainable solutions. Thus, this policy not only protects students from harm but also teaches them to make responsible choices, ultimately creating a safer school environment for the entire community.

Class : XI-1

Number Absent : 30

Topic: "Schools are prevented to hold a study tour."

1. Statement

The debate over banning school study tours is a critical one, and our position is clear: we vehemently oppose this policy. It's a short-sighted and misguided attempt to eliminate risk by sacrificing a core component of modern education. School trips are not frivolous outings; they are essential for bridging the gap between theoretical classroom knowledge and practical, real-world experience. By preventing schools from holding them, we are limiting students' potential and undermining the very purpose of a holistic education. This policy is a detriment to student growth and academic development.

2. Arguments

Argument 1: Study tours provide irreplaceable experiential learning.

Education is not confined to the four walls of a classroom. Study tours connect theoretical knowledge with practical, real-world application. A history lesson on ancient Rome becomes real when students walk through the Colosseum. A biology class on marine ecosystems gains meaning when students can see a coral reef in person. This hands-on learning approach solidifies understanding and makes lessons more memorable than any textbook or lecture ever could. A 2014 study by the Student and Youth Travel Association (SYTA) found that students who participated in educational travel had higher GPAs and were more likely to attend college. This proves that these trips are not a distraction from academics but a powerful tool to enhance them.

Argument 2: Study tours cultivate essential life skills and global awareness.

Beyond academic benefits, study tours are crucial for developing "soft skills" that are vital for future success. Students learn to be independent, adaptable, and resourceful while navigating new environments. They learn how to manage their time and money and collaborate with peers outside of a traditional school setting. A 2016 study in the Journal of School Health reported that students on school trips showed significant improvements in teamwork and leadership. Furthermore, these tours expose students to diverse cultures and new perspectives, which promotes empathy and breaks down stereotypes. By interacting with different communities, students develop a sense of global citizenship a skill increasingly important in our interconnected world. A 2017 study by the American Council on Education (ACE) found that students who took part in a study tour were 25% more likely to pursue a career in a related field after graduation, demonstrating the direct link between experiential learning and future success.

3. Rebuttal

The argument that study tours are too risky or expensive completely misses the point. The solution to these challenges is not to ban them outright but to manage the risks and find equitable solutions. Banning these trips is an overreaction that punishes all students for the failures of a few. We must focus on implementing stricter safety regulations, comprehensive risk assessments, and flexible payment plans or scholarship programs. We cannot allow fear to dictate our educational policies and prevent students from experiencing the world firsthand.

4. Conclusion

In conclusion, prohibiting school study tours is a flawed policy that robs students of a critical component of their education. These trips are vital for transforming classroom theory into real-world knowledge, fostering essential life skills, and promoting cultural understanding. Instead of eliminating these opportunities, we should work to make them safer and more accessible for everyone. A school’s responsibility is to prepare students for the future, and that includes giving them a chance to step outside their comfort zone and learn beyond the classroom walls.

link poster: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1w1eNcF5rZ1aIIe2U2W4A7zqMQvDOe0Es/view?usp=drivesdk

Class: XI-1

Absent number: 35

Main Opinion:

I don’t agree with the rule that students must arrive before 6:30 a.m., because I think it’s not effective. Coming to school that early makes students lose sleep, have less time to get ready, and sometimes skip breakfast—all of which affect their focus in class. This rule also makes traffic worse. And for students who live far away and need more than 30 minutes to get to school, it’s clearly a big problem. Schools should set a more reasonable arrival time so students have enough time to prepare.

Supporting Arguments:

1. It cuts into students’ sleep and gives them no time for breakfast. As a result, they feel sleepy and can’t focus in class because they’re too tired and hungry. According to American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), teenagers need 8 to 10 hours of sleep every night. Average teenager have trouble sleeping because of Circadian Rhythm that changes frequently, and it will causes sleep deprivation. Then, starting school at 06:30 forces students to wake up much earlier, often between 04:30 and 05:30. Lack of sleep makes students sleepy in class that affecting concentration, memory, problem solving, and other. Don’t teachers want their students to learn with energy? How can that happen if students are weak and exhausted because of this rule?

2. Traffic jams get worse, since many students end up leaving home at the same time. The roads become crowded in the morning with students rushing to school, which is not what anyone wants.

3. It’s a serious problem for students who live far away. If it takes them more than 30 minutes to get to school, how are they supposed to arrive at 6:30? Do they have to leave when it’s still dark outside? That’s risky, because poor lighting can cause accidents or other problems. It’s really unfair for those who live far from school.

4. Negative Impact on Physical and Mental Health, acording to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found a strong link between early school hours and health problems in teenagers. Sleep deprivation caused by early school hours is associated with an increased risk of mental health problems such as anxiety and depression.

Closing Statement:

So, as explained above, I don’t agree with this rule, because the bad effects are greater than the good ones. These include less focus in class, worse traffic, serious problems for students who live far away, and negative impacts on students’ health. This rule should really be reconsidered, keeping in mind all these negative effects.

Canva link:

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzXKdbCA/WMQKGXK-iPaAT0rRXzaK9w/edit?utm_content=DAGxzXKdbCA&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class : XI-1

Number : 23

1. Statement

To start our argumentasi, as we know our governour Mr. Dedi Mulyadi replase a new rule that student aren't allowed to ride or bring motorcycle to school. We totally agree with this new rule because at the first place, those who don't have a driver's lisensi are not even allowed to ride it

Yet, there's a lot of student to still ride a motorcycle to school anyway, maybe the cons team will say "What about the student whose far from school" or "The student who don't have sombong to bring them to school?". So guys, there's a thing called publik transportation. And if you don't want to use publik transportation, we can use online gojek such as Gojek or Grab. But, if we use public transportation we can reduce emisting polution for the enkironment. And that's with we agree with this new rute.

2. Argument

Violations of the Law and Safety the main reason students should not be allowed to ride motorcycles to school is because most of them are not yet old enough to hold a driver's license (SIM). Riding a motor vehicle without a license is a violation of the law. Furthermore, a lack of experience and understanding of traffic rules increases the risk of accidents, endangering the lives of both students and other road users. The school's top priority is to ensure the safety of its students, and allowing them to ride motorcycles without a license contradicts this principle.

The argument that students who live far away or who don't have parents to drive them has no other options is completely false. Currently, many transportation alternatives are available and safe. Students can use public transportation such as buses or public transportation (angkot), which are more environmentally friendly and affordable. Furthermore, there are also online transportation services like Gojek or Grab, which offer convenience and safety, with professional and registered drivers. Using these alternatives also indirectly teaches students to adapt to the public transportation system, reducing congestion and air pollution.

Social and Disciplinary Impacts: Allowing students to ride motorcycles to school can also lead to social and disciplinary problems. The large number of motorcycles in school areas can lead to unorganized parking, noise, and the potential for unhealthy competition among students. Furthermore, students' focus can be divided between riding their motorcycles and studying. By not bringing motorcycles to school, students can focus more on learning activities and interacting socially with their peers.

Therefore, we fully support the ban on bringing motorcycles to school as an appropriate measure to ensure safety, enforce the law, and create a better school environment for all students.

3. Rebuttal

The opposing argument may suggest that banning motorcycles creates a financial burden on students, as online transportation and public transit can be costly, especially for those from low-income families. While this concern is understandable, it overlooks the much greater financial risk of an accident. The cost of medical treatment and vehicle repairs from an accident, which is more likely without a license and proper training, far outweighs the daily expense of public or online transportation. Furthermore, using public transportation often qualifies students for special discounts, and pooling rides with friends via online services can make it more affordable. The school could also consider a subsidized public transport pass for students who demonstrate financial need, ensuring the new rule does not become a barrier to education.

4. Conclusion

Overall, the ban on motorcycles to school is a crucial decision based on the top priorities of safety and legal compliance. This regulation directly addresses the serious problem of a large proportion of students lacking a driver's license, significantly reducing the risk of road accidents. While challenges related to convenience and cost may exist, available alternative transportation options offer much safer and more sustainable solutions. Thus, this policy not only protects students from harm but also teaches them to make responsible choices, ultimately creating a safer school environment for the entire community.

poster design : https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzLJ_4Rg/Nv-joZeR_8IhmJ1nF5g3ig/edit?utm_content=DAGxzLJ_4Rg&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class and absent : XI-1 (17)

Disagree

1. Statement :

This study tour activity can enrich students' learning experiences, provide insights and knowledge not acquired in the classroom, and develop soft skills such as teamwork and time management. This allows students to directly observe the relationship between the learning material and the object.

2. Argumen :

Disegree that, Study tours are more than just sightseeing trips; they are part of the teaching and learning process at school. These activities take place outside the classroom, visiting various educational attractions, such as museums, national parks, historical sites, cultural sites, and more.

And that, Study tours have lots of benefits, like:

1. Getting experiences you can’t find in the classroom.

2. Learning directly from real sources.

3. Having fun and exciting experiences.

4. Making learning more interesting.

5. Becoming more aware of the environment.

6. Discovering and growing your personal interests.

3. Conclusion :

The conclusion means that a study tour is not just a fun trip, but an important part of learning. It helps students connect theory with real life, broaden their knowledge, build character, increase motivation to learn, raise environmental awareness, and discover personal interests. In short, study tours play an important role in enriching students’ learning experiences.

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzUI6wHE/4bqF_7lo5oZbTeyk-tRrSA/edit?utm_content=DAGxzUI6wHE&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Absent Number : 26

1. statement : I agree with the use of chat gpt and ai for educational purpose because it provides many benefits. Ai can give personalized learning support by offering instant explanations and feedback, something teacher can't always provide to every student at once. It also increase acces to knowledge, allowing students from different areas to learn anytime and anywhere. A study in computers and education 2022 even showed that students using Ai chatbots improved their participation and performance. Therefore, Ai like ChatGPT can make learning easier, more engaging and more effective

2. Argument :

Argument 1 : Chat gpt/Ai gives quick answers and explanation so students can understand easier.

Argument 2 : Using Chat gpt/Ai can save the time for teacher and student because it can summarize text generate.

Argument 3 : It is easy to acces and can answer many question. Student can learn anytime, not only in class.

Argument 4 : ChatGpt/Ai can make learning more fun because it use technology that students like.

3. Conclusion :the use chatgpt/ai for education brings many advantages. it helps students learn faster, save time, provides easy access to knowledge, and make learning more fun. and than, chatgpt/ai can support both teachers and students in creating a better learning.

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzCziK_o/5nLIX5XCfjo6RKMQT11b3g/edit?utm_content=DAGxzCziK_o&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class: XI-1

Absent number: 07

1. Statement

I strongly agree that schools should prevent holding study tours. Study tours often involve high costs that burden parents, safety risks during travel, and sometimes distract students from their main academic focus. By preventing study tours, schools can ensure equal opportunities for all students and prioritize their education and well-being

2. Argument

I absolutely agree with that statement, obviously I totally agree with the government's elimination of study tours in schools, especially the general school.

As we know our governor strictly forbade the holding of study tour instead of pivnic.

I would say we are all the students should already know about this, we are all not allowed to leave the area by the education department.

Based on the existing data, our governor strictly forbids that event, even if the student has to be charged with the cost. Its just a picnic together, and having fun, how about the children whose parents can't afford the payment? therefore many parents of the students came to complain.

Study tours involve risks such as traffic accidents, illnesses during travel, or other emergencies that are difficult to control. By preventing study tours, schools can prioritize students' safety.

3. Rebuttal

Opposition argues that study tours provide real experiences and develop social skills. However, these benefits can also be achieved through alternative school programs, such as project-based learning, local community service, or laboratory practice, which are safer and more cost-effective. Therefore, there is no strong reason to risk students’ safety and burden parents financially just for a trip.

4.Conclution

In conclusion, preventing study tours is the best decision for schools because it ensures students’ safety, reduces the financial burden on parents, and keeps the focus on academic achievement. There are many alternative ways to provide educational experiences without taking unnecessary risks. Therefore, schools should prioritize students’ well-being over recreational trips.

Poster Desain :

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzQDRuxc/LXX2XKQC6BLCCuRaBAmlCA/edit?utm_content=DAGxzQDRuxc&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class : XI-1

Number : 4

1.My Opinion:

I agree that schools should be prohibited from holding study tours. While we know that the initial goal of these activities is to broaden students' horizons through direct experiences outside the classroom, in reality, study tours often cause problems.

2.Argument :

First, *Student Safety Risks Are Very High*. Accidents often occur during study tours, especially on bus trips. Student safety cannot be guaranteed, especially if the tour is long-distance or involves dangerous routes. Student safety is the school's top priority.

Second, *Financial Burden on Parents*. Study tours often cost millions of rupiah per student. Not all parents can afford these costs, which can lead to social jealousy or financial stress. Schools should be inclusive places, not burdens on families.

Third' *Lack of Educational Value*. Despite being labeled "study tours," many activities are actually more about tourism and entertainment than learning. Educational goals are often merely formalities, with no significant impact on students' learning.

3. Rebuttal • Student safety is a top priority. In recent years, we have often heard news about study tour bus accidents that have claimed lives, both students and accompanying teachers. For example, the Lingga Kencana Vocational School study tour accident occurred on May 11, 2024 in Ciater, Subang, West Java. This accident claimed 12 lives (11 students and 1 teacher). This accident can occur due to various factors: driver fatigue, unroadworthy vehicles, dangerous travel routes, or poor time management. • Study tours generally require quite a large cost, reaching hundreds of thousands to millions of rupiah per student. Let's be realistic. Although there are some schools that can organize cheap tours, the majority of study tours are still expensive, and not all schools have the access or creativity to create inexpensive and meaningful activities.

4.Conclusion:

I still agree with the governor's policy that study tours remain prohibited. Therefore, banning study tours does not limit learning, but rather protects students from unnecessary risks and burdens, while encouraging schools to find more inclusive, safe, and meaningful learning opportunities, such as visiting museums and other places.

Poster desain : https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzdsjb5A/UwPLlJPt-TGK4DXDwZ45CQ/edit?utm_content=DAGxzdsjb5A&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class: XI-1

Absent: 34

Statement:

I disagree with the statement because when we use AI too often as Educatina Purpose our brain will be less work critical. It can reduce our creativity of thinking independently either if we use AI as our first education purpose. That's why i disagree with using AI as educatina purpose.

Arguments:

According to UNESA data based, not all the AI responds or answer is correct. Most people and researcher say that AI often gives wrong answers and if we rely too much to AI, we can get a bad impact on our study and score by that

Also, 8/10 educator said that district haven't had a clear policy about using chat gpt/ AI as educatina purpose. So, it make a big potential of AI Abuse.

According yo Mobile Guardian data based, its said that AI systems collect and analyst student data raise privacy concerns and the AI industry at large are consistently battling perceptions of control of AI. Besides that, AI will also cause job displacement because it might replace the educator roles in the future if AI continues to be the main learning material.

EastGate Software also speak up by presenting a statement about how AI will reduced human interaction, will making a technical difficulties and increased costs like software or hardware.

Conclusions:

Last but not least Chatgpt can impact to our logical thinking in designing algorithms. Brain neutron connections collapse from 79 to 42. It clearly showing us what's the worst impact as using chat gpt for our brain working. By that, we know how bad using chat gpt as our educatina purpose, firstly it'll make our logical thinking algorithms collapse, it'll make our brain less critical, it'll make a big possibility to AI Abuse. Thank You.

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzGHe_aw/EoamnmgAYjY4P4IOYrgWyA/edit?utm_content=DAGxzGHe_aw&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class : XI-1

Number :19

1. Statement

To start our argumentasi, as we know our governour Mr. Dedi Mulyadi replase a new rule that student aren't allowed to ride or bring motorcycle to school. We totally agree with this new rule because at the first place, those who don't have a driver's lisensi are not even allowed to ride it

Yet, there's a lot of student to still ride a motorcycle to school anyway, maybe the cons team will say "What about the student whose far from school" or "The student who don't have sombong to bring them to school?". So guys, there's a thing called publik transportation. And if you don't want to use publik transportation, we can use online gojek such as Gojek or Grab. But, if we use public transportation we can reduce emisting polution for the enkironment. And that's with we agree with this new rute.

2. Argument

Violations of the Law and Safety the main reason students should not be allowed to ride motorcycles to school is because most of them are not yet old enough to hold a driver's license (SIM). Riding a motor vehicle without a license is a violation of the law. Furthermore, a lack of experience and understanding of traffic rules increases the risk of accidents, endangering the lives of both students and other road users. The school's top priority is to ensure the safety of its students, and allowing them to ride motorcycles without a license contradicts this principle.

The argument that students who live far away or who don't have parents to drive them has no other options is completely false. Currently, many transportation alternatives are available and safe. Students can use public transportation such as buses or public transportation (angkot), which are more environmentally friendly and affordable. Furthermore, there are also online transportation services like Gojek or Grab, which offer convenience and safety, with professional and registered drivers. Using these alternatives also indirectly teaches students to adapt to the public transportation system, reducing congestion and air pollution.

Social and Disciplinary Impacts: Allowing students to ride motorcycles to school can also lead to social and disciplinary problems. The large number of motorcycles in school areas can lead to unorganized parking, noise, and the potential for unhealthy competition among students. Furthermore, students' focus can be divided between riding their motorcycles and studying. By not bringing motorcycles to school, students can focus more on learning activities and interacting socially with their peers.

Therefore, we fully support the ban on bringing motorcycles to school as an appropriate measure to ensure safety, enforce the law, and create a better school environment for all students.

3. Rebuttal

The opposing argument may suggest that banning motorcycles creates a financial burden on students, as online transportation and public transit can be costly, especially for those from low-income families. While this concern is understandable, it overlooks the much greater financial risk of an accident. The cost of medical treatment and vehicle repairs from an accident, which is more likely without a license and proper training, far outweighs the daily expense of public or online transportation. Furthermore, using public transportation often qualifies students for special discounts, and pooling rides with friends via online services can make it more affordable. The school could also consider a subsidized public transport pass for students who demonstrate financial need, ensuring the new rule does not become a barrier to education.

4. Conclusion

Overall, the ban on motorcycles to school is a crucial decision based on the top priorities of safety and legal compliance. This regulation directly addresses the serious problem of a large proportion of students lacking a driver's license, significantly reducing the risk of road accidents. While challenges related to convenience and cost may exist, available alternative transportation options offer much safer and more sustainable solutions. Thus, this policy not only protects students from harm but also teaches them to make responsible choices, ultimately creating a safer school environment for the entire community.

poster design : https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzqyul-8/u5vwaklkQhVMni5pkcEkRg/edit?utm_content=DAGxzqyul-8&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class : XI-1

Number : 23

1. Statement

To start our argumentasi, as we know our governour Mr. Dedi Mulyadi replase a new rule that student aren't allowed to ride or bring motorcycle to school. We totally agree with this new rule because at the first place, those who don't have a driver's lisensi are not even allowed to ride it

Yet, there's a lot of student to still ride a motorcycle to school anyway, maybe the cons team will say "What about the student whose far from school" or "The student who don't have sombong to bring them to school?". So guys, there's a thing called publik transportation. And if you don't want to use publik transportation, we can use online gojek such as Gojek or Grab. But, if we use public transportation we can reduce emisting polution for the enkironment. And that's with we agree with this new rute.

2. Argument

Violations of the Law and Safety the main reason students should not be allowed to ride motorcycles to school is because most of them are not yet old enough to hold a driver's license (SIM). Riding a motor vehicle without a license is a violation of the law. Furthermore, a lack of experience and understanding of traffic rules increases the risk of accidents, endangering the lives of both students and other road users. The school's top priority is to ensure the safety of its students, and allowing them to ride motorcycles without a license contradicts this principle.

The argument that students who live far away or who don't have parents to drive them has no other options is completely false. Currently, many transportation alternatives are available and safe. Students can use public transportation such as buses or public transportation (angkot), which are more environmentally friendly and affordable. Furthermore, there are also online transportation services like Gojek or Grab, which offer convenience and safety, with professional and registered drivers. Using these alternatives also indirectly teaches students to adapt to the public transportation system, reducing congestion and air pollution.

Social and Disciplinary Impacts: Allowing students to ride motorcycles to school can also lead to social and disciplinary problems. The large number of motorcycles in school areas can lead to unorganized parking, noise, and the potential for unhealthy competition among students. Furthermore, students' focus can be divided between riding their motorcycles and studying. By not bringing motorcycles to school, students can focus more on learning activities and interacting socially with their peers.

Therefore, we fully support the ban on bringing motorcycles to school as an appropriate measure to ensure safety, enforce the law, and create a better school environment for all students.

3. Rebuttal

The opposing argument may suggest that banning motorcycles creates a financial burden on students, as online transportation and public transit can be costly, especially for those from low-income families. While this concern is understandable, it overlooks the much greater financial risk of an accident. The cost of medical treatment and vehicle repairs from an accident, which is more likely without a license and proper training, far outweighs the daily expense of public or online transportation. Furthermore, using public transportation often qualifies students for special discounts, and pooling rides with friends via online services can make it more affordable. The school could also consider a subsidized public transport pass for students who demonstrate financial need, ensuring the new rule does not become a barrier to education.

4. Conclusion

Overall, the ban on motorcycles to school is a crucial decision based on the top priorities of safety and legal compliance. This regulation directly addresses the serious problem of a large proportion of students lacking a driver's license, significantly reducing the risk of road accidents. While challenges related to convenience and cost may exist, available alternative transportation options offer much safer and more sustainable solutions. Thus, this policy not only protects students from harm but also teaches them to make responsible choices, ultimately creating a safer school environment for the entire community.

poster design : https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzLJ_4Rg/Nv-joZeR_8IhmJ1nF5g3ig/edit?utm_content=DAGxzLJ_4Rg&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class : Xl-1

Absent : 32

Topic : Use of GPT Chat or AI as learning

1. Statement

We strongly disagree the use of ChatGPT or Artificial Intelligence (AI) as the main source of learning. Education is not merely about receiving information, but rather about building understanding, training critical thinking skills, and developing independence of character. If students rely too much on AI, then the true purpose of education will be neglected. Instead of training their minds to analyze and find solutions, they will only get used to copying instant answers provided by machines. This is dangerous for the quality of the younger generation, because learning should emphasize effort, experience, and the thinking process—not just quick and instant results.

2. Argument

- Argument 1

In our opinion, the use of AI weakens the essence of learning because students are no longer encouraged to think critically or creatively. They prefer to look for instant answers rather than analyze the material or develop their own ideas. As a result, they lose curiosity, the spirit of seeking knowledge, and independence in learning, which should be the true core of education.

- Argument 2

Several studies have shown that AI, including ChatGPT, does not always provide accurate answers. For example, a report from Stanford University (2023) found that AI responses decreased in quality over time, with error rates in solving simple math problems rising from 3% to more than 10%. Moreover, a Study.com (2023) survey revealed that 48% of students in the United States admitted using AI to complete school assignments, and most teachers considered this as increasing the risk of plagiarism and reducing the originality of students’ work. This data proves that dependency on AI has real negative impacts on education.

3. Rebuttal

Those who support AI may argue that this technology helps students access information quickly and easily. However, such convenience creates new problems, namely making students lazy to think and reliant on instant answers without questioning their accuracy. Learning should not only be about getting answers quickly but also about practicing perseverance, curiosity, and the ability to analyze problems from different perspectives. AI may serve as a supporting tool, but it cannot be the main source of learning, because its role can never replace teachers, books, or real learning experiences.

4. Conclusion

Based on the explanation above, we strongly emphasize that the use of ChatGPT or AI as the main source of learning is inappropriate. Dependence on AI will destroy the very essence of education, which is to foster independence, creativity, and critical thinking skills in students. AI should only be used as a supplementary tool to support learning, not as a substitute for the learning process itself. Therefore, quality education must remain focused on human effort to seek, understand, and construct knowledge independently.

Class: XI-10

Number :17

Nomber: 07

Date: 02 - 09 - 2025

Class: XI-10

Link Canva:

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzqQVbB8/kcFAG2bOsW2XNnFiWhxWRw/edit?utm_content=DAGxzqQVbB8&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

class:XI-10

link:https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzrtCupI/POCNu_-9KXTrAD99L5J6mw/edit?utm_content=DAGxzrtCupI&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class: XI-10

Link: https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzgpa3Cc/prLWqbJ6epMML6BCkuIUuA/edit?utm_content=DAGxzgpa3Cc&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class : XI-10

Absent number : 28

link canva design : https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzqAej0o/6o6E6kUw-UljfxbIrSONvQ/edit?utm_content=DAGxzqAej0o&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class: XI-10

Absent number: 27

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzhDQfsE/5zGhRA857u6fFQKxu5JJyA/view?utm_content=DAGxzhDQfsE&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=uniquelinks&utlId=hc366e319b2

Class : XI.10

Absent : 14

Link: https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzlBuDjM/Jr8tqyjPaoV4zl6Cpz5ogA/edit?utm_content=DAGxzlBuDjM&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class : XI-10

Date : 02 - 09 -2025

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxztJQTnM/TnVDAdEWuGEySDgnYGr5rg/edit?utm_content=DAGxztJQTnM&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

class:XI.10

absent number:01

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzitP-e8/nN7hIYXe02lyMKG0GRLoxQ/edit?utm_content=DAGxzitP-e8&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class : XI-10

Absent Number : 29

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzqB-M30/hW317n8lw_XmcM6986WDXw/view?utm_content=DAGxzqB-M30&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=uniquelinks&utlId=hfc81bfe2ed

CLASS:XI-10

NUMBER ABSENT:8 (eight)

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxz-kwNhI/70pxTvIpbRfSxWkxKlLayQ/edit?utm_content=DAGxz-kwNhI&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class : Xl-10

Absent : 21

Link :

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzmA8NEA/zTnXJz7gO6stl_GEmRYCdw/edit?utm_content=DAGxzmA8NEA&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

class:XI.10

no:01

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzitP-e8/nN7hIYXe02lyMKG0GRLoxQ/edit?utm_content=DAGxzitP-e8&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class:xl-10

No Absent:16

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzmvi7lI/s2HLalrwGUf46JJLqEVxeg/edit

Class : IX - 10

No Absent : 2

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxz1ua71M/Z8f1Ilq4qULGTY5EJQQaUA/edit?ui=eyJEIjp7IlQiOnsiQSI6IlBCV0M4aFFibExybUs5Y0oifX19&utm_content=DAGxz1ua71M&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class: XI-10

Absent number: 12

Link canva:

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzlTvMfc/fvKwko_o7jcyyp0llN6w6A/edit?utm_content=DAGxzlTvMfc&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class: XI-10

Absent Number: 26

Class : Xl-10

Number absent : 19

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzxuq6z8/t7pMY_XUz2j4mRVJMl1VbQ/edit?utm_content=DAGxzxuq6z8&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class: XI-10

Absent Number: 26

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxziXWuQg/76u4fXkrOruWa_2RsYYVeA/edit?utm_content=DAGxziXWuQg&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class: XI-10

Absent Number: 4

Class: XI-10

Absent Number: 03

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzqDPF9k/1nV0EoiuEybfubcssQjVKw/edit?utm_content=DAGxzqDPF9k&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class: XI-10

XI.10

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGx0MatvQ4/EkwLiaetT9DNMDMNkOxAFw/edit?utm_content=DAGx0MatvQ4&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class : XI-1

Absent Number : 8

1.Statement

Personally, I agree with the use of ChatGPT and AI in education. As students, sometimes we face difficulties in understanding certain subjects, and AI can really help us to study more easily. Instead of struggling alone or waiting until the next class to ask the teacher, we can directly use AI to get some guidance. I believe this can make the learning process more flexible and less stressful for students.

2. Arguments:

Helps Students Study Anytime and Anywhere: With AI tools like ChatGPT, we can study at home or even while traveling. For example, if I forget how to solve a math problem at night, I don’t need to wait until the next day. I can just ask ChatGPT and get an explanation right away. This makes learning more continuous and not limited to the classroom.

Makes Explanations Easier to Understand: Sometimes, the way teachers explain something is too fast or too complicated for some of us. AI can re-explain the same topic in simpler words, step by step, until we really understand. It feels like having a personal tutor who is always ready to answer our questions.

Supports Different Types of Learners: We all learn differently. Some of us are fast learners, while others need more time. AI can give personalized exercises, examples, or even explain the same topic in different ways until we get it. That way, nobody is left behind and everyone can learn at their own pace.

Encourages Us to Think More Critically: Even though AI can give direct answers, it doesn’t mean we should copy them. Instead, we can use AI as a discussion partner. For example, if ChatGPT gives us several explanations, we can compare them, check if they are correct, and decide which one makes the most sense. This actually trains us to analyze and think critically.

Helps Teachers Too: It’s not only useful for students, but also for teachers. Teachers can use AI to prepare materials, create practice questions, or even find examples to make the lesson more interesting. So, AI is not replacing teachers, but supporting them to teach better.

3. Rebuttal

Some people argue that using ChatGPT and AI can make students lazy because they might just copy the answers without really learning. However, I believe this problem does not come from the AI itself, but from how students choose to use it. If students are guided properly by teachers and reminded to use AI as a learning tool, not as a shortcut, then it will actually improve their learning. Others also say that AI is not always 100% accurate. While that is true, it can still be useful because students will learn to double-check the information, compare different sources, and develop their ability to evaluate knowledge critically. In the end, the disadvantages can be controlled if we use AI wisely.

4. Conclusion

In conclusion, I believe that using ChatGPT and AI in education is a very good idea. It makes learning easier, more flexible, and more personalized for every student. It also helps us develop critical thinking skills and supports teachers in their work. Of course, AI should not be abused or used for cheating, but if we use it wisely, it can really improve the way we study and make school more enjoyable.

Class: XI-10

Absent Number: 9

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGx0TsP_k0/UAoWHinBJVYcV-TCK7yYRQ/edit?utm_content=DAGx0TsP_k0&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class:XI-8

Absent Number:32

1)Statement

i dissagree with the rule that forbides from riding motorbikes. or many students, especially those who live far away from school, motorbikes are the most efficient and pratical transportation prohibiting them from using motorbikes would only create new difficulties instead f solving problems.

2)Arguments

Argument 1 : public transportation is not always available, especially in rural in suburban areas. ever if it exists, it is often expensive and not on time, Riding a motorbike helps students save both money and time.

Argument 2:

motorbikes allow students to be more independent. not all parents can drives their children to school everyday because of work, by riding motorbikes students can manage their schedule more easily

Argument 3: with proper training and a legal driving license, students can learn responsibility and discipline throught riding. instead of banning it, schools should encourage safety education and the use of helmets.

3) Rebuttal

some people say that students riding motorbikes increasess the risk of accident. whilw this is true. the solution is not to forbid motorbikes completely. the real solution is strict enforcementof traffic rulles, safety campaigns, and ensuring that only students with legal driving licenses are allowed to ride.

4. Conclusion in conclusion, forbidding students from riding motorbikes is not a fair of effective policy. motorbikes are affordablle, pratical, and often the only transportation oftion for many students. what schools and authorities should do is promote safe riding habits, not simply ban the

Class:XI-8

Absent number:16

Team:Kontra

we’re gonna debate about “wearing flippers in school area is not allowed” our opinion is we strongly disagree about this statement because flippers are needed for student who want to go to the mosque for wudhu and because now it’s a rainy season so flippers are also needed for protecting our shoes from get wet,so we can use flippers for a replacement and our shoes can stay dry and some medical studies in bournermouth university have shown that wearing flippers can reduce presure on the feet and improve our blood circulation. Flippers are also needed because we live in tropical climate which is the temparature is usually quite high so wearing shoes all day long during school can make our feet damp and it also can causes desease like foot corn and wearing shoes all day long can make our foot smell stinky so we can use flippers to make our foot not too damp and still smell normal.and not all student can afford shoes flippers are more cheap and affordable and education should be equal for everyone not based on fashion or ability to buy certain shoes and from the persoective of comfort filppers are more comfortable to wear especially in hot weather and for students who walk to school many school emphasize that wearing flippers in the school area is not disciplined and not polite but disciplined and politeness are not determined by footwear they are determined by students attitude and behavior but if some students scared of get injured while wearing flippers in heavy activiter like sports or PE (physical education) we can still use shoes for protecting our shoes but that doesn’t mean flippers are not allowed to use in school area so we totally and strongly disagree that wearing flippers in school area is not allowed.

Link Canva:https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxyPJWn_A/uVqe2WJAXjCj7YNUqOWUOg/edit?utm_content=DAGxyPJWn_A&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class:XI-8

link:https://www.canva.com/design/DAGx0izRRU0/ip1r3JWkjZWZWgIXD5_Xtg/edit?utm_content=DAGx0izRRU0&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class: Xl-10

Absent:25

Class: XI-10

Student Number: 35

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGx0le_m7g/eDU_KuhyBbR0C_aQZQyeAQ/edit?utm_content=DAGx0le_m7g&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class: XI-8

Absent: 18

We’re gonna debate about “wearing flippers in school area is not allowed” our opinion is we strongly disagree about this statement because flippers are needed for student who want to go to the mosque for wudhu and because now it’s a rainy season so flippers are also needed for protecting our shoes from get wet,so we can use flippers for a replacement and our shoes can stay dry and some medical studies in bournermouth university have shown that wearing flippers can reduce presure on the feet and improve our blood circulation.flippers are also needed because we live in tropical climate which is the temparature is usually quite high so wearing shoes all day long during school can make our feet damp and it also can causes desease like foot corn and wearing shoes all day long can make our foot smell stinky so we can use flippers to make our foot not too damp and still smell normal.and not all student can afford shoes flippers are more cheap and affordable and education should be equal for everyone not based on fashion or ability to buy certain shoes and from the persoective of comfort filppers are more comfortable to wear especially in hot weather and for students who walk to school many school emphasize that wearing flippers in the school area is not disciplined and not polite but disciplined and politeness are not determined by footwear they are determined by students attitude and behavior but if some students scared of get injured while wearing flippers in heavy activiter like sports or PE (physical education) we can still use shoes for protecting our shoes but that doesn’t mean flippers are not allowed to use in school area so we totally and strongly disagree that wearing flippers in school area is not allowed.

Poster: https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxyAta6WU/9wQndf8AWDeBrZNSvZnFOw/edit?utm_content=DAGxyAta6WU&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Name: Nisa Intan Nursafa

Class: XI-8

Student Number: 24

Class : XI-1

Absent : 29

Topic : Use of GPT Chat or AI as Learning.

1. Statement

We absolutely and firmly reject the use of ChatGPT or Artificial Intelligence (AI) as the main source of learning. Education is not about shortcuts or instant answers—it is about the process of thinking, struggling, and understanding deeply. If students depend on AI, they will lose the opportunity to train their own minds. Learning will no longer be about knowledge and wisdom, but about laziness and dependency. This is a serious threat to the future of education and the quality of the younger generation.

2. Argument

Argument 1

The use of AI destroys the true essence of learning. Students are no longer pushed to think, to ask questions, or to be creative. Instead, they become passive, just waiting for ready-made answers. This habit kills curiosity, weakens problem-solving skills, and eliminates independence in learning. If this continues, education will only produce students who are dependent, unoriginal, and unprepared to face real challenges.

Argument 2

Research proves that AI is not reliable and often misleading. A report from Stanford University (2023) revealed that the accuracy of AI answers declined over time, with mistakes in simple math problems rising drastically. In addition, a Study.com survey (2023) showed that nearly half of students admitted to using AI for schoolwork, which teachers saw as plagiarism and a threat to academic honesty. This means AI does not only weaken skills but also encourages dishonesty, plagiarism, and a decline in academic integrity.

3. Rebuttal

Supporters of AI may argue that it helps students find information faster. But what is the point of fast access if it leads to laziness, dependency, and misinformation? Education is not supposed to be “easy and instant.” It must train perseverance, discipline, and critical thinking. AI might be a tool, but it can never replace the roles of teachers, books, and real experiences. Relying on AI means sacrificing the very soul of education.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, we strongly declare that ChatGPT or AI must never become the main source of learning. Its risks far outweigh its benefits: destroying independence, weakening creativity, encouraging plagiarism, and lowering the quality of education. AI should remain only a small helper, not the backbone of learning. True education must be built on human effort, critical thinking, and real experience—because no machine can replace the human mind.

Link canva :

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzAaaZbk/eokAko8NRPkLYma7CNBGSg/edit?utm_content=DAGxzAaaZbk&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class: XI-1

Absent Number: 28

We agree with the motion that schools should be prevented from organising study tours.

Supporting Arguments:

1.Student Safety

Study tours often involve travelling long distances by bus or other transport. This can increase the risk of accidents. Protecting student safety should be the school's top priority.

2. Financial Burden

Not all students come from the same economic background. Study tours usually cost a lot of money, which can be a heavy burden for parents. By preventing study tours, schools can avoid inequality between students who can afford it and those who cannot.

3. Educational Effectiveness

Study tours sometimes focus more on recreation than learning. Schools can provide alternative educational activities such as local field trips, inviting guest speakers, or virtual tours, which are cheaper, safer, and still educational.

4. Alternatif Programmes

Instead of a study tour, schools can organise activities such as community service, camping or school-based fairs. These programmes are not only safer, but also help students build teamwork, responsibility and social awareness.

In conclusion, preventing schools from organising study tours is a wise decision as it ensures the safety of students, reduces financial pressure on families, and encourages a more meaningful educational programme. Therefore, we strongly support this motion.

Canva link:

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGx00FHoq0/PmY9cf9UmfQNs74ZoLn7LA/edit?utm_content=DAGx00FHoq0&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class : xi-1

disagree team.

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzMy0LhU/0RG-a8z5DHDvYtH0AuL8Cg/edit

1. Statement

I disagree with the policy that students have to attend school at 6:30 am. Because, school schedules that start too early have a negative impact on students' physical and mental health, and are not effective for improving learning productivity. Coming to school that early makes students lose sleep, have less time to get ready, and sometimes skip breakfast—all of which affect their focus in class. This rule also makes traffic worse and makes more stress. And for students who live far away and need more than 30 minutes to get to school, it’s clearly a big problem becaus they can't sleep enough. Schools should set a more reasonable arrival time so students have enough time to prepare & sleep.

2. Arguments

Argument 1 : Circadian Rhythm Disorder and Sleep Deprivation.

According to American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), teenagers need 8 to 10 hours of sleep every night. Average teenager have trouble sleeping because of Circadian Rhythm that changes frequently, and it will causes sleep deprivation. Then, starting school at 06:30 forces students to wake up much earlier, often between 04:30 and 05:30. Lack of sleep makes students sleepy in class that affecting concentration, memory, problem solving, and other.

Argument 2 : Negative Impact on Physical and Mental Health

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found a strong link between early school hours and health problems in teenagers. Sleep deprivation caused by early school hours is associated with an increased risk of mental health problems such as anxiety and depression.

Argumen 3 : Decreased Quality and Effectiveness of Learning

6:30a a.m is the time when most teenage brains are not fully "awake". As a result, they are not ready to receive the subject matter. A study from the University of Oxford showed that school hours that start later at 8:00 can improve students' average test scores. This proves that adjusting the school schedule to the biological rythm.

3. Rebuttal :

True discipline is about self management, not only wake up early. Many people that success in career dont st their day at 06:30. because they have flexible schedules and productive. Based on fact, we as teenagers recommended to start a lesson from eight to prevent lack of sleep. Wake up early isn't a solution to avoid traffic jam, the real solution is increasing public transportation, using bicycle, or other.

4. Conclusion :

Based on the above reasons, starting school at 06:30 is not only ineffective, but also harmful to students. These schedules interfere with physical and mental health, hinder learning ability, and ultimately reduce students' potential. Our priority should be to create an optimal learning environment, and that starts with respecting students' biological needs.

Class : XI-1

Absent Number : 6

Debate topic:

“Students are not allowed to ride or bring motorcycles to school.”

Our Opinion:

We strongly disagree with topic, because prohibiting students from riding motorcycles to school will brings more disadvantages than benefits.

Rebutal and Supporting Argument:

Motorcycles save time. Public transport is often unreliable, while motorcycles help students arrive on time and stay disciplined.

Motorcycles are cheaper. Public transport costs daily, but motorcycles only need fuel, which saves parents’ money.

Motorcycles teach independence and responsibility. Students learn to manage themselves instead of relying on parents.

Motorcycles are not always unsafe. Accidents can happen anywhere, even on public transport, which also has risks like reckless drivers or overcrowding. In rural areas, motorcycles are often the only way to reach school due to limited public transport.

Conclusion:

In short, banning motorcycles is not the solution. Motorcycles save time, reduce costs, teach responsibility, and are necessary in many areas. Safety can be improved with rules and discipline, not prohibition. Therefore, we strongly disagree with this motion.

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1gQxikmFReIcfQLJa3UYslWWQ4aJRp8Fj

Class : XI-1

Absent Number : 02

Link Canva : https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzkkkMMs/okwwloBL_FCkWMTuKcF5AQ/edit

1. Statement

I disagree with the policy that students have to attend school at 6:30 am. Because, school schedules that start too early have a negative impact on students' physical and mental health, and are not effective for improving learning productivity. Coming to school that early makes students lose sleep, have less time to get ready, and sometimes skip breakfast—all of which affect their focus in class. This rule also makes traffic worse and makes more stress. And for students who live far away and need more than 30 minutes to get to school, it’s clearly a big problem becaus they can't sleep enouhh. Schools should set a more reasonable arrival time so students have enough time to prepare & sleep.

2. Arguments

Argument 1 : Circadian Rhythm Disorder and Sleep Deprivation.

According to American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), teenagers need 8 to 10 hours of sleep every night. Average teenager have trouble sleeping because of Circadian Rhythm that changes frequently, and it will causes sleep deprivation. Then, starting school at 06:30 forces students to wake up much earlier, often between 04:30 and 05:30. Lack of sleep makes students sleepy in class that affecting concentration, memory, problem solving, and other.

Argument 2 : Negative Impact on Physical and Mental Health

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found a strong link between early school hours and health problems in teenagers. Sleep deprivation caused by early school hours is associated with an increased risk of mental health problems such as anxiety and depression.

Argumen 3 : Decreased Quality and Effectiveness of Learning

6:30a a.m is the time when most teenage brains are not fully "awake". As a result, they are not ready to receive the subject matter. A study from the University of Oxford showed that school hours that start later at 8:00 can improve students' average test scores. This proves that adjusting the school schedule to the biological rythm.

3. Rebuttal :

True discipline is about self management, not only wake up early. Many people that success in career dont st their day at 06:30. because they have flexible schedules and productive. Based on fact, we as teenagers recommended to start a lesson from eight to prevent lack of sleep. Wake up early isn't a solution to avoid traffic jam, the real solution is increasing public transportation, using bicycle, or other.

4. Conclusion :

Based on the above reasons, starting school at 06:30 is not only ineffective, but also harmful to students. These schedules interfere with physical and mental health, hinder learning ability, and ultimately reduce students' potential. Our priority should be to create an optimal learning environment, and that starts with respecting students' biological needs,

Richie Michael Suryadireja

Topic: Students must come to school before 6.30

Name: Richie Michael Suryadireja

Class and absent number: XI-8/29

STATEMENT:

We strongly disagree with the idea of students coming to school at 6.30 in the morning because it negatively affects their health, academic performance, safety, and mental well-being. Early school start times reduce sleep, increase stress, and make it harder for students to focus and succeed in their studies. A later start would create a healthier and more effective learning environment.

ARGUMENT:

1. Lack of Sleep Affects Health and Performance

Most students, especially teenagers, need around 8–10 hours of sleep. If they have to arrive at school by 6.30 AM, they would need to wake up extremely early—possibly before 5 AM. This reduces their sleep time and can lead to fatigue, poor concentration, and even long-term health problems.

1. Reduced Academic Productivity

Studies show that students perform better academically when school starts later in the morning. Early start times can cause students to feel sleepy and less focused, especially in the first few hours of class. This reduces the effectiveness of learning and lowers overall performance.

1. Safety Concerns

Coming to school at 6.30 often means traveling in the dark, especially during winter months. This raises safety concerns for students walking or commuting alone early in the morning.

1. Unnecessary Pressure and Stress

Early school times force students into rushed mornings, affecting their mental well-being. They may skip breakfast, forget materials, or feel stressed even before the day starts.

CONCLUSION:

In conclusion, starting school at 6.30 AM is not beneficial for students. It negatively affects their health, safety, academic performance, and mental well-being. A later start time would allow students to rest properly, focus better, and learn in a more supportive and balanced environment. For these reasons, I strongly disagree with the idea of coming to school at 6.30.

Class : XI-1

Absent Number : 20

1. Statement

I disagree with the idea that students should not be allowed to bring motorcycles to school, because this rule will not solve the problem but will actually make students face more difficulties. If this rule is applied, many students will waste a lot of time waiting for public transportation that is often late, spend more money every day to pay for bus or angkot fares. This situation can make students arrive late, become tired. For example, in suburban and rural areas, public transportation is not always available or reliable, and sometimes the only way for students to reach school on time is by using their motorcycle. That is why banning motorcycles is not a fair or practical solution. A better way is to make strict rules for students who bring motorcycles, such as always wearing helmets, having a valid license, and following traffic rules. Schools can also work together with parents to make sure students ride responsibly and safely. In this way, students can still get the benefits of using motorcycles without causing bigger problems.

2. Arguments

Firstly, motorcycles save a lot of time. Public transportation is often late and unreliable, making students come late to class. With motorcycles, students can arrive on time, which helps them be more disciplined and consistent.

Secondly, some people say motorcycles are dangerous. But accidents can happen in any transportation, even in overcrowded angkot or reckless buses. If students wear helmets, have licenses, and obey rules, riding motorcycles can be safe.

Lastly, in many rural or suburban areas, public transportation is rare or unreliable. For these students, motorcycles are not just a choice but the only way to reach school. Without them, education access becomes more difficult

3. Rebuttal

Some people may argue that allowing students to bring motorcycles will increase the risk of accidents. While that concern is valid, banning motorcycles does not solve the problem. Accidents happen not only because of students, but also because of bad road conditions and other reckless drivers. Instead of banning, schools and parents should work together to make sure students who ride motorcycles have licenses, wear helmets, and follow traffic rules. This way, safety can still be maintained without limiting students’ mobility.

4. Conclusion

In conclusion, banning students from bringing motorcycles to school will only create more problems rather than solving them. Motorcycles are an effective, affordable, and necessary means of transportation for many students, especially those who live far from school or in areas with poor public transport. Instead of removing this option, schools should focus on teaching responsibility, giving strict rules, and ensuring students follow safety measures. By doing this, students can enjoy the benefits of using motorcycles—such as saving time, saving money, and learning independence—while still staying safe on the road. Therefore, the solution is not prohibition, but regulation and guidance.

Class : XI 8

Absent Number : 23

1. Statement

We strongly disagree with the rule that students are not allowed to ride motorbikes to school. Motorbikes are one of the most common and practical transportation methods for students, especially in areas where public transportation is limited.

2. Argument

First, riding a motorbike saves time. Many students live far from school, and public transportation is not always available or reliable. Using a motorbike helps them arrive on time.

Second, motorbikes are more affordable compared to cars. For families with limited income, a motorbike is a reasonable option to support their children’s education.

Third, learning how to ride responsibly can teach students discipline, independence, and traffic awareness, which are important life skills.

3. Rebuttal

The opposing side may argue that motorbikes are dangerous for students. However, accidents can happen with any type of transportation, including cars and buses. The solution is not to forbid motorbikes, but to ensure that students follow safety rules, wear helmets, and have proper driving licenses. With good regulation and supervision, the risks can be minimized.

4. Conclusion

In conclusion, prohibiting students from riding motorbikes to school is not the best solution. Instead of banning, schools and parents should guide students to ride safely and responsibly. By doing so, students can enjoy the benefits of efficiency and independence without sacrificing safety.

Class : XI-10

Link :

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGx1kAauV0/7ruqKITANGe_-qieKQIqAQ/edit

Name : Nazwa Shakira

Class : XI-8

Absent Number : 23

The new rule implemented by Governor Mr. Dedi Mulyadi that prohibits students from riding or bringing motorcycles to school.

I completely agree with this new rule.

My support for this rule is based on several key points. First, this rule is fully justified because, by law, students who do not have a driver's license are not permitted to ride a motorcycle in the first place.

Furthermore, while some might argue about the challenges for students who live far from school or do not have someone to drive them, a viable solution already exists: public transportation. If they prefer not to use public transport, they can also use online ride-sharing services such as Gojek or Grab.

Ultimately, this new rule has a significant environmental benefit. By encouraging students to use public transportation, we can help reduce air pollution and contribute to a healthier environment.

For these reasons, I fully stand by my position. The new rule is a necessary and responsible policy that not only upholds legal standards but also helps create a safer and cleaner environment for everyone.

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGx11d-BBg/4YFe0mI6oSX_hVc8Oev-Kg/edit?utm_content=DAGx11d-BBg&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class: XI-8

Class: XI-8

Absent Number: 22

1) Statement

i dissagree with the rule that forbides from riding motorbikes, or many students, especially those who live far away from school, motorbikes are the most efficient and pratical transportation prohibiting them from using motorbikes would only create new difficulties instead f solving problems.

2) Arguments

Argument 1: public transportation is not always suburban areas, ever if it exists, it is often expensive and not on time, Riding a motorbike helps students save both money and time.

Argument 2:

motorbikes allow students to be more independent. not all parents can drives their children to school everyday because of work, by riding motorbikes students can manage their schedule more easily

Argument 3: with proper training and a legal driving license, students can learn responsibility and discipline throught riding. instead of banning it, schools should encourage safety education and the use of helmets.

3) Rebuttal

some people say that students riding motorbikes increasess the risk of accident. whilw this is true. the solution is not to forbid motorbikes completely. the real solution is strict enforcementof traffic rulles, safety campaigns, and ensuring that only students with legal driving licenses are allowed to ride.

4. Conclusion in conclusion, forbidding students from riding motorbikes is not a fair of effective policy. motorbikes are affordablle, pratical, and often the only transportation oftion for many students. what schools and authorities should do is promote safe.

Class : XI - 1

Statement

As we know, the Governor of West Java, Kang Dedi Mulyadi, made a policy requiring students to arrive at school at 6.30 a.m. Therefore, as the government team, we agree with this policy because we understand that coming to school early in the morning provides many positive benefits. Coming to school early is not only about building discipline but also about shaping us to become successful individuals in the future.

Argument 1

Therefore, students can develop positive character traits by coming to school early in the morning, such as building discipline. By arriving at 6.30 a.m., students are more trained to be punctual. In addition, students can be more focused during the learning process. According to several studies, many students are more concentrated in the morning, which allows them to sharpen their academic abilities. Another benefit is that Muslim students can gain more advantages, as they can wake up earlier and perform their prayers before going to school.

Argument 2

Moreover, according to experts, studying in the morning is effective for absorbing new information and memorization because the brain is in its most optimal condition after resting, especially after enough sleep and a nutritious breakfast. Morning light also helps improve alertness and focus, as well as enhance mood through the stimulation of serotonin production. This time is also ideal for reviewing previous material, which can strengthen long-term memory.

Argument 3

The percentage and ranking of Indonesian students in learning achievements show a low position. For example, the PISA results in 2018 placed Indonesia among the bottom 7 out of 79 countries, with only 1 out of 3 students meeting the minimum reading standard. In addition, TIMSS 2015 data showed that 27% of 4th-grade students did not have adequate basic mathematical knowledge, and only 18% of students achieved minimum mathematical proficiency (level 2) in 2024. This is a major concern for the future of our country. By starting school at 6.30 a.m., students will have more time to study and develop their talents at school, which can then be implemented in the workplace, making Indonesian students more qualified and producing a golden generation.

Rebuttal

The opposition team argues that students may get less sleep and their health may decline if they start school at 6.30 a.m. However, this argument is unclear because lack of sleep is not caused by school, but by other factors such as playing online games, using social media, or staying up late at night. Therefore, the problem is not the rule requiring students to arrive at 6.30, but rather the students’ unhealthy habits at night that disturb their sleep. If students can build a proper routine, manage their time well, and engage in good activities, then coming to school at 6.30 a.m. will not be a big problem.

Conclusion

In conclusion, asking students to come to school at 06.30 a.m. brings more advantages than disadvantages. It trains discipline, increases productivity, and gives balance between study and other activities. Therefore, I strongly support the idea that students should arrive at school at 06.30 in the morning.

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGx7v_m3Bk/iqFVh9yxOwmCmXedd3KRIQ/edit?utm_content=DAGx7v_m3Bk&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class: Xl-10

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGyF7KeEX0/p-ocr6xjNKGDaIW_s2DGAA/edit?utm_content=DAGyF7KeEX0&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Class : XI-9

Absent Number : 09

Class: XI-9

Absent Number: 31

Class : XI-10

Absent Number : 36

Opinion : Good morning everyone,

today we stand here to support the governor’s decision to prevent schools from having study tours.

Before we start our arguments, let us explain what a study tour is. A study tour is an educational trip where students go outside the school to learn something new, for example visiting museums, factories, or historical places. The purpose is to give students more experience and knowledge beyond the classroom.

However, even though study tours can be fun and educational, they also bring some serious problems. This is why we, as the pro team, support the governor’s decision to prevent schools from having study tours.

First, safety is the most important thing. When students go on a study tour, accidents can happen on the way, like bus crashes or getting lost. By not allowing study tours, the governor is protecting students from dangerous situations.

Arguments : •Not all parents have enough money to pay their childern to go on study tours.

•Although the purpose of a study tours is to learn, such as visiting museums and historical places. These era we can use social media platforms like youtube, instagram, tiktok, to learn visually. So students can learn widely without having to spend a lot of money.

•Based on my personal experience, during my study tour, i didn't really learn much about the places i visited. Instead, i learned more by watching youtube. So why we have to doing study tour when we can learn trough youtube.

Conclusion : The ban on study tours is the right step because it prevents students from the risk of accidents, and motivates schoold to provide other learning activities that are safer, cheaper, and more useful

Class: XI-10

Absent number: 12

Link gdrive: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1IA3M0Z2bb8Jl3sH33YugxT_0ozlSB7e9/view?usp=drivesdk

Class: XI-10

Absent Number: 03

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/19sGViKQm-pkkafg_mjlJscGsTbfqhmXs

Class: XI-7

Absent number: 36

link gdrive:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1v6z1YxZ8tIi3OsYw4o4QMe6H2esh7jfI/view?usp=drivesdk

Class : XI.9

Absent Number : 8

Statement

I disagree with the use of military barracks for children in West Java because this approach limits freedom, damages psychological development, reduces social interaction, and replaces creative education with rigid discipline, which can lead to isolation and mistrust in the community.

Arguments

1. Placing children in military barracks disregards their right to a nurturing environment, as it forces them into premature exposure to militarism instead of allowing them to grow naturally in supportive families and communities.

2. The military barracks environment is not suitable for children's ages and carries a high risk of physical and psychological violence, which violates the basic principles of children's rights.

3. Growing up in military barracks exposes children to strict rules and early indoctrination, which can hinder their critical thinking and prevent them from developing a balanced, independent identity.

4. This policy also raises concerns that parents will neglect their positive parenting responsibilities by entrusting their children to barracks.

Conclusion: Growing up in military barracks can restrict children’s freedom of thought, as strict rules and early indoctrination hinder the development of an independent and well-balanced identity.

Class : IX-9

Absen Number : 11

Statement

I disagree with the use of military barracks for children in West Java because this approach limits freedom, damages psychological development, reduces social interaction, and replaces creative education with rigid discipline, which can lead to isolation and mistrust in the community.

Arguments

1. Placing children in military barracks disregards their right to a nurturing environment, as it forces them into premature exposure to militarism instead of allowing them to grow naturally in supportive families and communities.

2. The military barracks environment is not suitable for children's ages and carries a high risk of physical and psychological violence, which violates the basic principles of children's rights.

3. Growing up in military barracks exposes children to strict rules and early indoctrination, which can hinder their critical thinking and prevent them from developing a balanced, independent identity.

4. This policy also raises concerns that parents will neglect their positive parenting responsibilities by entrusting their children to barracks.

Conclusion: Growing up in military barracks can restrict children’s freedom of thought, as strict rules and early indoctrination hinder the development of an independent and well-balanced identity.

Class: XI-9

Topic: Free Lunch

1. Statement

Free food programs are often seen as a quick solution to reduce hunger and improve nutrition, but in reality they are not an effective and permanent way to solve these problems. Such programs may provide temporary relief, yet they fail to address the root causes of malnutrition and poverty, which are mainly related to lack of education, limited job opportunities, and poor economic conditions.

2. Argument

The main problem with free food programs is that the food provided is not always of good quality, and without strict safety checks, there is a higher risk of food poisoning and other health problems. In addition, the food can quickly become stale and unhealthy, especially if stored in hot conditions, as steam from the food can lead to bacteria growth. Beyond health issues, free food programs also waste a large amount of government money that could be better allocated to education, job creation, or other sectors that truly support sustainable development. Furthermore, the wages of workers may be reduced because a significant portion of the state budget is directed to funding these programs, which worsens the already difficult economic condition of Indonesian workers.

3. Rebuttal

Although free food may seem helpful to reduce hunger in the short term, it only creates dependency among people. Instead of empowering citizens to be independent, it makes them rely on government aid. In addition, such programs open the door to corruption and misuse of funds.

4. Conclusion

In conclusion, while free food programs may look beneficial and helpful for the poor in the beginning, they are not a sustainable solution. These programs risk creating dependency, wasting government funds, and even encouraging corruption. Instead of continuously spending money on short-term relief, the government should prioritize long-term investments such as education, job creation, health facilities, and sustainable community development. By doing so, people can become more independent, improve their standard of living, and gradually reduce poverty in a more permanent way.

Class: XI-9

The military barracks program proposed by Pak Dedi Mulyadi, Governor of West Java, is an innovative step to improve students' discipline and character. Here are 5 positive reasons for this program:

1. Improving Student Discipline: The military barracks program can help students develop discipline and responsibility, which is crucial for their future success.

2. Building Student Character: This program can help students develop strong character, such as courage, patience, and teamwork, which is essential for achieving their goals.

3. Reducing Student Delinquency: The military barracks program can help reduce student delinquency and increase their awareness of the importance of discipline and responsibility.

4. Fostering Student Independence: This program can help students develop independence and the ability to overcome challenges, which is vital for their future success.

5. Promoting Nationalism: The military barracks program can help students develop a sense of nationalism and love for their country, which is essential for building awareness and concern for the nation and state.

Thus, Pak Dedi Mulyadi's military barracks program can be an effective solution to improve students' discipline and character, and help them become a better generation in the future.

Class : XI-9

Absent Number : 19

Class : XI.9

Class: Xi-9

Absent: 7

Topic: MBG/FreeLunch

My Video:

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGyYI2KhL4/qo-hwrhdT4T6mz-kxGOe0A/edit?utm_content=DAGyYI2KhL4&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

Absent:31

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1W09Dh42n9uyLzsbR21DHstjL6zMM7K2N

Class: XI-7

Absent Number: 07

Class: IX-9

Absent:1

https://drive.google.com/file/d/175qbp1Gzh0kl7oPJj1QX8Ycd7E2N8_Qo/view?usp=drivesdk

Class : XI-7

Student Number : 34

Class: XI-9

XI-9

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wb2F8gt_RHynTCwFdFKX81oesVpye14v/view?usp=drivesdk

Name : Sela Andriyana

Class: XI-9

Absent Number : 32

Absent : 29

Class: XI-9

Absent:12

Class : xi-9

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/13v92OwPZdyhOYBSAKOegT9XACEUByj_P

Class : Xl-10

Absent : 21

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1TGbHddh0_qsuiFpR6emw8cfM7fYXtwSQ

Class: XI-10

Absent Number: 26

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1f1LFIbrVH3Of77Sr9xYpGF6c1DELZ6Lk

Class: 11-7

Absence: 2

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1aOWe-7oegQ-vScLQpdrv3e5P14m2dL0H/view?usp=drivesdk

Zahra Novian Fuji Astuti

XI.9

Absen: 36

Class: Xl-9

Absent: 21

Topic: Students are demanded to arrive at 06:30 AM as disagree

Link:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1gAJt8-vs1jVWLrThHCuf9BqcUo6W6iV3

Class : XI-9

Absence Number : 04

Topic: students mus come to school befor 06.30

Name: Desviana nurohmadin

class and absent number:

XI-8 / 9

STATEMENT

We strongly disagree with the idea of students coming to school at 6.30 in the morning because it negatively affects their health, academic performance, safety, and mental well-being. Early school start times reduce sleep, increase stress, and make it harder for students to focus and succeed in their studies. A later start would create a healthier and more effective learning environment.

ARGUMENT:

1. Lack of Sleep Affects Health and Performance

Most students, especially teenagers, need around 8-10 hours of sleep. If they have to arrive at school by 6.30 AM, they would need to wake up extremely early-possibly before 5 AM. This reduces their sleep time and can lead to fatigue, poor concentration, and even long-term health problems.

1. Reduced Academic Productivity

Studies show that students perform better academically when school starts later in the morning. Early start times can cause students to feel sleepy and less focused, especially in the first few hours of class. This reduces the effectiveness of learning and lowers overall performance.

1. Safety Concerns

Coming to school at 6.30 often means traveling in the dark, especially during winter months.

This raises safety concerns for students

alone early in the morning.

1. Unnecessary Pressure and Stress

Early school times force students into rushed mornings, affecting their mental well-being. They may skip breakfast, forget materials, or feel stressed even before the day starts.

CONCLUSION:

In conclusion, starting school at 6.30 AM is not beneficial for students. It negatively affects their health, safety, academic performance, and mental well-being. A later start time would allow students to rest properly, focus better, and learn in a more supportive and balanced environment.

For these reasons, I strongly disagree with the idea of coming to school at 6.30.

Class: XI-10

Absent number: 27

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ftgiCqcLe_DoWEx_p83wS-1C_oHiirEr/view?usp=drivesdk

class: xl.7

number absent: 32

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/10d6cgl5qFfDAWEokN_LHRuspdvXGhGPyhttps://drive.google.com/drive/folders/10d6cgl5qFfDAWEokN_LHRuspdvXGhGPy

Class : XI-7

Absent : 1

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dcTfRqliOoj8qmakGmPzxhmLVY4Avx5Y/view?usp=drivesdk

Class : XI-7

Absent Number : 35

The topic debate : No Homework for students

‎Class: XI-9

‎Absent Number: 20

‎

‎Link Google Drive:

‎https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1SXVT3VPRhQ61jPcNQ3X518wk6NbT0m6S

‎

‎Topics: The Free Lunch From Govertment:

‎

‎Statement:

‎    Healthy food can protect the body from various non-communicable diseases, such as heart disease, diabetes and cancer.

‎    However, in reality, not everyone can afford to buy nutritious food, so with the existence of Free Nutritious Food they are helped to fulfill their right to get healthy and nutritious food.

‎

‎Arguments 1:

‎     With this programs, parents especially those from low income families no longer have to worry about the lost of their children's meals at school, so they can allocate their income to other needs.

‎

‎Arguments 2:

‎     If only children from wealthy families can afford to health food, there will be a generational. Gap this program bridges the gap so that all children have an equal opportunity to grow optimaly.

‎

‎Arguments 3:

‎    Nutritious food is a basic right of every child. The state is obliged to ensure that an children receive adequate nutrition. As this is part of the right to a healty life, which is protected by low.

‎

‎Conclusion:

‎     As a pro team, we emphasize that free nutritious meals is not just a program, but an investment in the nation with healthy. Intelligent, and empowered children, Indonesia has a stronger future. Therefore, we fully support this program to achieve indonesia's golden generation.

Class: XI-10

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Ddf9LiFgelMMHRJYDgYSzjCLesqZVhSU/view?usp=drivesdk

class : XI-7

absent: 19

Name: M.Khanendra Dafa Perwira

Class: XI-7

Link gdrive

Class: XI-7

Absent number: 03

Class:XI - 10

No:10

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/12AY325cUcvWxp9rt0170JUXNJDzUaC2a

Class: XI - 7

Class:XI.7

Absent Number: 10

Class: XI-10

Absent Number: 4

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lTeMQt9MGqY7gzeR9-x9qK-lkCN20uM0/view?usp=drivesdk

Class : XI -9

Name : Raisya Vania Marthatilova

Class : XI-9

Absent Number : 28

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Rg1nVp77RNg3fb_0zC_j_gUf0LS6uv_g/view?usp=drivesdk

Class : XI-10

Number : 22

class: XI-7

absent: 03

The topic debate : Students Are Demanded to Arrive 6:30AM

Class: IX-10

Absent: 13

Link Video:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/12FxNPmE3EvZaxMAruhVJtDpfcUJmjJbi/view?usp=drivesdk

Class : XI-9

Student number : 05

My video :

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1aCXgJMXqEl8yEmwevuzPEB8K936b9a2A/view?usp=drivesdk

Name: Indah Putri Fachrudin

Class: XI-7

Absent Number: 16

Agree Team

My Opinion:

I'm agree with this program because it will increase students’ discipline, give them more time in the morning to socialize, finish assignments, and do other positive activities. For Muslim students, it is also suitable since they already wake up early for morning prayers. For other students, this habit will help them get used to waking up early. Moreover, this program can help to reduce traffic jams in the morning.

Supporting Arguments:

1. Better concentration and productivity: According to a study by the American Psychological Association (2020), students’ brains tend to be more alert and active in the early hours of the morning. This shows that the early morning is the golden hour of learning.

2. More free time in the afternoon: A survey conducted by the Indonesian Ministry of Education and Culture (2022) revealed that more than 65% of students reported that finishing school earlier gave them more opportunities to join extracurricular activities.

3. Time management and solutions: With good time management, students can sleep earlier and wake up earlier, making their mornings more productive. If students face sleep problems, solutions can be applied, such as reducing homework and ending school earlier (for example, at 2.30 PM) so they still have enough time to rest.

4. Parental and transportation support: Parents can support their children by taking them to school. If they are busy, students can use ride-hailing services like GrabBike or public transportation. As another solution, schools or the government can provide free public transportation for students so they can arrive on time without extra costs.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, starting school at 6.30 AM is a beneficial program because it improves discipline, enhances concentration and productivity during the golden hours of learning, and provides more time in the afternoon for extracurricular activities or rest. With proper time management, strong parental support, and good transportation facilities, this program will create a more effective, healthier, and disciplined learning environment for students.

The GDrive video link: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1WnFL9lTViZqxYJzsccPk_XBQrvNqY06L

Name: Raihana Jasmine Wijaya

Class: 11.7

Absent: 29

Class : XI-10

Absent Number : 31

Link : https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vvvPe3KCXlE5FLYdmsReiRXKiMOQlgL9/view?usp=drivesdk

Thank You.

Class: XI-7

Absent: 23

Class : XI-10

Absent Number: 29

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1AJuWNi9w8bJmfuHL8kAJ_w5a_mx6Ve-r

Clas: XI.7

Absent Number: 15

Class : XI.10

Absent : 14

Topic : Students are not allowed to go outside after 09.00 PM

https://drive.google.com/file/d/116X2MRfVOEkEVs2y_IUTA9hbeu6o-gsi/view?usp=drivesdk

class:11-10

XI.10

Class: 11-8

Statement

I agree with the policy of starting school at 6:30 in the morning. Waking up earlier helps students build discipline and manage their time better. Morning hours also provide a fresher and calmer atmosphere, which makes it easier to focus and absorb lessons.

Arguments

There are several benefits of entering early at school and waking up earlier.

1. Enhanced Discipline & Time Management

Waking up early helps students cultivate discipline, establish a structured morning routine, and develop time-management skills essential for lifelong success.

2. Sharper Focus & Fresher Mornings

The early morning provides a calm and invigorating environment. Cooler temperatures and natural morning light can improve concentration and mental alertness.

3. More Time for Breakfast & Preventing Tardiness

A properly scheduled early start encourages students to eat breakfast and reduces lateness—benefitting academic readiness and overall well-being.

4. Healthier Physical & Mental Outcomes

Later start times are linked to lower risks of obesity, depression, risk-taking behaviors, and improved sleep health and mood .

5. Equity Benefits for Disadvantaged Students

In schools serving economically disadvantaged and minority students, delaying start times significantly reduced tardiness and absenteeism.

Overall, starting school at 6:30 a.m.—assuming a well-balanced schedule and supportive infrastructure—can reinforce discipline while providing a calm morning environment, enhancing academic performance, reducing accidents, bolstering emotional well-being, and delivering substantial social and economic benefits.

Conclusion

In conclusion, starting school at 6:30 a.m. offers significant advantages for students, schools, and society. It strengthens discipline, improves focus in learning, allows more time for breakfast. Supported by research, early school hours also enhance academic performance, promote healthier lifestyles, and even contribute to economic and social benefits. With proper planning and balance, the 6:30 start time can be an effective policy to support students’ growth and future success.

Name: Haya Elresha Nindika

Class: XI-8

Absent Number: 14

Class : XI-1

Number : 24

Statement

I strongly agree that students should be at school at 6:30 in West Java. Starting school earlier is not only practical, but also beneficial for students’ learning, discipline, and daily life.

Argument 1

The human brain is more focused and alert in the morning. By starting school at 6:30, students can study difficult subjects like Mathematics and Science during their peak concentration hours, leading to better academic performance.

Argument 2

West Java is known for heavy traffic in the morning. If students leave earlier, they can avoid the rush-hour congestion. This makes traveling safer, faster, and less stressful for both students and parents.

Argument 3

By starting early, students also finish early. This gives them more time in the afternoon for extracurricular activities, family time, or simply resting. It creates a healthier balance between academic life and personal life.

Rebuttal

Some may argue that starting school at 6:30 is too early and will make students tired. However, this is not necessarily true. If students learn to manage their time and sleep earlier, they will actually be healthier and more disciplined. Moreover, in West Java the sun rises around 5:00 AM, so 6:30 is not too early it is the perfect time to start learning

https://www.canva.com/design/DAGxzPD6UgA/tA2yJi2qMPLygsw-c2hnFA/view?utm_content=DAGxzPD6UgA&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=uniquelinks&utlId=he571581cd4

Class : Xl-1

Absent : 9

1. Statement

We strongly oppose the use of ChatGPT or Artificial Intelligence (AI) as the main source of learning. Education is not merely about receiving information, but rather about building understanding, training critical thinking skills, and developing independence of character. If students rely too much on AI, then the true purpose of education will be neglected. Instead of training their minds to analyze and find solutions, they will only get used to copying instant answers provided by machines. This is dangerous for the quality of the younger generation, because learning should emphasize effort, experience, and the thinking process—not just quick and instant results.

2. Argument

- Argument 1

In our opinion, the use of AI weakens the essence of learning because students are no longer encouraged to think critically or creatively. They prefer to look for instant answers rather than analyze the material or develop their own ideas. As a result, they lose curiosity, the spirit of seeking knowledge, and independence in learning, which should be the true core of education.

- Argument 2

Several studies have shown that AI, including ChatGPT, does not always provide accurate answers. For example, a report from Stanford University (2023) found that AI responses decreased in quality over time, with error rates in solving simple math problems rising from 3% to more than 10%. Moreover, a Study.com (2023) survey revealed that 48% of students in the United States admitted using AI to complete school assignments, and most teachers considered this as increasing the risk of plagiarism and reducing the originality of students’ work. This data proves that dependency on AI has real negative impacts on education.

3. Rebuttal

Those who support AI may argue that this technology helps students access information quickly and easily. However, such convenience creates new problems, namely making students lazy to think and reliant on instant answers without questioning their accuracy. Learning should not only be about getting answers quickly but also about practicing perseverance, curiosity, and the ability to analyze problems from different perspectives. AI may serve as a supporting tool, but it cannot be the main source of learning, because its role can never replace teachers, books, or real learning experiences.

4. Conclusion

Based on the explanation above, we strongly emphasize that the use of ChatGPT or AI as the main source of learning is inappropriate. Dependence on AI will destroy the very essence of education, which is to foster independence, creativity, and critical thinking skills in students. AI should only be used as a supplementary tool to support learning, not as a substitute for the learning process itself. Therefore, quality education must remain focused on human effort to seek, understand, and construct knowledge independently.

1. Statement

We strongly oppose the use of ChatGPT or Artificial Intelligence (AI) as the main source of learning. Education is not merely about receiving information, but rather about building understanding, training critical thinking skills, and developing independence of character. If students rely too much on AI, then the true purpose of education will be neglected. Instead of training their minds to analyze and find solutions, they will only get used to copying instant answers provided by machines. This is dangerous for the quality of the younger generation, because learning should emphasize effort, experience, and the thinking process—not just quick and instant results.

2. Argument

- Argument 1

In our opinion, the use of AI weakens the essence of learning because students are no longer encouraged to think critically or creatively. They prefer to look for instant answers rather than analyze the material or develop their own ideas. As a result, they lose curiosity, the spirit of seeking knowledge, and independence in learning, which should be the true core of education.

- Argument 2

Several studies have shown that AI, including ChatGPT, does not always provide accurate answers. For example, a report from Stanford University (2023) found that AI responses decreased in quality over time, with error rates in solving simple math problems rising from 3% to more than 10%. Moreover, a Study.com (2023) survey revealed that 48% of students in the United States admitted using AI to complete school assignments, and most teachers considered this as increasing the risk of plagiarism and reducing the originality of students’ work. This data proves that dependency on AI has real negative impacts on education.

3. Rebuttal

Those who support AI may argue that this technology helps students access information quickly and easily. However, such convenience creates new problems, namely making students lazy to think and reliant on instant answers without questioning their accuracy. Learning should not only be about getting answers quickly but also about practicing perseverance, curiosity, and the ability to analyze problems from different perspectives. AI may serve as a supporting tool, but it cannot be the main source of learning, because its role can never replace teachers, books, or real learning experiences.

4. Conclusion

Based on the explanation above, we strongly emphasize that the use of ChatGPT or AI as the main source of learning is inappropriate. Dependence on AI will destroy the very essence of education, which is to foster independence, creativity, and critical thinking skills in students. AI should only be used as a supplementary tool to support learning, not as a substitute for the learning process itself. Therefore, quality education must remain focused on human effort to seek, understand, and construct knowledge independently.

Class: XI-1

Number: 12

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1kf3jzZHNNCGvyoVppTNGbJOnXKdh7lbk

Class : XI - 1

ABSENT NUMBER : 21

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1P1zOuvOeqM2cOfA7oGLAK8eXCoE8YejX

Class: XI-1

Number absen: 27

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1zDE1-GgJ7yK21YIGMXwSRpooHRM3V1d9

Class: XI-I

Student Number: 18

Recording video’s link:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1sVMA6Vr7ACeksThrwzpuGuMQkC5orkmy/view?usp=drivesdk

Class: XI-1

GDrive Link: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1g4DFpskdqIg9xz0EE7-jxLNRUZaOIo7z

1. Statement

We believe that asking students to arrive at 06.30 a.m. is a wise and beneficial policy. It is not meant to burden students, but to prepare them for discipline, effective learning, and readiness for the future. Education is not only about gaining knowledge, but also about building character and strong habits that will last a lifetime.

2. Arguments