Prep for debating

Affirmative Constructive 3 min

Imagine such a scene: a class of people sitting together waiting for class to start, with no

communication or even eye contact from anyone. Everyone is staring at their phones looking at

various things. This silence is terrifying and seems like a crisis. Does that sound familiar? It just

happened in my previous class, and it always happens in our daily lives.

Today, I affirm Resolved: The usage of cell phones should be banned in schools. The key terms

of the resolution such as cell phones, refer to smartphones that enable internet access, texting,

and calling. This resolution can be proved with three arguments as following.

First of all, in this day and age, cell phones are overused and lead to loneliness in teenagers

diverting their attention from face-to-face interactions. According to Frankova’s research from

2025, time spent on phones replaced opportunities for building trust and rapport through direct

human interaction, leading to a noticeable drop in face-to-face social activities. Less chance to

social in person tended to report fewer close friendships and weaker connections with peers.

Thus, increased levels of anxiety and depression will be caused. In addition, it will draw

students' attention away from class work and lead to lower grades. A study by Central Michigan

University (2019) found that frequent smartphone use among teenagers is linked to lower

academic performance. To be more specific, cell phone usage is a leading cause of distraction

because constant notifications and social media pull attention away from tasks. As a result, it will

lower academic performance. Last but not least, usage of cellphone increases cyberbullying and

harassment. A 2025 study published in Child Abuse & Neglect found a direct association

between screen usage and cyberbullying experiences in teenagers. To be precise, if someone

user. More people mean more diverse views, and the judging and arguing begin when people

express their opinions different from each other. Thus, things will end up in a collective

cyberbullying incident.

Because of their harmful effects on student’s social, academic and emotional well-being, cell

phones should be banned in schools.

Crossfire 45scd (Question!!

Affirmative Block 2min

Defending Case Argument #1: Over usage of cell phones is linked to loneliness in teenagers

and might divert attention from face-to-face interactions.

A. Refuting Statement:

“Gen Z lives in a world of social media and doesn’t need face-to-face interaction as much as

older generations.”:

1. Block 1 – Human beings, regardless of generation, need in-person interaction for

emotional well-being.

2. Research by Liang et al. (2024) found that face-to-face interactions significantly enhance

feelings of well-being, even in casual exchanges such as with service workers. The study

compared virtual and in-person interactions and concluded that in-person communication

had a more positive effect on daily mood and mental health.

predictor of happiness than digital interactions. The paper draws from behavioral

economics and psychology to support the conclusion that social bonds formed in person

are crucial for sustained mental well-being.

4. Our argument is stronger because the opposing claim that Gen Z lacks the need for in-

person interaction overlooks the biological and psychological constants across

generations. While usage patterns change, human neuropsychology doesn’t. Your sources

underscore this universal truth backed by experimental psychology and social science.

1. Block 2 – Excessive phone use is linked to social isolation, stress, and depression in

teens.

2. Verduyn et al. (2021) demonstrated that increased smartphone use correlates with reduced

face-to-face interactions, particularly on days of high social media engagement. These

reductions directly contributed to feelings of loneliness and stress.

3. Stieger et al. (2023) found that digital communication fails to replicate the emotional and

psychological benefits of in-person interaction, which are critical to reducing depression

and enhancing happiness.

4. Our argument is stronger because the opposition may suggest phones offer connection,

but these studies clarify that this connection is superficial and emotionally insufficient

compared to face-to-face interaction, especially for adolescent development and

emotional regulation.
Block 2 – While phones may seem like helpful tools, they often sabotage students’ academic

success.

1. According to Khalid et al. (2024), excessive use of social media can lead to increased

academic procrastination, reduced sleep quality, and heightened academic stress—all of

which undermine student performance.

2. This evidence shows that students using phones are not just passively distracted, but

actively harming their ability to manage time and rest—key components of academic

success.

3. While some argue that phones enable efficient learning, this view overlooks how

addictive behaviors driven by constant phone access interfere with students’ cognitive

and emotional readiness to learn.

4. Our argument holds firm because it accounts for the long-term effects of phone

dependence, while the opposing view ignores how these devices contribute to unhealthy

habits that directly impair academic outcomes.

Defending Case Argument #2: Cell phones are a major distraction that can draw students'

attention away from class work and lead to lower grades.

B. Refuting Statement:

“Cell phones increase in-class learning efficiency – technology makes learning easier.”:

1. Block 1 – In reality, most students use phones in class for distraction, not learning.
 2. Kushlev et al. (2018) found that students using phones during class reported less

enjoyment and were more distracted in group tasks compared to those without phone use.

The mere presence of a phone undermines attention and learning.

3. Kim (2017) reported that smartphone-mediated communication is linked with

problematic use and reduced perceived social support, further suggesting that rather than

aiding learning, smartphones become tools for disengagement.

4. Our argument is strongly supported because while tech in learning has benefits, it

requires discipline and structure, traits not yet fully developed in high school students.

The opposition’s argument ignores this developmental gap, whereas your evidence

highlights how phones are more likely to harm than help without strict controls.

2. Block 2 – Using technologies like laptop, projector, or VR space would be better way to

improve the efficiency of in-class learning, but cellphone usage do distract students

instead of helping them.

Defending Case Argument #3: Phone usage in school increases cyberbullying and harassment

1. Possible rebuttal: Cyberbullying happens outside school more than in school hours.

a. Block: Allowing phones during the school day allows students to take videos, pictures and

immediately post bad things.

b. Furthermore, a 2025 study published in Child Abuse & Neglect reinforces this concern by

demonstrating a clear association between high screen time and cyberbullying experiences
among adolescents. The study also found that teens who used social media for escapism or

entertainment were more likely to become targets of online harassment (Boruah, Cormier,

Murray, & Marin-Dragu, 2025).

c. This rebuttal tries to downplay the issue by shifting the focus to what happens after school. It

assumes that because most bullying might occur later, school phone policies aren't relevant. But

this is a deflection, not a disproof—it doesn’t address what happens when phones are allowed

during school or how that access might make things worse

2. Monitoring phones is a better solution, not a complete ban on phones.

a. Block: Students will still misuse phones; clear boundaries are necessary to help create a safer

more inviting environment

b. Research consistently shows that more time on social media increases vulnerability to

cyberbullying and its harmful effects. According to Maranan et al. (2025), spending more time

on digital platforms increases exposure to online threats such as cyberbullying, which is linked to

depression, anxiety, suicidal thoughts, and even suicide.

c. Our team's argument is better because monitoring phones in school is not a better solution due

to many factors. The first factor is that research shows the more students spend time on their

phones the more vulnerable they are to cyberbullying and other harmful effects. If teachers

monitor it will not be consistent, and students will abuse the system finding ways to get out of

getting in trouble. With a complete ban student with a phone would get in trouble and the other

students would be safe.

In conclusion, cell phones are undoubtedly useful tools; however, in the hands of teenagers

during school hours they often cause more harm than benefit. As discussed, their use increases

loneliness, reduces face-to-face interaction, disrupts learning, and lowers academic achievement,

while also exposing students to cyberbullying and harassment that endanger their emotional

health. Thus, we strongly believe cell phone use should be banned in schools because of its

serious impacts on students’ social, academic, and emotional well-being. Limiting phones is not

about rejecting technology—it is about safeguarding the next generation’s welfare, which is why

we should win this debate.