The Big Debate

‘Labels belong on jars, not on children!’


December’s Big Debate:   ”˜Labels belong on jars, not on children!’

This Big Debate was hotly contested as our team practised for the Oxford Schools’ debating competition.   Ruth Scott and Eleanor Lynch argued rather controversially that labelling a child provides an excuse for failure and that labels can be used wrongly to access funding for schools.   They were ably opposed by Maaham and Isabella Butterwick who considered the importance of a ”˜label’ in the tailoring of teaching methods to the individual as well as creating an awareness in society of a child’s needs.  

Comments from the floor were, as always, erudite and challenging, incorporating the views of students with personal experience of dyslexia or of relatives with special needs.  

The conclusion of the house was firmly in opposition to the motion and in support of ”˜labelling’ children in accordance with their needs with a final vote of 13 to 3 with 5 abstentions.