CBSE Class 11 English Debate Writing Questions (with model answers) from previous years question papers
Debate Writing Previous Year Questions with answers – Students of class 11 can benefit from these previous year questions on debate writing. Also, the model answers will help you understand the technique for attempting debate writing questions in exam.
Related:
- Debate Writing for Class 11: Format, Tips, Examples & Topics
- 10 Examples of Debate Writing for class 11
Q1. There is a growing argument over censorship on entertainment platforms as a means to uphold societal morality or a means to curb freedom of expression. Write a debate in 120-150 words expressing your views either for or against the motion. You are Shivam/Shivas, a student of class XI.
Ans. Censorship on entertainment platforms—upholds societal morality or curbs freedom of expression
FOR THE MOTION
Entertainment platforms offer relief from stress but can sometimes challenge societal morality. Good morning, everyone! Today, I, Shivam, want to highlight the importance of censorship in upholding our values.
Censorship is crucial for protecting cultural values and fostering a healthy social environment. The influence of entertainment on impressionable children and adolescents is significant, and any exposure to violent or explicit content can make them insensitive and normalize harmful behaviors. Censorship shields young viewers from degrading material, safeguarding their development.
India is known for its cultural values and any entertainment content that disregards these values can erode the harmony in the society, leading to conflict. Censorship helps maintain respect for cultural beliefs and promotes a responsible media landscape by discouraging harmful stereotypes and behaviors.
Censorship also enforces legal and ethical standards, restricting content that incites hatred or violates the laws and social harmony. While the entertainment industry often emphasizes self-regulation, censorship serves as a necessary check to prevent the sacrifice of societal values for profit.
I would like to conclude it by agreeing that censorship is crucial for protecting our cultural values and the mental development of children. There should be a limit on entertainment that could harm societal sentiments.
AGAINST THE MOTION
Respected Judges and my esteemed opponent, I am Shivam, and today I defend the principle that censorship on entertainment platforms unjustly limits our freedom of expression.
Censorship harms creativity and stifles vital discourse within our communities. Imposing restrictions on artistic expression leads creators to self-censor, reducing content diversity and limiting the exploration of important issues like social justice and mental health. Entertainment has the power to challenge norms and spark essential conversations, which censorship obstructs and hinders societal progress.
Each viewer should have the autonomy to choose what resonates with them, fostering critical thinking and diverse opinions. In conclusion, censorship creates complications that outweigh any benefits, undermining freedom of expression and threatening democracy. We must advocate for an environment that supports creativity and open dialogue, nurturing a society that values diverse voices.
Q2. An inter-school debate for Class XI students is focused on the topic “Is internet a reliable source of information?” Write the debate in 120-150 words expressing your own views either for or against the motion, as Aryan/Aditi, a student of Class XI.
Ans. FOR THE MOTION
Respected judges, teachers, and fellow students, I am Aditi, a Class XI student, and I strongly believe that the Internet is a reliable source of information.
The internet is a valuable resource that gives us access to a vast amount of knowledge. With just a few clicks, we can find different perspectives, research findings, and expert opinions from around the world. This access to information helps us learn independently and think critically.
The internet also updates information in real-time, helping us stay informed about the latest developments in any field. This is important in our fast-changing world.
Although there are concerns about misinformation, we can develop digital literacy skills to navigate online information effectively. We can evaluate sources, cross-check facts, and identify credible websites. Therefore, the Internet is a powerful and reliable tool for those who use it wisely.
AGAINST THE MOTION
Respected judges, teachers, and fellow students, I am Aryan, a student in Class XI, and I believe the internet is not a reliable source of information.
While the internet has a lot of data, we often cannot trust its accuracy. It has plenty of misinformation, fake news, and biased content. Anyone can post anything online, no matter if it is true or false. This makes it hard to tell what is real, especially for younger users who may not have the skills to evaluate sources.
Moreover, the algorithms that control what we see online. Users only see viewpoints that match their own beliefs, which can lead to a distorted understanding of reality and increase prejudice.
Although the internet can be a useful tool, it is not always a reliable source of information. We need to be careful and look for information from trusted and credible sources.
Q3. Smartphones should be distributed free to all adults. Write a Debate either for or against the motion in 120-150 words. You are Deepak/Deepti Narang
Ans. FOR THE MOTION
Respected judges and opponents, I, Deepti Narang, believe in providing free smartphones to all adults to create a connected and empowered society.
Smartphones are essential in our digital world, offering access to information, education, healthcare, and job opportunities, particularly for low-income communities. By bridging the digital divide, we can ensure that everyone, regardless of financial status, can fully engage in our society, promoting social inclusion and equal opportunities.
Moreover, access to smartphones can drive economic growth by enhancing workforce participation and encouraging innovation and entrepreneurship.
Giving free smartphones to all adults equips individuals for success and fosters a society that values inclusivity and economic development. Let’s work towards a brighter, connected future for everyone.
AGAINST THE MOTION
Respected judges and my worthy opponents, I, Deepak Narang, believe that giving free smartphones to all adults is not practical and is not the best use of resources.
It would cost a huge amount of money, putting a heavy load on taxpayers. On the contrary, we could use this money to support essential needs like education, healthcare, and reducing poverty. These areas would have a more direct and lasting impact on people’s lives.
Also, just giving away smartphones doesn’t ensure that people will use them responsibly. Without teaching digital skills and critical thinking, free smartphones could lead to more issues like misinformation, cybercrime, and social isolation.
Instead of handing out smartphones to everyone, we should focus on making internet access affordable and providing digital literacy programs. This way, we can help people buy and use smartphones responsibly.
Q4. ‘Our large population is not a cause of poverty but it is an asset and a resource.’ Write a debate in 120-150 words either for or against the motion.
Ans. FOR THE MOTION
Respected judges and my opponents, I believe that our large population is an asset and a resource, not a cause of poverty.
We need to change our perspective. In a youthful nation like ours, a large population is a big advantage. It gives us a strong workforce that can drive economic growth and innovation. A bigger population means a larger market, which boosts demand and creates opportunities.
Our diversity, which comes from our large population, offers creativity and resilience. We have a vast pool of talent that can contribute to many fields. The key is to invest in our people by focusing on their education, health, and skills. By doing this, we can turn our population into a strong force for progress and prosperity, showing that our large numbers are truly our greatest resource.
AGAINST THE MOTION
Respected judges and my worthy opponents, I believe a large population can be a resource. Saying it is not a cause of poverty is an oversimplification.
The reality is that a large population puts a lot of pressure on our limited resources. Overcrowding and lack of clean water and sanitation, along with strained infrastructure, all contribute to poverty and slow down development. High population growth makes it difficult to provide good education and healthcare for everyone, creating a cycle of disadvantage. While a young population can be an asset, without proper investment in their development, they can become a burden on the economy.
We must address population growth responsibly and invest in people’s development to reduce poverty and create a sustainable future.
Q5. You wish to participate in an inter-school debate competition. The topic is ‘Online learning is going to replace traditional classroom learning.’ You are provided with the following data. On the basis of the given data, prepare a debate on the given topic. You may write in favour of or against the motion.
Table: Key Metrics of Online vs. Traditional Learning (2020)
| Metric | Online Learning | Traditional Learning |
| Average Student Satisfaction (%) | 85 | 75 |
| Average Test Score (out of 100) | 80 | 85 |
| Flexibility in Schedule | High | Low |
| Technical Issues Reported (%) | 25 | 5 |
Ans. FOR THE MOTION
Respected judges, teachers, and fellow students, I believe that online learning will replace traditional classroom learning.
Online learning has an 85% average student satisfaction rate. This shows that students find online platforms engaging, comfortable, and helpful for their learning styles. Online learning also provides flexibility in scheduling, which is a major advantage. It allows students to learn at their own pace and fit education around their other commitments, which is particularly useful for those with jobs or families.
Although 25% of students report technical issues with online learning, this is a small problem that we can fix with better technology and training. While traditional learning has slightly higher average test scores, online learning is improving quickly. With personalized learning tools and AI feedback, online platforms are becoming more effective in helping students achieve academic success.
The future of education is personalized, flexible, and accessible. Online learning meets all these needs.
AGAINST THE MOTION
Respected judges, teachers, and fellow students, I oppose the idea that “Online learning will replace traditional classroom learning”. While online learning has some benefits, evidence shows it cannot completely replace in-person classes.
First, students in traditional classrooms tend to score higher on tests. This suggests that the classroom setting helps students learn better and remember information more effectively.
Online learning is flexible, but it often has technical problems, reported 25% of the time. These issues disrupt learning and create inequality, as not all students have the same access to good technology.
More importantly, traditional classrooms offer vital social interaction, teamwork, and guidance. Students learn from one another, develop communication skills, and build relationships with teachers—things that online learning often fails to provide.
In conclusion, while online learning can support education, it does not have the academic depth, social benefits, and dependable structure found in traditional classrooms.
Q6. You wish to participate in an inter-school debate competition. You are provided with the following data. On the basis of the given data, prepare a debate on the given topic. You may write in favour of / against the motion,
The topic is “Public transportation should be made free for all citizens.”
Table 1 : Key Metrics Before and After Implementing Free Public Transportation
| Metric | Before Implementation | After Implementation |
| Traffic Congestion (average delay in minutes) | 30 | 20 |
| Public Transportation Usage (%) | 50 | 75 |
| Air Pollution Levels (AQI) | 150 | 100 |
| Public Transportation Cost (USD/year) | 300 | 500 |
Ans. FOR THE MOTION
Respected judges, teachers, and fellow students, I support making public transportation free for everyone due to its clear benefits.
When cities made public transport free, traffic congestion decreased significantly, with average delays dropping from 30 to 20 minutes. This allows people to be more productive and less stressed.
Usage of public transportation also rose from 50% to 75%, indicating a shift towards buses and trains over cars. Consequently, air pollution improved, with the Air Quality Index (AQI) falling from 150 to 100, benefiting public health and creating cleaner, more sustainable cities.
While the cost of running public transportation increased from 300 to 500 USD per year, the economic and social benefits make it worthwhile. Reduced congestion saves time and fuel, while better air quality leads to lower healthcare costs.
Overall, making public transportation free is a wise investment that enhances traffic flow, increases usage, and improves air quality.
AGAINST THE MOTION
Respected judges, teachers, and fellow students, I oppose the idea that public transportation should be free for all citizens. While some data shows benefits, there are also important downsides and better options.
The data shows that after free public transport was introduced, traffic congestion dropped from 30 to 20 minutes, public transport use rose from 50% to 75%, and air improved, with the Air Quality Index (AQI) going from 150 to 100. These results sound good, but the cost of public transportation increased dramatically from 300 to 500 USD per year. This higher cost puts a significant strain on taxpayers. Is this a realistic solution?
Moreover, the data does not capture everything. Free public transport might lead to overcrowding and lower service quality. It could also cause some people to walk or cycle less often, leading to a more inactive lifestyle.
Instead of making public transport completely free, we should consider a more balanced approach. We could offer targeted financial help for low-income residents, improve the frequency and reliability of services, and invest in better infrastructure.
Q7. ‘Private cars should be banned in the congested commercial areas of the cities.’ Write a debate in 120 – 150 words either for or against the motion.
Ans. FOR THE MOTION
Respected judges and my opponents, I strongly believe that private cars should be banned in busy commercial areas of cities. This is an important step towards making our urban centres healthier and more livable.
The high number of private cars in commercial areas causes traffic jams, reduces productivity, and creates a lot of stress. It also leads to serious air pollution, which harms the health of pedestrians, residents, and workers. This congestion and pollution can also damage historical sites.
Banning private cars would encourage people to use public transport, cycle, or walk. This would create a more sustainable transportation system, reduce congestion, improve air quality, and make the environment more friendly for pedestrians. It would also help local businesses and enhance the overall quality of life.
While there may be some initial inconvenience, the long-term benefits of less pollution, better traffic flow, and a more vibrant urban environment are worth it.
AGAINST THE MOTION
Respected judges and my opponents, I strongly believe that banning private cars from busy commercial areas is impractical and unfair.
Private cars offer essential convenience for families, individuals with disabilities, and those carrying goods. A ban would hinder access to vital services, businesses, and jobs. Moreover, restricting cars could harm local businesses by limiting customer access. Moreover, public transportation isn’t always available, especially at the time of an emergency. With the increasing competition between the countries, a ban on private cars would only hamper our progress towards development.
Instead of a ban, we should adopt a balanced approach: improve public transportation, implement congestion pricing, build more parking with good transport links, and promote cycling and electric vehicles. These measures can effectively manage congestion and pollution without unfairly impacting those reliant on private vehicles.
Q8. Some people feel that electronic media (TV news) will bring about the end of print media (newspapers). What are your views on the issue? Write a debate in 120-150 words either for or against this view.
use of visuals on TV—— authentic and fast———not enough news for 24 hours telecast—–may fabricate news——- become repetitive and dull——– even scandals become news——-print media-time tested——– analysed, verified news——- editorial comments——- cater to all interests
Ans. FOR THE MOTION
Respected judges and my opponents, I strongly believe that the growth of electronic media, especially 24-hour TV news, means print media is declining. TV news gives a lively and immediate experience. The use of visuals creates a sense of realness and urgency that newspapers can’t match. Today, people want instant updates, and TV provides that.
While it’s true that the 24-hour news cycle can lead to repeating stories and blowing small events out of proportion, this actually appeals to modern viewers. Even scandals attract attention, increasing viewership and pushing traditional, slower reporting to the sidelines.
Print media, with its careful methods of checking and analyzing news, seems more outdated. Newspapers try to cover many interests, but their detailed reporting struggles against the speed and volume of information from electronic media. The future of news consumption is visual, instant, and always updated. This future belongs to electronic media.
AGAINST THE MOTION
Respected judges and my fellow opponents, I firmly believe that electronic media will not replace print media. While TV news is quick and visually engaging, it cannot match the depth, reliability, and lasting value of newspapers.
TV news provides fast delivery and visuals, but the need to fill a 24-hour news cycle often causes it to repeat stories, sensationalize events, and even present false information. This shift focuses on attracting attention rather than truly informing the public.
In contrast, print media has a long history. It offers well-researched and verified news, providing detailed reporting and thoughtful editorial insights. Newspapers cover a wide variety of topics, giving a fuller understanding of events that TV news sometimes misses.
Print media’s strength lies in its focus on accuracy, context, and careful analysis. It serves as an important record of events and a place for informed discussion. While electronic media may be popular now, print media remains a key part of responsible journalism and a crucial resource for an informed society.
Q9. Materialism is increasing day by day. The extravagances of yesterday have become necessities of today. The result is that the more we want the more miserable we become. Write a debate in 120-150 words on ‘The only way to mitigate human misery and agony is to control our desires. You are Sanya/ Sayam, the school leader of Happy Hour Public School, New Delhi.
21st century life style——- ambitions for material pursuits—— yester years extravagances——today’s necessities——— affects our life——– makes us miserable——– human dependence on gadgets——— makes slaves to machines— disease prone life———-premature death———- to mitigate human misery & agony——– self realization——— to control our desires
Ans. FOR THE MOTION
Respected judges, teachers, and fellow students, I am Sayam, the school leader of Happy Hour Public School in New Delhi. I support the idea that the only way to reduce human suffering is to control our desires.
Today, many people are driven by a constant need for more material things. What was once a luxury has become a necessity. This endless quest for more makes us unhappy. Our reliance on gadgets turns us into slaves to machines, harming our health and leading to early death. We get caught in a cycle of wanting, getting, and wanting even more.
True happiness comes from understanding ourselves and controlling our desires. By seeking inner peace, building meaningful relationships, and focusing on something bigger than ourselves, we can escape from the grip of materialism. By simplifying our lives instead of accumulating more possessions, we can find contentment and reduce the misery that affects so many in our modern world.
AGAINST THE MOTION
Respected judges, teachers, and fellow students, I am Sanya, the school leader of Happy Hour Public School in New Delhi. I stand against the idea that the only way to reduce human pain and suffering is to control our desires.
While it’s true that our 21st-century lifestyle, with its focus on material things, has turned many luxuries into necessities, that’s not the full picture. Yes, our reliance on gadgets can sometimes make us feel like we are controlled by machines, and there are worries about health issues and early deaths. However, we cannot overlook the great benefits that materialism and technology have brought to our lives.
Modern medicine, better transportation, and global communication have improved life in ways our ancestors could not have imagined. The answer is not to simply control our desires, but to direct them toward innovation and progress that help everyone.
We should aim for a balanced approach. It’s important to know ourselves, but we should also use our ambitions to create a better world, find cures for diseases, tackle global problems, and improve the quality of life for everyone.
Q10. You are Naveen/ Sunita of Little Flower School, Surat. Your school is hosting a debate competition on the topic ‘Children should not be allowed to have their own cell phones’. Write a debate either in favour or against the motion in about 120 – 150 words.
Ans. FOR THE MOTION
Respected judges, teachers, and fellow students, I, Naveen, from Little Flower School in Surat, support the idea that children should not have their own cell phones.
Cell phones are appealing but they create many problems for children. They distract kids in school, making it hard for them to focus and interact with others face-to-face. Being constantly connected can also lead to cyberbullying, online dangers, and exposure to inappropriate content.
Furthermore, cell phones can harm children’s physical and mental health. Too much screen time can cause sleep issues, eye strain, and a lack of physical activity. The pressure to look perfect online can lead to anxiety and depression.
Childhood should be a time for exploration, play, and learning important social skills. However, cell phones can take away this valuable time and hurt children’s growth overall.
AGAINST THE MOTION
Respected judges, teachers, and fellow students, I am Sunita from Little Flower School in Surat. I feel that Children should be allowed to have their own cell phones.
I understand the risks of cell phone use, but I believe that banning them entirely is not the right answer. When used responsibly, cell phones offer many benefits for children.
First, they provide a sense of security. Children can quickly contact their parents in emergencies or plan activities after school. Second, cell phones can be useful educational tools. They give access to a lot of information, educational apps, and online resources for learning. They also help kids work together on school projects and improve their digital skills, which are important today.
Instead of banning cell phones, we should educate children about using them responsibly. We need to set clear rules and monitor their online activity. By teaching them to use technology safely and ethically, we can help them enjoy the benefits while reducing the risks.
Q11. You are Sameer/Saira. Write a debate for or against the motion in not more than 120 – 150 words on the topic ‘Entrance tests are the right method for selecting students for undergraduate courses’.
Ans. FOR THE MOTION
Ladies and gentlemen, esteemed opponents, I, Sameer, support the idea that entrance tests are the best way to choose students for undergraduate courses.
Entrance tests offer a fair and equal way to measure a student’s skills and knowledge. They ensure that all students, no matter their background, have the same chance to show what they can do, despite different school systems and grading methods.
Merit should be the main factor in admitting students to undergraduate programs. Entrance tests provide a clear and efficient way to assess merit, helping to find candidates who are ready for the challenges of higher education.
While others may suggest different methods, entrance tests remain the most reliable way to ensure fairness and maintain the quality of our undergraduate institutions.
AGAINST THE MOTION
Respected panel and my esteemed opponents, I, Saira, strongly feels that Entrance tests do aim for objectivity, but they are not the best method for undergraduate admissions.
These tests often focus on memorization and test-taking skills. They overlook important qualities like critical thinking, creativity, and perseverance. They can also be unfair to students from disadvantaged backgrounds who have limited access to coaching and resources. Additionally, a single test cannot accurately predict a student’s long-term academic success or their ability to contribute to their field.
We need a more complete approach, looking at factors like academic records, extracurricular activities, personal essays, and interviews. This will help us better understand an applicant’s abilities and potential. Relying only on entrance tests does not do justice to the diverse talents of our student population.
Q12. You are Shivam/Saloni of SPG School, Rohtak. Your school is hosting a debate competition on the topic ‘Is competition a necessary part of the education process?” Write a debate either in favour or against the motion in about 120 – 150 words.
Ans. FOR THE MOTION
Respected judges, teachers, and fellow students, I am Shivam from SPG School, Rohtak, and I believe competition is an essential part of education.
Competition helps us strive for excellence. It encourages students to push beyond their comfort zones, work hard for improvement, and reach their full potential. Without competition, students may become complacent and less motivated to succeed.
Competition also prepares us for the real world, which is competitive by nature. Education needs to help us handle challenges and build resilience, including coping with pressure and not giving up when things get tough.
Moreover, healthy competition inspires new ideas and creativity. When students compete, they look for better ways to solve problems and advance.
Working together is important but competition drives growth, achievement, and the development of key life skills.
AGAINST THE MOTION
Respected judges, teachers, and fellow students, I am Saloni from SPG School in Rohtak, and I oppose the notion that competition is necessary in education.
Competition has some benefits but excessive competition can lead to stress, unhealthy rivalries, and a loss of joy in learning. Education should inspire a love for knowledge rather than focus on comparisons.
Moreover, defining success solely by grades overlooks vital skills like creativity and critical thinking. We should focus on collaboration, cooperation, and individual growth, fostering a positive environment where students celebrate each other’s successes. This approach prepares us better for a collaborative future.
Q13. ‘Rising prices can be controlled only by the government.’ Write a debate in 120 – 150 words either for or against the motion.
Ans. FOR THE MOTION
Respected judges and my worthy opponents, I strongly believe that rising prices can be controlled only by the government.
While market forces influence prices, history shows that government action is essential to control inflation and protect citizens. Unregulated markets, driven by profits, often worsen price increases, especially for basic goods. Businesses may take advantage of shortages or speculate, making essentials too expensive for everyday people. This can lead to social unrest and economic problems.
Governments have specific tools to manage prices. They can set price limits on essential goods to stop businesses from charging too much. They can also provide subsidies to lower production costs, making goods more affordable. By releasing strategic reserves of important products, they can help balance supply and demand.
Additionally, governments can oversee monopolies and prevent them from raising prices unfairly. They can also use fiscal and monetary policies, like changing interest rates and taxes, to control overall inflation.
While businesses and consumers play a role in the economy, they do not have the power or resources to effectively manage widespread price increases. Only governments can take the necessary steps to maintain price stability and protect their citizens’ economic well-being.
AGAINST THE MOTION
Respected judges and my opponents, I oppose the idea that ‘Only the government can control rising prices.’
While the government can help, it is not the only answer and not always the best. Too much government control can hurt the market and lead to problems. For example, price limits can cause shortages because suppliers won’t sell goods at low prices. Subsidies can also burden taxpayers and create waste.
Free markets work better because they respond to supply and demand. Business competition keeps prices fair, as companies try to give the best value to customers. However, a completely free market isn’t perfect either. We need a balanced approach. The government should create a stable economy, encourage competition, and fix market problems. This includes using smart fiscal and monetary policies to manage inflation, investing in infrastructure to improve supply chains and lower transport costs, enforcing laws to prevent monopolies, and providing support to help those most affected by rising prices.
To sum up, while the government has an important role, we can manage rising prices best by combining market solutions with targeted government actions, rather than depending only on government control.
Q14. ‘The Internet cannot replace a classroom teacher’. Write a debate in 120 – 150 words
either for or against the motion.
Ans. FOR THE MOTION
Respected judges and my worthy opponents, I support the motion: “The Internet cannot replace a classroom teacher”. While the internet is a useful tool, it lacks the important human element that is essential for real education. A teacher does more than share information; they provide guidance, mentorship, and personalized attention. They adapt to each student’s learning style, encourage critical thinking, and inspire a love for learning.
A classroom is a lively space for discussion, collaboration, and social skill development—areas where the internet falls short. The internet can offer access to many resources, but it cannot teach values, meet emotional needs, or give the detailed feedback that a teacher can provide. The presence of a teacher, their passion, and their ability to connect with students personally are irreplaceable in the learning journey.
AGAINST THE MOTION
Respected judges and my worthy opponents, I strongly oppose the motion. The internet is more than just a tool for education; it is changing how we learn and can often replace the traditional classroom teacher.
The internet gives us access to a huge amount of information that surpasses what any single teacher can offer. It supports different learning styles through interactive simulations, videos, and personalized learning platforms. Students can learn at their own pace and tap into global experts and resources anytime, anywhere.
While traditional classrooms have benefits, they often face challenges like large class sizes, limited resources, and varied student needs. The Internet provides a scalable and cost-effective way to make education accessible for everyone and encourages students to take charge of their own learning. The role of the teacher is changing, but in many ways, the internet is becoming the new classroom.
Q15. Only managing waste is enough for the health of our citizens. Write a debate in 120 – 150 words either for or against the motion. You are Sarita/Sachin.
Ans. FOR THE MOTION
Respected judges and my worthy opponents, I, Sachin, support the motion: “Only managing waste is enough for the health of our citizens.” While other factors matter, good waste management is essential for public health.
Uncontrolled waste causes disease. It taints our water, pollutes our air, and creates places for pests like mosquitoes and rats, which carry serious illnesses. Proper waste disposal stops this cycle. It keeps infections from spreading, lowers exposure to harmful toxins, and makes our environment cleaner and healthier.
A clean environment is the first step toward a healthy population. With effective waste management, we can prevent many health problems.
AGAINST THE MOTION
Respected judges and opponents, I, Sachin, oppose the idea that “only managing waste is enough for the health of our citizens”. This statement is not only wrong but also dangerously oversimplifies the issue.
Public health is complex and needs a comprehensive approach that goes beyond waste disposal. While effective waste management is important, it is just one part of a bigger problem.
For instance, access to clean drinking water is essential; no waste management system can fix the harm caused by pollutants in our water. Proper sanitation and hygiene facilities are also critical for stopping the spread of diseases. Quality healthcare services matter too; without them, a society can face serious health issues, regardless of how well waste is managed.
Additionally, nutrition and lifestyle choices have a big impact on health. A population that lacks access to nutritious food or engages in unhealthy habits will struggle, even if waste management is ideal.
Q16. Write a debate in 120 – 150 words either for or against the motion: Money is the only thing that matters in today’s life.
Ans. FOR THE MOTION
Respected judges and my worthy opponents, I strongly agree that money is the only thing that matters in today’s life.
In today’s world, money is more than just a convenience; it is the foundation of our lives. Think about the basics: food, shelter, healthcare. Without enough money, these necessities are out of reach. Education, which is crucial for a better future, costs a lot, creating a gap between those who can afford it and those who cannot.
Financial stability also affects relationships. Money troubles can put stress on families and life partners while having money can lead to experiences and opportunities that bring people closer. While other things matter, they often take a backseat to the need for financial security.
Money gives us choices, opportunities, and the ability to thrive in a world that revolves around economic strength. In short, money isn’t everything, but nearly everything depends on it.
AGAINST THE MOTION
Respected judges and my opponents, I strongly believe that money is not the only thing that matters in life.
While money is important, saying it is the only thing that matters oversimplifies life. Our lives are rich and complex, filled with values that go beyond financial gain. Love, compassion, and strong relationships give us emotional support and meaning that money cannot provide. Good health, both physical and mental, is essential for a happy life and is not ensured by wealth alone.
Additionally, creativity, knowledge, and following our passions enrich our lives in ways that money cannot measure. Acting ethically, being socially responsible, and helping others give us a sense of purpose and fulfilment that is far more valuable than material things.
Putting money above everything else reduces our humanity and overlooks the true values that make life worth living.
Q17. Write a debate either for or against the motion: Admission to top-notch institutes guarantees a successful career. (120 – 150 words)
Ans. FOR THE MOTION
Dear judges and opponents, I strongly believe that getting into a top-tier school is important for a successful career.
These schools do more than just teach; they are centres of excellence. They gather some of the brightest people, encourage creativity, and provide excellent resources. The challenging courses and chances to meet industry leaders help students prepare for real-world challenges better than many other schools can.
Also, building connections with alumni from these top schools can be very helpful. These networks can lead to job opportunities, offer guidance, and provide ongoing support. Employers often prefer graduates from these prestigious institutions because they trust the quality of education and the skills of the students.
While personal effort is essential for success, being accepted into a top school gives you a clear advantage. It provides the knowledge, skills, and connections needed to succeed in one’s career and leads to a fulfilling future.
AGAINST THE MOTION
Respected judges and my opponents, I believe getting into a top-tier school is not necessary for a successful career.
While attending a top school is an achievement, it does not ensure success. Success means more than just earning money; it includes personal happiness, acting ethically, and making a positive impact on society. These qualities can be developed outside even the best schools.
Success in a career comes from hard work, determination, flexibility, emotional intelligence, and a desire to keep learning. People from less prestigious schools or those without formal education can still be successful due to their talent and strong work ethic.
Moreover, the pressure to succeed in elite environments can lead to burnout and stress, often causing people to focus only on achievement and neglect other important values. While a top school can provide a good start, it is ultimately a person’s drive, character, and ability to tackle real-world challenges that shape their success.
Q18. ‘The policy of reservation of seats for admission to the professional courses is good for the deprived sections of society.’ Write a debate in 120 – 150 words either for or against the motion.
Ans. FOR THE MOTION
Respected judges and opponents, I strongly support the idea that reserving seats for admission to professional courses is beneficial for disadvantaged groups in society.
Reservation policies are not just helpful; they are necessary for these groups. For centuries, discrimination has kept many people from accessing quality education and opportunities. This has created a cycle of poverty and exclusion. Reservations help break this cycle by offering equal opportunities. They ensure that merit is not only based on privilege but also on the potential and talent found in these historically disadvantaged communities.
By increasing representation in fields like medicine, engineering, and law, reservations empower these communities and create role models. These role models inspire future generations to aim for success and contribute to the country’s progress. Some claim that reservations hurt merit, but they actually broaden the meaning of merit to include qualities like resilience, perseverance, and the ability to overcome challenges.
In our country, where social inequalities are widespread, reservations are essential for promoting fairness and creating an inclusive society.
AGAINST THE MOTION
Respected judges and my worthy opponents, I oppose the statement that “The policy of reservation of seats for admission to professional courses is good for the deprived sections of society.”
While the intention of reservation policies is commendable, their long-term effects can be detrimental. Reservations undermine meritocracy, leading to deserving candidates missing opportunities and fostering social divisions.
Moreover, they imply that certain communities can’t compete on their own, weakening their motivation and competitive spirit. Real progress comes from improving education and providing equal opportunities at primary and secondary levels, rather than relying on reservations.
In the end, the government should focus on enhancing the quality of education for all, allowing individuals to succeed based on their abilities rather than their social background.
Q19. “It is cruel to put stray dogs to sleep.” Write a debate in 120 – 150 words either for or against the motion.
Ans. FOR THE MOTION
Respected judges and my opponents, I strongly agree that “It is cruel to put stray dogs to sleep”. While some see euthanasia as a solution, it tragically ends a life, no matter how difficult that life might be.
Stray dogs suffer greatly through no fault of their own. They deal with hunger, disease, injuries, and the risk of violence. Euthanasia may seem to stop their suffering, but it is a final act of despair. We have a moral duty to find better, more humane solutions.
We should focus on responsible actions. We also need more animal shelters with enough resources and staff. Promoting adoption and fostering can give these dogs a chance for a loving home. Educating the public about responsible pet ownership is important to prevent more animals from becoming stray.
We should consider euthanasia only in rare cases of untreatable suffering or aggression after all other options have been tried. Using it as a common solution for the stray dog problem shows a lack of compassion and fails our duty to these voiceless animals.
AGAINST THE MOTION
Respected judges and my worthy opponents, I stand against the statement, “It is cruel to put stray dogs to sleep”.
While putting a stray dog to sleep is hard to think about, it is not always the cruellest choice; sometimes, it is the kindest. We must recognize the sad reality of the stray dog crisis. Overpopulation causes great suffering, including starvation, disease, untreated injuries, and violent deaths from fights or traffic accidents.
Many stray dogs can also threaten public health by spreading rabies and other diseases. Shelters are often too full and do not have enough resources to care for every animal. In these situations, euthanasia becomes a tough but necessary solution. It ends suffering that would otherwise go on, prevents the spread of disease, and reduces the stray population, leading to less suffering overall.
Of course, we need to focus on prevention. We need more spaying and neutering programs to promote responsible pet ownership. But until we have those systems in place, euthanasia is a difficult tool we sometimes need to manage the suffering that we, as a society, have created.
Q20. Loudspeakers, bands etc create a lot of disturbance at all hours of day and night especially for students and for the sick. Write a debate in favour of or against the motion in 120 – 150 words. You are Saurabh/ Shobha.
Ans. FOR THE MOTION
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, and my respected opponent, I am Saurabh, and I support the idea that loudspeakers, bands, and similar noises cause a lot of problems at all times of the day and night, especially for students and sick people.
While we recognize that loud sounds can be disruptive, we also need to see how important they are to our culture. They bring joy to celebrations, show our traditions, and express our religious beliefs. These sounds are part of who we are. A festival without music, a wedding without happy sounds, or a community event without the joy of gathering together, doesn’t look like an occasion. We can set rules for noise levels and the times when these sounds can happen. However, completely banning them would be extreme and would take away the cultural richness that makes us unique.
We need to find a middle ground. We can celebrate and express ourselves while also respecting the need for quiet. A total ban is not the solution.
AGAINST THE MOTION
Respected jury and my esteemed opponents, I, Shobha, strongly oppose the noise pollution caused by loudspeakers and bands.
Loudspeakers and bands create annoying noise at all hours. This noise pollution is a major problem, especially for vulnerable groups like students who need to focus and sick people who need peace to recover.
Students studying for important exams lose their concentration due to loud music. A patient in a hospital struggles to heal when faced with constant noise. All this happens during celebrations and entertainment. While cultural events are important, they should not harm people’s well-being. There are specific times and places for these activities.
We need to enforce the laws against noise pollution. Stricter regulations and enforcement are necessary to ensure peace and quiet, allowing everyone to enjoy a healthy and productive environment.
Conclusion
Students of class 11 can take help from these previous questions on debate writing and practice for the exams. By doing written practice you can easily score full 5 marks in debate writing question.