HOGWARTS is an ideal school!
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Despite students facing death almost daily, Hogwarts taught them to try their best and be true to themselves.
That was the argument that a Brauer College debating team successfully put to win its debate against a Warrnambool College team in the year 7-8 Warrnambool school eisteddfod debating competition.
While the Warrnambool College team argued that students should not have to deal with three-headed dogs, phoenixes and trolls running amok, Brauer argued that students would not learn unless they took risks.
Warrnambool College countered that the wizardry taught at Hogwarts was a limited field with few employers but Brauer parried again, arguing Hogwarts ensured that all students reached their full potential.
The merits and pitfalls of Hogwarts, the school of Witchcraft and Wizardry in the popular Harry Potter book series, were among the many points of view making Mozart Hall in Timor Street a hotbed of debate this week.
With engaging topics such as “Education should not be interrupted by schooling”, “Modern sport is a pharmaceutical venture” and “Blogging isn’t real communication” the arguments were topical and entertaining.
More than 80 teams from schools throughout the south-west are taking part in the debating eisteddfod that will run throughout this week.
Nearly 30 teams contested the year 5-6 primary school section that concluded yesterday and nearly 60 teams are contesting the secondary school section.
Merrivale Primary School won a clean sweep of the primary school section, taking out the award for the best overall school.
It was a tight finish with the Merrivale teams, which are coached by teacher Linda Mooseek, which were even with Warrnambool Primary School until the last debate.
Merrivale also came first and second in the best debate competition. A top performance by Merrivale pupil Breanna Billing won her the award for the best debater in the primary school section.
Ironically, Breanna had argued against the topic that “any topic is suitable for debate”.