His social agency skills have taught him how to handle the criminals and the witnesses accordingly and not to his disadvantage. His management team feels it would be better if he left the force. When an online debate is more rigid, step-by-step instructions are provided for debate and defense, as in a formal face-to-face debate. Evaluation, Interpretation, Language, Linguistics. Reference List 1. Anything that can help students communicate during emergencies should be allowed in school, therefore smart phones should be allowed in schools. Sorry, but copying text is forbidden on this website. Captain de Koster compares today’s times as being a cop different to when he started, “but I loved it because I thought I was doing something for my country. And if not, banning something results in students being prevented from concentrating, then the schools ought to ban them because after all the point of the school is education, and that's standing in the way. No. The goal is to make the argument look as good as possible so that you can learn from it. In this course, you will learn what an argument is. So, you can fix it up a little bit. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that Main Section Defining the Structure- Agency Debate Structure as illustrated and defined by www. The other group of high school students from the same high school in South Korea argued for the opposite conclusion, that smartphones should be allowed in class. Today the Captain doesn’t feel welcome, his colleagues say he is very negative and the pride that was once there has disappeared. Additionally, banning smartphones can result in lack of ways for students to communicate during emergencies. Captain de Koster feels his neighbours don’t appreciate him or the uniform he wears and cast judgement towards his morality as police officer. According to Van Huysteen, E, ( 2003:56) “Giddens (1979) developed the theory of ‘structuration’ which argues that structure and agency are mutually dependent rather than opposed. Is actually stopping you from learning the language yourself. So the first argument, which is try to show that smartphones should be banned during class, runs like this. Retrieved from https://graduateway.com/structure-agency-debate-emile-durkheim/, This is just a sample. Because things like hey going to the bathroom. The structure agency- debate has two sides. Each week will be divided into multiple video segments that can be viewed separately or in groups. Next, you will learn how to break an argument into its essential parts, how to put them in order to reveal their connections, and how to fill in gaps in an argument by adding suppressed premises. As the subject of sociology has progressed through the ages so many issues have arisen. Many students are using smartphones during class, and this causes many problems. Students who want more detailed explanations or additional exercises or who want to explore these topics in more depth should consult Understanding Arguments: An Introduction to Informal Logic, Ninth Edition, Concise, Chapters 1-5, by Walter Sinnott-Armstrong and Robert Fogelin. Or what you really want by allowing the smartphones. Introduction The structure-agency debate has raged on since the start of time. It's a linear structure. The position of first speaker is a key one in winning any debate. And it's probably not really continuously. Cause that's what the class is for. The other group only had one argument. This is where most people are taught from birth about how to act in society and how to accept various other people from different walks in life. com/social+structure Downloaded 1 March 2013 3. Going to the bathroom during class might stop other students from concentrating, learning quite as much, but, you gotta go, you gotta go. Well, what the arguments do is they tell us the values at stake, what you really want from the band. So they should be allowed. Well, they are a lot of addictive apps like, social networking and games that make students check their smartphones continuously. Or maybe, we're going to be able to monitor their smartphones to see whether they're going on to the right types of program. The first group are the structuralists and the second group the humanists. But one of the nice features of arguments is that they don't just tell you these people want smartphones, these people don't want smartphones banned. Two sides speak alternately for and against a particular contention usually based on a topical issue. • The debater should never publicly disagree with the decision of the judge or the audience. Now, I want to ask one more question. So I think you could raise a lot of questions about this argument, just like the other one, but what I'm interested in here is the structure. ... Do we have a linear structure, or a branching structure, or a joint structure? First reason to allow smartphones is that they can aid in education, and that's what schools are all about. Smartphones can help students learn, and then anything that can help students learn should be allowed in school. ’ Altbeker, A (2005:169). Right? This implies to me that as agents of socialisation in the police fraternity that to be accepted you would need to complain a lot and that is exactly what Captain de Koster does. People might get stuck in the school. And so, we have to allow those. One is that smartphones can help students learn. The chapter chosen follows Captain Louis de Koster through working for the SAPS pre-apartheid and post-apartheid. I couldn't be more sincere and adamant in my recommendation, no matter who you are or what you do. One can only start understanding texts from a sociological point of view if we can understand the structure-agency debate. Which leads to the conclusion five which becomes a premise in the argument for the final conclusion seven. How often do these emergencies happen? Captain Louis de Koster The Captain started out in the police force as soon as he left school.