Standardized Exit Exams: Lincoln-Douglas Format

I will address all arguments in the order that my opponent listed them in his RD 1 posting. OV: his address against my case was not organized by my case, but by two general responses that did not seek to specifically rebut my standards or my contentions. Hence, nearly all of the offensive arguments and warrants in the affirmative's round 1 can be extended. At that point, you affirm. -------------------- On the Affirmative Case: In response to my opponent's paragraph 2, regarding bias and the aff's ability to solve for it: 1: It isn't my job to present an alternative to graduation exit exams. It is my job, as the affirmative, to prove that exit exams lack merit in that they are more harmful than beneficial. Hence, I need not solve for the harms that I detail in my case. 2: No human institution may be entirely unbiased. However, at the point where I prove that exit exams not only can't fix discrimination, but actually reify that discrimination, then clearly the affirmative world is a better choice. In response to my opponent's paragraph 3, regarding the "contradiction" between my two contentions and the fact that they don't link together: 1: My opponent doesn't articulate this supposed contradiction at all, so without a crystal ball and a great deal of cosmic luck, I can't address it. I encourage him to be clearer in RD 2. 2: I don't need to link my contentions together, as they are independent reasons to affirm the resolution. They both detail separate and equally detrimental flaws with the exit exam model. What I do need to do is link both of my contentions with my standards, which I do clearly in the first round. Essentially, I have sought to prove that exit exams result in an illegitimate system of education, and my contentions are the qualities about exit exams that result in this illegitimacy. If the system is illegitimate, then we can't access societal welfare, which includes equal access to education as tied to the success of American society. -------------------- On the Negative Case: Standards: My opponent has not used a recognizable value or criterion, has not defined them further, has not linked them together, and has not linked them to his case in anyway. As it stands, I am currently winning the standards since he doesn't actually have any. That, and he drops my standards and analysis, so we will assume that whoever fulfills my standards is winning the round. My opponent's first contention (rhetorical mishmash aside) is essentially that exit exams, being standardized, act as a check to educators who may not choose to teach the standards to their students. I have 3 responses: 1: Standardized exams don't solve the problems of a biased system. They instead encourage schools, districts, and even whole states to manipulate students and tests in order to artificially inflate their passing scores. A number of states have openly admitted to rewriting standardized exams used to calculate AYP for NCLB, and principals will even hold students back who are unable to pass exit exams (typically taken in 10th grade) in order to bolster graduation rates each year. 2: My opponent assumes that all teachers have equal access to materials to teach state standards, which I prove is patently false in my case. He scapegoats teachers for the failure of students, when realistically it is also the inherent stratification of resources. 3: Cross-apply my entire Contention 2, which goes dropped in the debate. Even if my opponent later attempts to claim that he can check individual teachers that don't (or can't) teach the standards, he still can't prove that exit exams show competence in "what the electorate decides is most relevant to becoming a good citizen," nor can he prove that they correlate in any way to a student's future employability. As for my opponent's second contention, which asserts (and only asserts) that exit exams are the only way to guarantee the imparting of crucial knowledge, I have two responses: 1: My opponent doesn't warrant any of his arguments here. He doesn't link any of his rhetoric to the concept of an exit exam. He attempts to say that the only way to access this set of fabulous knowledge (which he doesn't define as anything in particular) is to embrace standardized testing. However, he doesn't bother to let you know exactly how this actually works. 2: Cross-apply my entire Contention 2 again, which is basically dropped in his round 1 posting (excepting his remarks about how it didn't link to Contention 1, which I already discussed). Exit exams are not a proven or effective metric for academic achievement, and they have no bearing on our success in the US workforce. Since my opponent has yet to warrant or even explain how standardized exit exams actually show competence or help students succeed outside of high school, my analysis and evidence outweigh. Since the negative clearly cannot avoid illegitimizing the education system further by employing exit exams, I encourage a vote for the affirmative.