Public high school students in the US ought not be required to pass standardized test exams to gradu

I'm going to try something that I've never tried before, a counterplan. This will go: his case, then mine ======= Framework ======= COUNTERPLAN The should government continue to maintain it's monopoly on public schools, and allow students to attend whichever public school they choose, provided their grades warrant it. His framework is: Value: Education Criterion: Prevention of government monopoly In so far as I win that my counterplan is more beneficial to education, this turns the impact of his criterion. ====== His Case ====== ========== Contention One ========== "Families send their kids to schools the government chooses. If you don't like your public school? Tough. If the school is terrible? Tough. " " No matter what problems the school they are sending their kids to may have, they must send their student to that school; the government orders them to do so. " The counterplan solves this. Students can opt to go to a better or worse school based on their educational needs. ======= Subpoint 1 ======= It seems that my opponent has forgotten which side he is on! He claims that government run schooling is bad, then provides examples of countries with public education that are doing better than we are. Best educated countries Country A Country B Country C Country D United States My opponent would benefit in pointing out that countries A-D are doing better than we are and that they don't have government education. He is doing just the opposite. He points out that countries (such as Poland and Korea) are doing better than us, but they DO have public education. This seems to be a reason to continue public education. Poland: . http://education.stateuniversity.com... Korea: . http://www.transitionsabroad.com... This means that not only does this not prove his point, but this Subpoint 1 is an independent reason to vote CON, because the countries he wants to compete with DO have government monopolized education. ======= Subpoint 2 ======= "Accountability is why private schools perform better. Every day they are held accountable by parents, and if they fail the kids, the school administrators lose their jobs. " This, like his Subpoint 1, is also a reason to vote for me. 1. My counterplan captures the benefits private schools currently have: the ability for parents to reject a failing school. His reason that these private schools are good is because they have the incentive to be. If they do bad, they lose business. My counterplan provides this incentive to public schools, because if the schools do bad, kids transfer. This solves the problem of a lack of accountability, but further. .. 2. Standardized testing provides MORE accountability than private schools: What determines which private school is the best? Their ad campaign? Their price? Determining which private school is the best is a very subjective business. Accountability isn't even being adequately provided. If you advertise your school well, you get business; if you don't, you lose business. While the educational experience might play a part, it certainly isn't the only thing going into private schools' so called "accountability" program. Standardized exams across government funded schools solve this. This gives us an objective way to measure the quality of education across school systems in order to choose the best school to go to. We compare the test scores of one school to the scores of another to determine which school is better teaching. This is certainly superior to comparing the brochures of one private school to another, because what we are comparing here is actual education. ======== Contention 2 ======== "requiring students to take an exit exam to graduate only strengthens the government's control of public schools; as evidenced my previous contention, more government control is the last thing that these schools need. " Notice what he is doing here: This 2nd contention isn't an independent reason to affirm. He just bases it off of his 1st contention. It isn't its own point at all, because it relies on the fact that he has proved contention 1 true. Now look what's happened in the round: I showed that my counterplan is the best form of education, and that it requires a government monopoly. His 2nd contention says: exit exams only strengthens the government's control of public schools. I've already proved that government monopoly is good, so his 2nd contention just furthers MY point, by proving that exams will HELP my government monopolized counterplan, which would benefit education. This means that his 2nd contention is jut ever furthering the reason why you vote CON. But, let's look at his (unsourced) evidence: "[they] test the political will of policymakers to hold students to these standards" My counterplan solves this. The power isn't only in the hands of policy makers to effect change in our school system; it's with the parents, too. If schools are scoring below average, the parents choose to switch schools. The schools lose revenue, so this forces them to keep up their standards. This means that the problem isn't being solved by weak-willed policy makers with no interest in the matter, but by the parents who have something at stake here. "states [currently] set the bar for passing exit exams at a point that is too low to make any real difference" Um, ok? So if the only real problem is that the bar is set too low, then just set it higher. Problem solved. ===== My Case ===== Contention: Privatized schools entrench the poor in a cycle of poverty. A. Private schools can push out low performing students to boost their appeal. As a private corporation, private schools have the ability to choose their clients. If certain students are scoring poorly and reflecting poorly on the school's academic prowess, it is within the school's power to simply give them the boot. This means the stupid will only get stupider and are forever stuck in a self-defeating cycle. Only the smart kids are allowed into the best schools, and those who don't achieve are put back into worst schools. This takes away the effective education of the ones who need it most. Privatized schools shun the person who isn't naturally gifted because he would reflect poorly on them, even though he is the one who needs the help most. A publicly run school system solves this because it doesn't have the right to kick kids out; its education is open to all. B. The cost of schooling just makes the poor even poorer. In a privatized system, the best schools cost the most. The richest students can get the best education, and the poor are simply left with the 2nd class education. This only serves to keep the rich rich and keep the poor poor and further segregate the society into social classes. It is the government's duty to provide equal education to all to prevent such dehumanizing social classes from existing. ====== Summary ====== My opponent has claimed in his Contention 2: Exit exams strengthen government control on schools. I certainly agree. I posit that a government run system, rather than a private system is superior for multiple reasons: His C1, subpoint 1: Public education is clearly superior if we are looking at other nations as examples. His C1, subpoint 2: A government run system provides more accountability to kids than a private one. His 2nd Contention: Exams clearly allow the government to provide better education to students. My one Contention: A private system will only serve to entrench the poor in poverty and further social class distinction. In conclusion, not only my case, but my opponent's also, proves that we should maintain government education and that standardized tests will only benefit us in doing so.