: Public high school students in the United States ought not to be required to pass standardized exi

Please note: Extending is after a drop or when no refutal has been made. And voters, please vote based on arguments not personal opinions, thank you. I wasn't being rude, just wondering about my opponent's experience. I'm a soph going into JV for anyone who's interested. Just a point: He has no qualms with my rebuttals to his observation 1, thus the government isn't the source of problems. Let's begin. V: -"And link this to my C3, it will show that the government cares so much, that there willing to adopt another system, and change their ways." Where does it in C3 say U.S will adopt another plan?-> "The U.S. is the only economically advanced nation to rely heavily on multiple-choice tests. Other nations use performance-based assessment where students are evaluated on the basis of real work such as essays, projects and activities. Ironically, because these nations do not focus on teaching to multiple choice tests, they even score higher than U.S. students on those kinds of tests." Where does it say in C3 "government will change," prove it??? If you claim in C4 that the government does care (to educate) then by removing it we lost that strong support, thus our education system will suffer more severely. And if the government does care then it would not corrupt the system. Value falls. VC: Where in the resolution states we ought to adopt a new method? You don't need a counter-plan. I am arguing exit tests are fair, yet you have not met your burden. I have refuted C1 and you also dropped a point I made and still didn't attempt to mention it. Again resolution doesn't state we should implement a method. C1: No reasoning why it isn't biased thus you cannot extend. You also dropped my point about states being sued for being a racist on exit exams. I have refuted sentence by sentence on this. He cannot extend because he fails to prove it is biased. This contradicts his C4 because if it exit exams are biased then they will keep out certain people, but in C4 he states everyone graduates even if they didn't pass. Big point before: "Standardized tests isn't unfair because students can simply switch schools if they feel their district is too lenient. As school districts see a decreasing amount of students attending they will naturally reform and increase quality to compete for students." C2: How can you extend if you have no impact and ideal? All he has left is reasoning. It's like I took out the wheels and the engine of his car, can it still move without those parts? No, similarly here his C2 has no purpose. I have also attacked the reasoning that he did not refute: schools have other means to receive money from the government, receiving money like his example is a small fraction. C2 has no point, no rebuttals, no purpose. C3: Son, please learn about the basics of LD before embarrassing yourself. You cannot extend because it has not link. Dan1 has provided no reason to why it does links to VC. In LD contentions must link to VC and VC is the best way to achieve VP. He has also failed to recognize my direct argument about implementing Finland. We must cast aside our pride, morals, virtue, and ideals that we shed years of blood on if we implement Finland's example. Finland is different in terms of history, morals, population, allies, and ideals. Example Finland was ruled by Russia thus it still has communists ideals, when me adopt it we are also adopting some communists ideals. Another example U.S' population 307,230,000, Finland 5,342,344; obviously Finland has a smaller population thus more teachers are able to focus on them. Anyway without a link to the VC it cannot achieve his value, it either falls or if he wishes to keep this contention then his VC isn't the best option to achieve his VP, thus his VC is invalid because there's a better way to achieve is value. C4: You agreed with my point! In the end they both get the same diploma with the tests thus it fair. -They both took the test and in the end got the same diploma that worth the same; very fair don't you agree? -By taking out the exit exam, this only makes the system easier, thus more people do not have to study to graduate leading to an increase in poverty rate, Con's impact (no attacks on that point). Achieves fairness at one point, yet in the ultimate end...doesn't. Con's ultimate end is the impact, reason why my augment wins. -R1 VC: "We strive for fairness, yet this graduation requirement keeps us from achieving this goal"-C4 says everyone graduates even if they fail, and VC says tests keep students from graduating. Don't you see that it contradicts? "Extending all of them"...hehehhe I attacked every point made how can you possibly extend them all. Voting issues: 1. Dropped some points I made. Never attempted to mention them. 2. R3 was filled with nothing, no C1,2,3 refutals. 3. C3 has no link, he advocates C3 stays thus his VC, best way to achieve V, is invalid. 4. C2 no weighing impact, no purpose. 5. Con attacked C1 numerous times, Pro fails to refute any. I have proven exit tests aren't biased. His C1 also contradicts C4. 6. C4 contradicts VC's goal. 7. Overall he had a contradictory case. 8. I have proven my burden. Pro has not. 9. Clearly exit exams' benefits outweighs its harms. Reasoned above vote Con. Thanks. Dan1 good luck on your actual H.S debate.