Public High School Students and Exit Exams

To accommodate this change in the structure of this debate, I ask that Pro not post an argument in the last round to keep both sides even. With that said, let this debate begin! I negate; resolved: public high school students in the United States ought not be required to pass standardized exit exams to graduate. I shall define standardized exit exams (SEEs) as the US Department of Education does, "an educational accountability technique employed to ascertain if progress and base standards are being met by school districts through the use of a high stakes test in compliance to federal standards." This definition should be preferred, as the US government is ultimately the entity that is acting. My value will be progressive post-industrialism (P P-I) which is, as David Bell writes "the evolution of industrialist societies into more technologically advanced and culturally progressed civilizations dedicated to humanist principles of justice and human dignity". This is best achieved through the criterion accountability, because as Bell continues "it is only through accountable educational systems teaching the basic prerequisite subjects required to communicate such as language and math can we solve for violations of human worth and injustice worldwide." By focusing society on the individual, diversity, and justice, P P-I creates strong and fair societies. Professor Gosta Esping-Andersen writes about P P-I societies. " The benefits of striving towards the post-industrial value system in quality of education is seen in everyday life in those nations that have achieved it. Quality of health care for the disabled, poor, and old is significantly higher. The base level of education, especially in language ensures a quality of communication that ensures we recognize each other as individuals working together as opposed to working against each other. Empirical studies in Norway and Denmark show the level of education directly effects the likelihood of individuals showing aggression towards other racial, ethnic, or socioeconomic subgroups because of a greater understanding of the interconnectivity of the world." C1: Exit Exams Create A Progressive Post-Industrialist Society The American economy is faltering on the global scale because of inadequacies in the educational system. The National Education Association writes, "Domestic and international economies have shifted, and a new base of skills are required for the workforce. In the last 10 years over 3 million manufacturing jobs were lost while 15 million service sector jobs were created. These new jobs required basic math and English levels that were found to be lacking in many American high school graduates." Society's switch from a manufacturing to service-based economy requires us to dramatically change our educational objectives. Manufacturing jobs only need a 6th grade English, and 4th grade math level. In contrast, the service sector requires laborers to have an 8th grade mastery in both. The current educational system simply cannot support the economy. The solution is quite simple, as Gosta Esping-Andersen elaborates. "The standard of education in post-industrialist societies in Europe are what ensure their economic and social survival. The rigorous testing taken by those exiting the secondary education system ensure that the needed market skills are present within the student." Exit exams ensure that students are adequately equipped for the workforce, and create stable economies. This is clearly seen in strong European nations with rigorous exams. C2: Only high-stakes exams can achieve any form of accountability. Barry and Finley (2009) write, "Due to the lack of consequences related to low-stakes tests, student performance has been found to be lower in low-stakes testing than in high stakes conditions, which leads to poor instrument refinement decisions. The low motivation of low-stakes testing increases the amount of students using rapid guessing. Items that were known to be low difficulty appeared more difficult and discriminating, lowering the quality and validity of the tests overall." Only when students apply themselves can we obtain an accurate measurement of their of their ability and ensure accountability. This has twofold impacts – first, students who graduate absolutely have the abilities they need. Second, teachers and administrators can utilize these data to improve the system. As I have shown through my case, it is only by negating, through a high stakes testing methodology can we ever ensure social and economic stability which is the cornerstone of social progress and rights. Without exit exams we cannot reach the level of progress post-industrialist societies have reached in terms of competitiveness in the world market and in social cohesion by the valuing of human worth. These unique and powerful benefits provide a clear reason to vote for the negative. Let's move to the Aff side. Regarding the value debate, we need to prefer P P-I. We both value societal benefit, but the Neg gives a clear path towards social progress. The Aff doesn't give you a bright line to determine where progress has been achieved and where it hasn't. Aff's criterion only weakly links to his value. His arguments for pragmatism actually fail, because in the end he is looking for a 'valued diploma'. On the Aff side, he has no way to achieve anything more than a subjective diploma. The Neg, on the other hand can clearly show what a diploma entails. Furthermore, we can look to my definition and immediately see a reason to vote Neg. A SEE by definition meets the federal, not state standard. If we want to completely standardize an SEE, it needs to be on the national level. The Aff cannot bind the Neg to support only state level exams. The Neg determines Neg arguments, not the other way. @ C1 The Negative value system immediately does away with many of these harms. If we implement a P P-I exam (more on that later), these harms actually go away! Remember the Esping-Andersen and Bell cards I presented earlier. A move to a P P-I society would actually reduce dropouts by placing more emphasis on individual students and schools and ensuring that they get the attention and help they need. Furthermore, if we just promote students who shouldn't be promoted, we are only harming society. In my C1, I showed that the current lack of accountability and rubber-stamping of diplomas is leading to a backslide in the economy. These problems would only be exacerbated in an Aff world. The problems, as Aff states, are because "states have the bar so [low]", which would immediately disappear in a P P-I society with a federal test. @ C2 Exit exams reflect the curriculum, not the other way around. By putting SEEs into place, we ensure that teachers are actually teaching the curriculum. Second, all the problems Aff cites are with basic multiple choice tests. The thing with P P-I societies is that their views of education are starkly different from the current paradigm. They value individual opinion and free expression, and thus we have these wonderful examples of tests: http://www.debate.org... (check the links in the 6th post) Note how the tests are completely free response and allow students to use their own methods. Such examples of critical thinking free response tests raise the bar and encourage student achievement. Students get to construct their own strategies and thinking styles, which is just what the Brooks-Young cards says they need to do. The problems that Aff brings up are problems with society today and low-level multiple-choice exams. The negative value structure of P P-I immediately takes out all of his harms and introduces unique benefits. P P-I societies value education and the individual, which is the cornerstone of social progress and the solution to today's problems.