High schools should add students to the teacher evaluation system.

I guess this is rebuttal 2?To make it easier for everyone to see (mostly me), I'll attack her case first.Flaws with the current system:1) Test Scores: If we're being technical here, grants actually could help the students because it goes into the school and not in the pockets of the administration. Test scores are just a tool for the administration to use in teacher evaluations, and they aren't used alone. Tools are useful. While there are students who do well with negligent, there would be a re-occurring pattern by the test scores for the majority of students who are in between good test takers and bad. I'll get to the student evaluation effectiveness later. 2) Principal reviews: Attacks my evidence by using evidence that doesn't relate. If she were to find evidence that proves that this piece of evidence is actually biased and not just facts about teacher reviews. This evidence actually doesn't mention student evaluations. This is the reason I used it. It gives good evidence that simply shows the current system. We could argue source credibility this whole time, but I'm going to focus on what really matters: the arguments. Accuracy of student evaluations: 1) The Atlantic Card: My opponent attacks principal evaluations by stating that I have no evidence on how accurate they are exactly by a study. It's not that I found statistics that were against me in this point or for me and I didn't post them. I just haven't found anything. Due to time constraints, I have no time to search all day for this one piece of evidence. Proving that they are effective should be enough for me here. The reason my opponent could easily find evidence for herself is because a majority of the schools don't use student evaluations on teachers, so a study would be simply to do. She can state that because of the evidence, she's right, but then I could say the same thing. 2) Addressing biases: my opponent and I are speaking of two different biases when we compare gender bias and just not liking the teacher. There is a lot more that would cause somebody to give a teacher a bad review with a bias than gender bias. Gender biases are easily detectable. In my opponents own words, students should be top priority. If students aren't succeeding and the teacher is good, there needs to be a change. If students gave the teacher a good review, there would be no change and students would continue to do poorly. Student achievement cannot be ruled as unimportant. It is half or more than half of what a teacher's job is next to being a good teacher. If they truly are good teachers, we should see it in student achievements without student evaluations. Lastly, students are not qualified. As I've said many times before, students don't understand everything that goes into being a teacher, or being a part of administration. It's the job of the administration to decided who is qualified as a teacher or not. They set the standard, not the students. Improving the School System: 1) Tenure is flawed. Like The evidence in R3 said, they give it by seniority and not teacher capability. This point is irrelevant. 2) Thanks for clearing that up. I'm guessing that my opponent thinks all teachers doing a poor job should be fired rather than helped to become better teachers. They don't need to be fired if they're doing a poor job. My opponent alludes to the idea that this means they are held to a lower standard. Without evidence, there is no way to prove this. With all of the evidence I provided in R3, we can see that they are not held to a low standard. 3) My opponent attacks my analogy. I simply came up with it on the spot to be clever. I couldn't find anything better to compare that would fit the best. Of course restaurants don't have a lasting impact, but I was simply trying to point out why students are not qualified and that it is the job of the administration to set the standard. I won't defend my analogy because it's just a tool for my main argument: the administration knows a ton more about teaching than students making them more qualified that students. That was my point. There is certain complexity to teaching that students couldn't answer questions about since students only have general knowledge. Benefits the teacher/students 1) a lot of kids hate school and still learn. A lot of people eat when the don't like the food. Either way, they get what they need. 2) The teacher could also make a survey just for students to fill out without the evaluation. If they care that much, they should care enough to do something like this. My case: Students have different ranges of what they expect: Students even in the same exact classes will have different expectations in a teacher in general. They all have opinions on what is good and bad teaching. This is a fact. Qualifications *see attack 3 on "Improving school system" and attack 2 on "addressing biases" Expectations This goes back to my first and second point. Current system For the reasons that students evaluations would cause problems in the current system, and the current system evaluates teacher adequately and accurately, this point is proven. I have proven this throughout the debate. ---For the all of these reasons and the reasons in previous rounds, vote con. Thank you debatability. It was an honor. Muchas gracias all voters tambien.