Public highschool students inthe US oughtnot be required to pass standardized exit exams to graduate

Thank you for your response (close though you may have cut it haha). I look forward to this debate. I accept the definition of justice as only the 1A which falls under my definition as giving each his due. You accept my definition of a standardized test due to credibility. Mine stems directly from the department of education whereas Francon's definition is specific only to the department of education in Nebraska, not the overall department of education. My definition surpasses her definition in authority and, therefore, must be given the authority over her's. Point by point (I'll reiterate my points and why you accept them in the R4 once my opponent has given an attack on them): 1) You reject this point because my Reardon card specifically states that merely doing well on a test does not gauge how well you know a subject, but how many resources you have on tap (My opponent asked for credentials involving my card and I shall give it to her. Reardon is the Associate Professor of Education and Sociology at Stanford University, 2009 who wrote Effects of the California High School Exit Exam on Student Persistence, Achievement and Graduation) 2) Simply because a student does not grasp a subject or cannot pass a test does not mean that the teacher has failed. My Long card (Bridget Terry Long, Researcher at Harvard University, author of Playing the Admissions Game: Student Reactions to Increasing College Competition, 2009) outlines that some schools are simply not given the same budget and resources as other schools. Does this mean the teachers have failed their students? Certainly not! A standardized test does not gauge the ability of a student who has not been taught by the same standards of other schools. This does not mean the student has failed to learn, they have simply failed to learn a test and cannot receive the full benefits of passing a test. They may very well have learned the subject but they haven't learned how the test expects them to answer questions regarding the subject. 3) An end of course test at the standard high school level does not show how well a person has learned something. There are sixty questions in the average EOC that are meant to sum up a semester long course. This, of course, does not accurately tell how well a student grasps a subject. Again, Steele and Aronson's proves that minorities feel cornered into a certain stereotype and accept it because it is popular. This may lead to the lack of test-taking skills insofar as stereotypes like "black students are not as smart as white students" will cause the average minority to believe and, therefore, underperform. 4) I don't understand what you mean. Can you give me an example of a "fluff" school? Furthermore, what constitutes a fluff school? 5)See my Long card again. The government may hold each school by the same standards but different funding opportunities will invariably effect the final outcome per school. 6) You're forgetting that when you compare apples in schools, you must also compare oranges. You are comparing achievement without comparing how many opportunities each school gets which can effect achievement. If you want to debate how funding effects schools we can. It is, after all, one of my points. However, until you prove that governments are justified in comparing schools of different qualities, this point falls. 7)The test itself is not biased towards any one race or sex as far as I can see. Stereotypes concerning these races and sexes will lead to underperformance. You reject this point because it is not really relevant insofar as it offers no negative or positive outcomes should you choose to accept it. 8) As stated in my observation two, any minor discrepancies involving a test should be discarded as relevant. Just because there is a possibility that a test may, in the future, involve both types of tasks does not make you any less apt to vote in the Affirmative or to consider the negative. It merely means what tests can become more diverse. I don't see how this fits into the scope of the debate. 9) How so? An exit exam merely tests what you have learned in a course. Why should passing a course involving the information on the exit exams not be the standard over the test itself? It shouldn't. The exam tests a structured and finite amount of information whereas the course teaches on a more subjective but effective level. Just because information isn't on a test does not mean we should ignore it. For example, I wanted to know what year John Locke was born in my AP US History course. My teacher responded, "that won't be on the test." 10) Talk to George Bush about that. The reason students who don't understand a course pass isn't due to a lack of tests but is due to things like the No Child Left Behind Act. Schools have always had exit exams. The reason students pass who don't deserve to pass does not hinge on the test itself rather the outside factors effecting schools (such as the NBLA). 11) (I'm sorry. In Lincoln-Douglas, there is no specific country under speculation. You may use instances where a country did something that may benefit your case but you cannot use it as the foundation for the resolution) Helping the USA does not effect this resolution. I'm sorry. I did not specify "In the United States, public high school...". This point falls. 12) Governments allocate scholarships based on merit. Tests do not gauge merit accurately. Furthermore, there are a multitude of scholarships used for different cases. There are scholarships for essays, for art, for service, etc. Tests actually play a very small role in the scholarship process. The grant process is based on need, not merit. Since my opponent did not understand... or rectify the mistake by studying... that this is an LD debate, I'll be nice and ask that the judges and my opponent consider my VC but not make it the deciding factor in this debate. Thank you. I await a surely exciting debate.