The Australian education system should united and be the same level as the Nsw education system

Ladies and gentlemen. I would like to point out that my opponent (pro) has not only misunderstood my argument in round 1, but surprisingly misread his own argument in round 1. To quote part of his argument in Round 1, it goes as follows:"In this debate I will try to prove that Australian education should be same throughout the nation" Although this is not a very precisely given resolution, we can still gather that his resolution stands clear:Pro's Resolution: The Australian "education" should be the same throughout the nation. NOT that the Australian education system should be the same throughout the entire nation. He used the New South Wales education system to support his claim, but did not put that forth as his resolution for this entire debate. To prove my point, here are some further quotes from his Round 1 argument:"As the affirmative i define the topic as a possible way to change australian education system for the good of the nation." This above quote relates to the already given topic. Therefore, we can already conclude that my arguments still stand clear and all of PRO's rebuttals are merely red herrings to my arguments. He has failed to understand his own resolution that was submitted in the first round. Just to point out my point further, one of pro's arguments was not only irrelevant to his side of this debate, but was a supporting argument for Con. He has proven that the New South Wales education system caters for students of a variety of levels, which therefore leads us to the following question:"Which education should be used as the one for the entire nation?" The education system in New South Wales is very complicated, with levels suited for people who are GAT and students who are not even up to the same level as an average expected standard. Pro also claims that immigrants still suffer from the current education system. However, he is not completely right in this statement. Within normal government-funded schools, there is an ESL (English as Second Language) system branched out to students who are in need for such treatment. Unfortunately, Pro has once again mistaken my final argument as invalid. However, as it follows the topic of this debate, I am indeed arguing towards my own resolution. It goes as follows:Con's Resolution: The Australian education should remain the same and have a variety of styles with education. Readers must realise by now how mistaken Pro has been with his own topic of this debate. I have put forth arguments that relate to the topic of this debate and my opponent has failed to do so. My argument stand forth and Pro must argue against them. REBUTTALS: While Pro has argued that New South Wales has the “hardest” education system in whole of Australia, I think he was trying to say that New South Wales has the best achieving students (as an average). If this is his point, I would like to just prove to him just how wrong he is. [1] The scores of the NAPLAN prove that states such as Victoria or ACT are either achieving similar, if not better results than NSW. My opponent has also failed to realise that he wishes to prove why all of the education should imitate those of NSW to “benefit the nation”. I wish to point out that Australia is actually one of the lowest scoring nations compared to all the other countries. The education in Asian countries are far ahead of those in Australia. This means, it will not be benefitting our nation that much at all. EXTEND ALL ARGUMENTS. I would also like to advise my opponent to check their spelling and grammar as it is clearly of a very low standard. He should be advised that he will lose points for bad spelling and grammar. RESOURCES:1. http://www.nap.edu.au...