students of public high-schools ought not be required to pass standardized exit exams

i very much appreciate the acceptance of this debate by my opponent i will be going down the neg then the aff Value: his value of justice is defined as fairness which is acceptable but gives no warrant or impact to back this up. so we should continue to look at my value for this round Standard: i agree with my opponents standard, but with standardized testing as i explained within my case NOT everyone within this system can voice their opinions. i gave the example of teachers withholding test scores. so since not everyone is included within his standard we need to look to mine. also my opponent claims that my standard has no bright line, this is untrue, we will know when we achieve fairness when everyone has equal opportunity for schooling. Ct1 sub A: i would like to point out that abandoning the standardized test is not going to allow students to graduate without the nessesary requirements for life. they will need to prove competent for the job they wish to apply. also if schools abandon the test, they will need another way to judge student achievement and thus increase the required GPA for graduation. so this argument falls. sub B: my opponent offers no impact to this statement so right there it should be disregarded. next, as i stated before without standardized tests, schools will need to gauge student achievement in another manner. private schools do this: they give achievements tests that are given according to the classes students are taking and the difficulty of said classes. if they pass, then they are able to move on to graduation and or higher level classes. (may it be duely noted that they are not required to pass or even take the exams) so this argument falls again because of the fact that schools will find a way to gauge student learning and have them graduate with the essentials for life. sub C: we can group his first and second impacts because they are supporting my argument that schools will find another way to gauge student achievement and have them graduate with the essentials to life. because by doing this they give students the ability to get the higher end jobs and decrease the poverty rate. decreasing the poverty rate as my opponent exclaims will stimulate the economy. so standardized tests are not needed and can be abandoned without negative consequences. now to the aff my opponent attacks my first argument in that it has no warrant. even if this is true we can see this happening within schools. proficiency exams are easy to some but not to others. they dumb down the smarter kids while continually failing those that need help in that area. his second attack on my case is that teachers are lying about test scores. they are lying not so much as "fudging" the numbers on tests but withholding information on students not doing well in schools and special education students. my opponent also attacks my argument of emotional effects on students and teachers through high stakes testing by saying it is non unique. this is not true. test anxiety happens during a normal test as i explained in a later argument but there are those that this test anxiety hurts them more in HIGH STAKES TESTING. so this argument stands being that i am talking about the effects of high stakes tests and not others. lastly he attacks my last contention by saying it has no link. this is not true. it links back to being fair because if those biases exist then the test is not fair to those students affected by it. so being that i have put down my opponents case and upheld mine we must look to the aff case (thank you once again to my opponent for pointing out the flaws in my case. really helpful)