Resolved: An ideal form of No Child Left Behind would be beneficial to the welfare of the U.S.

Thanks... good luck OBSERVATION: The problem with this observation is that it overpasses the intent of the resolution. When ideal is used, it puts the resolution where it should be. In other words, the debate is about, "Can the best form of NCLB actually help us?". However, this observation says that we could never find the ideal form, but that is not what the debate is about. Therefore, prefer my interpretation where I beg the judges to look to the intentions of NCLB and how when they are carried out it benefits the most amount of people. CONTENTION 1: Ok... It was more of clarification anyway. But pull this argument through as it shows how the ideal form would be better than the current status quo system. CONTENTION 2: My opponent says intentions does not mean good results. But fails to show how this applies to NCLB. Furthermore, if you look to an ideal form of NCLB, all it does (assumably) is look to teachers and make sure they are qualified and that they are doing their job. The problem is that the checks on these teachers are currently weak (C1)... The ideal form of NCLB would improve these checks and overall WOULD benefit the United States. CONTENTION 3: Correct, we are talking about an ideal form of NCLB. Just like we are talking about NCLB being beneficial to education, not making education perfect. This argument is therefore irrelevant. Furthermore, flow through my evidence that has the South Dakota Superintendents say very specifically the flaws of NCLB, then go on to show how it could be fixed. This shows that there is a way to fix it. Furthermore flow through my argument (on the bottom of C3) where I show how an ideal of NCLB would successfully: 1) Standardize a high quality of teachers. 2) Hold improper educational facilities accountable to their improper actions. 3) Target facilities that improperly teach students to adequate levels. I would also like to add 4) Target the students who are not properly learning. 1) Cross-apply the argument from C3 where I explicitly show that the resolution asks us to benefit the welfare of the U.S., it does NOT however say that I have to show that education would now be perfect. All that an ideal form of NCLB would do is give the students who do not learn much the BEST CHANCE to succeed. And with this chance to learn going up, we WOULD benefit the U.S. More people learning = benefit to the U.S. welfare. I urge my opponent to show anything different. 2) This only shows that a few students would not learn. I agree. But by meeting the 4 things that would happen with an ideal form of NCLB, more students would learn. Even if only ONE more student learns, then the welfare of the U.S. would be increased. Of course, however, with checks on teachers, schools, and students, more than one student would be benefited. ---I don't think we could adequately debate WHAT the ideal form of NCLB would include. But I would assume that it doesn't put life or death stress on educational facilities like it does now. Furthermore, it wouldn't be 'raising' the bar, it would be establishing the bar. Something that the United States has failed to provide before. ---NCLB does target the students through targeting the teachers. For example: Student A, B, and C are learning fine, but student D is not. NCLB would ensure that student D would be given an equal opportunity when compared to the rest of the students. It would make sure that all students can adequately have the opportunity to learn, and it would make sure that teachers didn't simply shun the students they did not want to teach. Certainly student D probably doesn't care, but NCLB would make sure that student D had the exact same chance as everyone else. Or perhaps it would make it so the teacher gives them private lessons if necessary. Some students learn differently than others, our goal is to teach all, and an ideal form of NCLB would accomplish this. I therefore urge you to vote PRO! Thank you and good luck!