The Instigator
fresnoinvasion
Pro (for)
Losing
35 Points
The Contender
Logical-Master
Con (against)
Winning
36 Points

An ideal form of No Child Left Behind would be beneficial to the welfare of the United States

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/24/2009 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,519 times Debate No: 7540
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (8)
Votes (11)

 

fresnoinvasion

Pro

The fundamentals of No Child Left Behind stand strong. The problem is the individual resisting the effective program that is No Child Left behind. In an ideal world that the individual gave in to how No Child Left behind taught that masses, everyone would benefit.

Pushing individual schools to meet a requirement on certain standardized tests ensures the individual is learning what needs to be learned to be an active member in society. Those that choose what should be learned hold a strong understanding of how people learn, and what they should learn. By rewarding schools for meeting test requirements we push the things they should really learn onto them.

The basics of No Child Left Behind are strong, and in an ideal world (which the resolution calls for) would see a benefit.
Logical-Master

Con

Greetings ladies and gentleman. I would like to thank the judges (and the remainder of the audience) for watching and my opponent for participating.

In today's case, I intend to show how an ideal form of "No Child Left Behind" would in fact NOT be beneficial to the welfare of the United States. I see no reason to provide any definitions concerning the topic, but should my opponent provide any, I must point out that I am not obligated to accept his rendering of the terms used.

============================================================================
PRO's Case
============================================================================

RE: "In an ideal world that the individual gave in to how No Child Left behind taught that masses, everyone would benefit."

Let me stop the instigator right there. He states that in an IDEAL world, everyone would benefit from NCLB, yet no place in the resolution do I see anything indicating that we're discussing an IDEAL world. Rather, all it indicates is that we are discussing an IDEAL form of NCLB. So with that said, the real question is whether or not an ideal form of NCLB can benefit the welfare of the United States PERIOD.

I say it cannot and for one simple reason: Although an ideal form of NCLB is a form of NCLB which is flawlessly carried out, we must keep it mind that this says NOTHING about the results it brings about. To pull an example out my good friend "Yraelz's" playbook, let us take Mercury treatment into consideration. Mercury treatment was considered a means of treating syphillis in the 1600s. However, not only was mercury treatment poisonous to humans (hence was harmful), but there is also the fact that it did not serve to cure syphillis. Even if one were to use an IDEAL form of mercury treatment, the fact of the matter is that even if it were performed flawlessly, it still wouldn't serve to cure syphillis as mercury does not cure syphillis. The only way to cure syphillis with the aid of mercury would require methods which no longer render the treatment to be "mercury treatment."

The same can be said here in the case of this debate. We are discussing whether or not a plan carried out flawlessly will bring about results which bring about a positive net gain for benefits to US welfare. Now if the resolution were to have stated something along the lines of "The GOALS of NCLB would be beneficial to the welfare of the US", this would be a different story and my opponent's case would make sense. However, given that the resolution does not indicate anything like this, PRO's case is just one big usage of the non sequitur ("doesn't follow") fallacy.

============================================================================
MY CASE
============================================================================

CONTENTION #1: Encourages school administrations to manipulate test results.

An example of this claim is the fact that schools have been shown to employ a "creative classification of dropouts" to reduce unfavorable statistics ( http://www.factcheck.org... ). Not to mention that because each state can produce its own standardized test, states may feel the motivation to simply make their tests easier(example: http://cbs2chicago.com... ). Ladies and gentleman, making tests easier will not solve the problem which stems from our horrible education system. Rather, with education standards lowered, we will have less people getting good jobs, not to mention that this lower standard in education could serve to indirectly decrease our technological standards as well (less educated people = less technology produced, not to mention other advancements that improve the way we live).

CONTENTION #2: Teachers are encouraged to teach according to what is on the standardized tests, hence narrowing the teaching and going against the purpose of teaching in the first place.

Through being encouraged to teach in accordance to the test, students are less likely to get a deeper understanding of the material and are less likely to have the understanding necessary to solve similar problems (http://www.reading.org...

Teachers who have "taught by the test" have been known to misinterpret the educational outcomes the test are designed to measure.

"On two state tests (New York State and Michigan) and the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) almost two-thirds of eighth graders missed math word problems that required an application of the Pythagorean theorem to calculate the distance between two points." -Direct quote found on wikipedia( Wiggins, G. & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design, 2nd Edition. ASCD. ISBN 9781416600350. p. 42-43)

It goes on to state the following . . . "Wiggins and McTighe blamed the low success rate on teachers who correctly anticipated the content of the tests, but incorrectly assumed each test would present rote knowledge/skill items rather than well-constructed, higher-order items."

CONCLUSION: Basically, taking my two contentions into consideration, in exchange for leaving no one behind (which is impossible, but we'll get to that in the next round), education standards are lowered and the country is worse off than it was. Ideal or not, this problem remains.

I reserve the right to present new arguments in the next round should I find such necessary. Later. :D
Debate Round No. 1
fresnoinvasion

Pro

On "Let me stop the instigator right there"-

His later arguments concede my argument that we should look at the perfect implementation of NCLB, this would mean that the citizens of the country are no longer resistant to NCLB. The word ideal in the resolution means that we have to imagine that NCLB was implemented perfectly and we have to look to the effects of NCLB on America in a world post implementation.

The debate comes down to whether or not the fundamentals of NCLB are good. The arguments he makes with his case are the only valid arguments he made in the last round. I'f we were to have the debate any other way the affirmative would have no chance at all. We see that NCLB is failing now, the only way the affirmative can make an argument is by assuming the conditions for the perfect NCLB are ideal.

On his case-

"Contention 1"

1- We can assume this will not happen because the conditions for its implementation are perfect, thus this will not happen.

2- Even if an individual state has a lower standard than another individual state it doesnt change the fact that the well performing schools of the state will be rewarded when the bad performing schools will not. Creating the competition within states motivates teachers to teach the standards better.
- These standards are key to ensuring each and every student learns what is essential for success later on.

"Contention 2"

1. The only reason teaching to the test doesnt work is because the kids are resistant to it. By using the standards as a guideline, what kids need to learn will be learned. The only way to ensure the whole nations kids are learning the same things is by making national standards that all kids have to learn.

2. The only alternative is the let teachers have free reign. This means that nationally we will have no uniformity and what the kids on the west coast learn can be completely different than that of the east coast. As a nation we need to know certain things, and standards make this happen.

It's clear that NCLB would be beneficial in a perfect world. If kids werent allowed to move schools if their school sucked they would be stuck in the bad school. NCLB is the only thing that does that. Standards are also key to national uniformity on what our youth knows, directed learning can happen in college.

Adios
Logical-Master

Con

============================================================================
PRO'S CASE
============================================================================

RE: "His later arguments concede my argument that we should look at the perfect implementation of NCLB, this would mean that the citizens of the country are no longer resistant to NCLB."

False. People looking at NCLB in a negative light is not part of the process to undergo NCLB just as people looking at taxation in a negative light is not part of the process to undergo taxation. NCLB is simply a system which uses standardized testing to bring about everyone getting a good education. Basically, PRO's logic is comparable to saying that a critic's distaste for a film in particular is a flaw in the film itself.

RE: "The word ideal in the resolution means that we have to imagine that NCLB was implemented perfectly and we have to look to the effects of NCLB on America in a world post implementation."

Agreed. And even implemented perfectly, it still does not bring about the results it attempts to bring about much like mercury treatment would not bring about a cure for syphilis (which, my opponent incidentally provides no response to). The moral of the story is that perfect means do not guarantee perfect results. You can ideally hit punch yourself in the face in attempt to make your brain tougher and smarter, but that doesn't mean you will get your results.

============================================================================
MY CASE
============================================================================

REBUTTALS FOR CONTENTION #1:

"RE: 1- We can assume this will not happen because the conditions for its implementation are perfect, thus this will not happen."

We can assume no such thing. Just see my other examples concerning "ideal methods" for proof.

RE:"2- Even if an individual state has a lower standard than another individual state it doesnt change the fact that the well performing schools of the state will be rewarded when the bad performing schools will not. Creating the competition within states motivates teachers to teach the standards better.
- These standards are key to ensuring each and every student learns what is essential for success later on."

Um . . . so basically, well performing schools who only perform well due to manipulating standards(i.e. lowering them) shall be rewarded? PRO does nothing more than prove my point. Well performing schools shall be rewarded for lowering their standards whereas schools who keep their standards raised shall not be rewarded and shall hence have to enter this "competition" which motivates teachers to lower their standards. This in turn shall cause the students to suffer in terms of education and the US will become even more of a laughing stock in terms of education.

REBUTTALS FOR CONTENTION #2:

RE:"1. The only reason teaching to the test doesnt work is because the kids are resistant to it. By using the standards as a guideline, what kids need to learn will be learned. The only way to ensure the whole nations kids are learning the same things is by making national standards that all kids have to learn."

No, as established by my factual evidence, teaching to the test doesn't work because kids are less likely to truly comprehend the material. Teaching to the test encourages kids to make use of their memorization skills.

As far as using the "standards" as a guideline goes, teachers are already given standards and are well aware of them. However, the fact of the matter is that with NCLB, they are also well aware of the tests (and have to be in order to NCLB to be implemented) and also well aware of the fact that their careers rely on their teaching performance. National standards or not, this problem is STILL going to remain an issue.

RE: "2. The only alternative is the let teachers have free reign. This means that nationally we will have no uniformity and what the kids on the west coast learn can be completely different than that of the east coast. As a nation we need to know certain things, and standards make this happen."

NCLB already allows free reign (in terms of all states defining the standards for the test). I won't accuse my opponent of anything just yet,but above, he insisted that the US should have national standards. Now, he is insisting that there should be no uniformity and that each state should be able to adhere to its own guidelines. How do these assertions not contradict each other?

In any case, as suggested above, uniformity doesn't change anything. The inherent variable of NCLB (having to rely on standardized tests, hence having to teach by them) is the problem and there is nothing in PRO's case which undermines this.

============================================================================
CONCLUSION
============================================================================

RE: It's clear that NCLB would be beneficial in a perfect world."

Whether or not it would be beneficial in a perfect world, we have no reason to believe that this debate concerns a perfect world (I see nothing in the resolution that states "In an IDEAL world . . ."). In fact, we have plenty of reason to believe otherwise.

RE:"If kids werent allowed to move schools if their school sucked they would be stuck in the bad school."

People already have the freedom to choose what kinds of schools they wish to go to.

RE: "Standards are also key to national uniformity on what our youth knows, directed learning can happen in college."

1) Not everyone goes to college (for various reasons that don't just concern knowledge/education).
2) My opponent has one round to clarify on this in his next round (as I suspect this as being a contradiction) before I respond further.

And that'll do it for now.

PS: I was gonna provide another argument, but it looks like I'm outta time. Fortunately, it wasn't necessary.
Debate Round No. 2
fresnoinvasion

Pro

Cool

Overview-

Many issues have been discussed throughout this debate, but a single issue makes it so that voting pro is the only way to go. As a judge you must remember that we are discussing the implementation of an ideal form of NCLB, not the current form. The fundamentals of NCLB are what is being debated here today and in this round I will prove the fundamentals are strong. Through presenting a modified form of the current system we will see that this ideal form of NCLB will benefit society.

The argument-

One argument went massively undercovered by my opponent and he loses because of it. Maybe you should have provided that additional argument, too bad its too late now.

NCLB ensures students can move schools if their school performs at a lower standard than other schools in the district. The only argument against this was that "People already have the freedom to choose what kinds of schools they wish to go to" and sure, they can choose whether they go to a private or public school. However, not every American can pay to go to a private school. The determining factor on where you are placed for schooling is where you live. The individual has no say in what school they go to. This means if a school performs poorly compared to the others in the district that individual is stuck in the bad school and their future is hindered in the process. Making people go to a school that will not help their future is a horrible thing for the government to do, not everyone can just move their house/apartment because they want to move schools. NCLB ensures students can switch schools if the school performs poorly on the standarized tests. An ideal for of NCLB would have national standards that each school is tested on at the same time each year. Schools that perform well are rewarded by the federal government, schools that perform poorly are not; and all students that attend the poor performing schools will be given the opportunity to switch to a well performing school. Because I have proven that this one part of NCLB is a good thing, I win the debate round. Because I have proven that NCLB has at least one good thing, this means an ideal form will have that part and only that part utilized. Too bad you undercovered the argument and can't make new arguments in the last round. You had adequate time to rebut the argument and you refused to do so. Judges, hold him to only that one sentence rebuttal he gave, he had his chance, don't let him make a bunch of new arguments that I can't respond to.

All of the issues dealing with the standardized tests no longer exist because the ideal form of NCLB will be free of those problems. The ideal form of NCLB will be a national test that rewards the well performing schools of the individual areas. The rewarding will be relative on the schools in a certain area. Only the top certain percentile will be rewarded by the federal government. Because the test is national there will be no lowering of standards in individual states.

The standardized tests are the only way you can measure a school against another and are therefore necessary. Being that the tests are only in the core areas, schools can still have other classes and focus on other things. When creativity is beneficially, some things are necessary for all American children to learn. The ideal form of NCLB will only test the bare standards of what students need to learn and leave time for other subjects to be taught.

When its so obvious that an ideal form of NCLB will be beneficial to society, you have no choice but to vote pro.
Logical-Master

Con

===========
PRO'S CASE |
===========

PRO drops everything regarding "ideal = perfect".

==========
My case |
==========

PRO drops my whole case entirely and readjusts his argument around a statement he made in the conclusion section of the previous round.

===================
PRO's New main argument |
===================

RE: "One argument went massively under covered by my opponent and he loses because of it. "

If my opponent is by chance referring to the one or two isolated statements he made in the conclusion (which had nothing to do with what he had claimed to be his contentions or rebuttal to my contentions) of his previous round, I hardly see any "massive under covering", giving that I addressed this with an isolated statement of my own. In addition, please note that my opponent chose not to expand on this isolated statement until this round. His protestations concerning me not being allowed to respond to his change in arguments are at best absurd and are hence not worthy of any serious consideration.

RE: "NCLB ensures students can move schools if their school performs at a lower standard than other schools in the district."

As does the current system. The only difference is that NCLB would be more likely to encourage it. Given that I've already established that schools with "better performance/standards" are more likely to be schools which simply lower the level of education (note that PRO has completely has completely dropped my contentions), this really matters little.

RE: However, not every American can pay to go to a private school."

Very true, but irrelevant as NCLB isn't a program which pays for students to get into private schools. Private school institutions are not covered by NCLB, given that it is a government employed program (not to mention that even if it did pay for students to get into private schools, it would no doubt cost a great deal of money--as we're talking 2000-5000 dollars per school year per student on average).

RE: "The individual has no say in what school they go to."

As long as it is a public school, they have plenty of say. If any government funded school administration attempted to deny the students on most bases, the student could take the school in question to the courts and sue them to oblivion for not abiding by the constitutional provided rights. This is currently happening with colleges who are denying certain students on the basis of affirmative action.

RE: "An ideal for of NCLB would have national standards that each school is tested on at the same time each year"

Since PRO did not answer my question in my previous round, I must address this as a direct contradiction to one of rebuttals in the previous round. Previously, he insisted that national uniformity be abolished and that states be inclined to have their own standards. In the same round, he also insisted that the US uphold national standards. Therefore, this statement which I am responding to fails on the basis that it violates the law of non contradiction.

Even if we are to ignore this contradiction, I must yet again point out that having national standards does not in any way solve the problem and that is teachers as well as school administration having ample motive to lower the level of education and make it easier for students to succeed (which again, is backed up by my empirical data cited in Round 1). No child being left behind is meaningless if the result is lower level education.

RE: "Because I have proven that this one part of NCLB is a good thing, I win the debate round. Because I have proven that NCLB has at least one good thing, . . ."

Not only has PRO not proven that any single good thing comes from NCLB (as students already have the ability to transfer schools on their own free will and pointing students to schools that are likely to have lowered the level of their education in order get better funding is by no means good giving that the result is poor education . . . a result which students who are currently "left behind" succumb to), but even if he did, this wouldn't grant him victory for two reasons:

1) Nowhere in any previous round did he insist that nearly needed to prove that NCLB had at least one good thing for it. This is something he decided to mention in the most recent round alone.

2) Refer back to a statement he made in R2:

PRO: "The debate comes down to whether or not the fundamentals of NCLB are good."

Notice the term fundamentalS as well as the use of the verb "are." This clearly implies that PRO is referring to more than a single good. In addition, he means to refer to NCLB in its entirety. This is not the implication that a single part of it is good.

RE: ". . . this means an ideal form will have that part and only that part utilized."

PRO never bothers to explain why we would be lead to this conclusion. In addition, NCLB cannot exist without the use of standardized test (this is how schools are supposedly determined to have "low performance" in the first place)(and again, please refer back to the inherent problems I cite with heavy emphasis on standardized testing), thus his reasoning is clearly erroneous.

RE:"All of the issues dealing with the standardized tests no longer exist because the ideal form of NCLB will be free of those problems."

Nah. The problems I've cited are inherently part of NCLB. You cannot get rid of them without getting rid of NCLB. Not to mention that I crushed this faulty reasoning with my mercury example (which PRO has yet to even ATTEMPT to respond to).

RE: "The ideal form of NCLB will be a national test that rewards the well performing schools of the individual areas. . . . because the test is national there will be no lowering of standards in individual states."

Ignoring the fact that PRO decided not to argue this until this round (hence new argument):

1) In the words of the immortal NOK_Domination, "The 10th amendment says that any power not given to the national government is a reserved power given to the states. This would include setting the standard, especially education. This is unconstitutional and invites the government to take away other freedoms.

2) This ignores my other contention; this ignores the fact that teachers still have the incentive to teach "to the test", hence still lowering the scale of education.

RE: "The standardized tests are the only way you can measure a school against another and are therefore necessary."

Necessary in terms of gathering statistical data? That is arguable. In terms of achieving the goals which NCLB desires? Not at all. Japan, Finland as well as the rest of the countries rated in the top 10 seem to do just fine without NCLB. By no means is NCLB and its absurd methods necessary.

RE: "The ideal form of NCLB will only test the bare standards of what students need to learn and leave time for other subjects to be taught."

Ignoring the fact that this is a new argument: It doesn't matter. The argument against NCLB is that it lowers the level of education via poor teaching and manipulative schooling. The test dealing with less subjects (specifically, the "bare subjects") will simply make the process easier and more frequent.

CONCLUSION:

1) Pay special attention to PRO's drops, switching the emphasis of his case as well as the two crucial contradictions which he makes.
2) NCLB provides the incentive to lower the level of education (both by states lowering standards and by teachers teaching to the test)(also, PRO's round 3 alternative to the 1st problem is unconstitutional). Essentially, no one gets left behind, but at the same time, no one really benefits from education.

And that's about all I see of significant importance. Vote CON! :D
Debate Round No. 3
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by Kleptin 7 years ago
Kleptin
C: I found PRO's small casual outbursts to be a bit jarring. In addition, PRO made a modification in his argument revolving around the notions of a "ideal" plan. CON was far more organized and had no such problems. However, I will make this TIED because I find my small nitpicks to be slightly biased.
S&G: No hideous spelling discrepancies on either side. TIED.
A: CON by far had the better arguments. Not only did he provide counterpoints that were right on the mark, he correctly identified many of his opponent's flaws, whereas PRO came off weaker in responding to those counterpoints. Like CON mentioned early on, PRO began to dull the line between "ideal world" and "ideal NCLB plan" and it was painfully visible because he made references to "an ideal world". PRO's final statement was also not strong enough to withstand CON's ending rebuttal. Points go to CON.
S: CON was the only one to cite sources.
Posted by Featherfromhell 7 years ago
Featherfromhell
logical master sucks
Posted by Maikuru 7 years ago
Maikuru
It took me a while to get around to this rather long debate but I'm glad I did. A rewording of Pro's position would have served him well but as it stands, Con did his job.
Posted by HeedMyFeed 7 years ago
HeedMyFeed
Will get my ballot in tomorrow night or maybe even tonight.
Posted by McBain 7 years ago
McBain
Round 3, Pro's stance changes and makes some crazy and unsubstantiated claims.

Almost all fundamentals of an IDEAL form of NCLB are flawed. Maybe the intended goals could be right, but NCLB in no way achieves them.

Much better arguements on Con.

Vote con!
Posted by Yraelz 7 years ago
Yraelz
Mercury Example FTW~!
Posted by fresnoinvasion 7 years ago
fresnoinvasion
I'd answer the arguments that you somehow found necessary to post, but im sure lm will make similar arguments.
Posted by McBain 7 years ago
McBain
I would ague just the opposite. Standardized testing has been shown to be a poor measure of students intelligence and bottlenecks a school's curriculum. No child left behind places value on fact regurgitation and teaching to the test, not for understanding and comprehension. It places no value on the arts, athletics/extra-curriculars, nor does it value critical thinking, and comprehension of the material being taught. On top of that, after it has beaten all creativity and thinking out of students, it punishes schools for poor performance by removing support and funding from them. Even if un-intended, following your "fundamental" implementation of "no child" has the PROVEN effect of causing disadvantaged schools such as inner city schools to be punished and have funding cuts (sometimes closing schools causing students to need to relocate). These schools should be receiving MORE aid, and not having its capabilities further slashed.

It is, and ALWAYS will be an a ss backward policy.
11 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Kleptin 7 years ago
Kleptin
fresnoinvasionLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Clockwork 7 years ago
Clockwork
fresnoinvasionLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Tatarize 7 years ago
Tatarize
fresnoinvasionLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
fresnoinvasionLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by falafel 7 years ago
falafel
fresnoinvasionLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by JBlake 7 years ago
JBlake
fresnoinvasionLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by fresnoinvasion 7 years ago
fresnoinvasion
fresnoinvasionLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Featherfromhell 7 years ago
Featherfromhell
fresnoinvasionLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by VoodooChildJr 7 years ago
VoodooChildJr
fresnoinvasionLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by studentathletechristian8 7 years ago
studentathletechristian8
fresnoinvasionLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07