The Instigator
andreiranisav
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Relativist
Pro (for)
Winning
15 Points

Geographical proximity as a criteria for admission into high school

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Relativist
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/8/2014 Category: Education
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,027 times Debate No: 48683
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (3)

 

andreiranisav

Con

This parliament wants to introduce the geographical proximity as a criteria for admission into high school.This means that it wants to change the actual criteria(which is an exam after finishing the 8th grade).As you can see,there are a lot of con/against argument for this motion(like equality,the right to choose,impracticability and so on). I would really want to hear some pro arguments because I need them...
Relativist

Pro

I'd like to thank andreiranisav and his opposition backbenches for the challenge, Aye, My imaginary parliament, wishes to pursue this reform as a viable criterion for admission in high schools in LaLa land. As you all know, a sizeable majority of my constituents wants the law introduced apart from other criteria. Here is our argument, and may the opposition be wise to give their full support.

From what I understand, the resolution is unclear as con did not outline which criteria to be eliminated or adopted by my policy makers. Since the resolution suggests that "geographical proximity as criteria", we will adopt the position of justifying just that and argue how geographical importance justifies as a additional condition in admission policies. Our position is pro so we will start with our argument first while the opposition's duty is to denounce our argument.

The addition of Geographical importance EASES student admissions

The Henrietta Barnett School's admission policy uses geographical proximity, as stated in their website
" In the event that candidates are equally ranked, the following criteria will be used to decide the final placings...geographical proximity to the School as measured by the London Borough of Barnet. "(1)

I for one, as well my backbenches fully endorse these decisions. If you had to pick between 2 students of which have the same education attainment, same ECA(Extra Curricular Activities) attainments, same physical attributes, which one would it be? Do you judge them because you don't 'like' them in this case, because you don't like the way their personalities are? That"s a very subjective way of evaluating.

By using a geographical compass, it is the only way to objectively measure which student to enrol. It will be tough for schools, should they eliminate the criterion, they may resort to social backgrounds, racial profiling, all of which are discriminative in nature. Even if they were to make judgements, it is very subjective as what is indecent to me could not be indecent to you. It is prudent for schools to adopt an objective approach in enrolling students as subjective approaches are nothing but bias. It is important to recognize the value of being objective, as this is the only way to be FAIR.

Furthermore, there are thousands of variables to be taken into account. There are testimonies by previous schools to be considered, should one school opted for the discriminative nature, what then, or how do you justify your choice in enrolling them?

The easiest way is the obvious,
GEOGRAPHICAL proximity.

Sources
(1)http://www.hbschool.org.uk...
Debate Round No. 1
andreiranisav

Con

andreiranisav forfeited this round.
Relativist

Pro

Con forfeited, I've spent an hour for my argument in R1, the sources were extremely difficult to find.
ARGUMENTS EXTENDED



Debate Round No. 2
andreiranisav

Con

andreiranisav forfeited this round.
Relativist

Pro

Arguments Extended
Debate Round No. 3
andreiranisav

Con

andreiranisav forfeited this round.
Relativist

Pro

I extend all arguments
Debate Round No. 4
andreiranisav

Con

andreiranisav forfeited this round.
Relativist

Pro

Con forfeited all his rounds without producing a single argument.
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Blade-of-Truth 3 years ago
Blade-of-Truth
Lol, looks like he's forfeiting all of his rounds in your debate. I just finished mine with him and it was the same thing.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Blade-of-Truth 3 years ago
Blade-of-Truth
andreiranisavRelativistTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct - Pro, because of FF by Con. S & G - Pro, because Con made grammatical errors in opening statement. Argument - Pro, he actually presented an argument. Sources- Pro, he was the only one to use sources.
Vote Placed by Actionsspeak 3 years ago
Actionsspeak
andreiranisavRelativistTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Raisor 3 years ago
Raisor
andreiranisavRelativistTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con FF