The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
4 Points

High school students should have to pass a national exit exam to graduate

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/12/2014 Category: Education
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,666 times Debate No: 65020
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (4)
Votes (1)




1st round if for acceptance.
Debate Round No. 1


1st of I would life to give the definition of the High school Exit Exam: "The California High School Exit Examination, or CAHSEE, is a test that every student in California must pass before they receive their high school diploma. This test was developed in response to concerns over students graduating high school without the basic skills they would need to succeed in the workforce or in college."
2nd)The main reason why schools give an exit exam is to cover all material that has been covered through the kids high schools years. It lets the Board of Governors of the school to know how well children are doing, its also a way to know if a child needs help in a certain subject. If a kid doesn't pass the exam, they shouldn't be able to continue and go into college unless they pass it. When you fail the test, obviously they are struggling and if we let them continue and go to college they are just going to have a much harder time and they will be taught stuff that wont make sense to them just like in the exam.


The problem with national examinations is that it would place authorities over examination to the federal government. Many things that our Founders fought for were to eliminate things about central government. The ideal government was to restrict federal government to war and defense. Many things were to be restricted to the state. Every state has their way of preparing kids for the future. Why trample that? Why not let control of education be to the states and citizens. Federal government, if it has too much power, can take on a God complex. We've seen happen in foreign countries. So, no. I don't believe there should be a national exam. It would just make the states unhappy.
Debate Round No. 2


This debate isn't as much as a national issue but more of "Should they take the test?"
Either way they should, to review key concepts that they have went over and to make sure they have a grasp on all the things they have learned. What if they continue and go to college and don't understand a single thing because they didn't take the test that would prepare them?


But the whole issues tie into kids taking it.
Every state has a different program which deals with preparing young minds for the future. Some believe in statewide testing. Others might have other ways. You also have to take into account private schools vs public schools. How about the parents who teach their kids?

Tests also should not even be completely the part. Sure, tests are part of it.

National exams would also be too costly.

We have to be pragmatic about education.
Debate Round No. 3


Most schools teach all the same subjects such as common edu like English, math and history. It doesn't have to do with schools teaching different things it has to do with what they know and what they have learned.
Here are just some objectives of the test. "Students know what is expected and that the test really counts, so they work harder.
"Schools identify and can address student weaknesses early.
"Similarly, schools discover areas of overall weakness, prompting them to refocus resources where they are most needed.
"Education across the state is more consistent, eliminating situations where schools in some districts are superior to others.
"The public sees gains from year to year and regains confidence in public schools.
Source used


That's not what I mean. Obviously schools teach common subjects. However, every school implements policies. Some believe in testings. Others don't. Why should schools who believe in testing what their ways imposed on schools that don't. It's not fair, and it's also unfair to the kids going to the schools.

Thank you for the debate.
Debate Round No. 4
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by JayConar 1 year ago
@theonenothere There is no need to call people derogatory things because they have a different opinion to you. If that is how you plan to live your life then I suggest you leave this site as you're going to come across a lot of people whom you disagree with.

@Lee001 There is no need to take yourself down to the level of people who attempt to offend you by replying to them. Ignore it and you'll find that everybody else will ignore it too, or side with you. Having said that, if you are going to reply to them on matters such as education, take your time to check spelling, grammar and punctuation.

Your = Possessive
Examples: May I borrow your calculator.
Of course, I understand your need for it.

You're = Shortened version of 'you are'
Example = You're short sighted?
Yes, you're very perceptive.
Posted by Lee001 1 year ago
Obviously your stupid cause you don't want to take a test to prove you learned something.
Posted by Adam2isback 1 year ago
Hey. Lee001 is not stupid, even I disagree with her.
Posted by theonenothere 1 year ago
ok im not going to take a national exam to pass high school. there are diferent schools that teach different things and ways. lee001 you are stupid to state this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by JayConar 1 year ago
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 Checkmark-1 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: Pro fails to rebut Con's argument, instead attempting to claim that Con was being irrelevant when he was not. Ironically, with Pro being pro-national exit exam, I found it hard to understand what she was attempting to say for large portions of her argument, this was due to her rather difficult to understand sentence structure and spelling. Both Pro and Con attempted to use sources.