Is a student's score on the SAT or ACT good enough to predict their future success?
Debate Rounds (5)
1-The first thing that i will argue is that the reason math and english are the only things tested for is because all other furture careers and even simple jobs now and even college class all include some type of math and english. For intanse a lawyer as you said does not need math but when he is in a case defending an acused murderer and they asked for an allabi or even the what he did that day the logic course that is test in math can help us understand which statements are true and which are false and they use numbers for the time and date so having a backround in math is useful for anyone. Also outside his job he needs to buy thing he will need to know how to calculate his spendings. lastly he would need some math to find out how much people owe him after each job he takes. I agree that at some points its complex but don't you think the harder the roblem the more effort someone will put into it to solve it and that concept in itself helps many. English on the other hand is used everywhere.
2-I agree some students are smart and some aren't but I don't think that it is fair that both students end up having the same future because there wasn't a test to seperate ranks. The SAT/ACT are test that destinguish students who are smart from thse who aren't and give everyone a fair and equal chance to determine what they will study. As for the student who are bad at exams there are many options for them because they would show that they are really smart at some college by keeping there GPA high and distinguishing themselves from those who don't study at all. Now you said that it doesn't show there work ethics but i will disagree. First the amount of time some one puts to study for this exam is alot and i can say it is almost equivilent to someone who is working. The work ethics part is how well a student uses that time and how much knowledge does he or she gain. If a students study habits are good then we can fairly asume that he will do good in the exam compared to those who don't even try to study. Since much of the college success is dependent on work and study ethics don't you agree that the SAT/ACT prepared the students well and gave them the knowledge of what to expect in college. Since his profomance has met his expectations of college can we not say that his success is currently on the run and will even be more astounding in the future. The average typical student has a chance to show his talent by working hard if he is serious about his future. If I took the SAT and did not do so well I can still get into college and expect the worst since I got an understanding of what it might be through the SAT so I would better prepare myself for college and show off my talent. Now if a student took it and didn't well and just gave up we can already asume that he didn't have that feeling of improving and preparing himself so he can prove how good he really is. Smart or dum if a student doesn't try he won't get any where and success doesn't come to those to don't seek it. So the SAT can be seen as a gate toward a successful future only to those who seek it.
2-I don't know what the funding has to do with the SAT/ACT because everyone no matter where they are if they promote themselves to the thought that we don't get funded so its logical for me to fail is wrong. If they truly want to prove themselves even in these condition we can see that they will be in the top and thanks to the SAT they will be able to get scholarships to go to college. An example would be a female lawyer that came in the first year convocation she is from Newark and she was able to study and show her potential she got through the SAT good/or bad mark doesn't matter(as i mentioned before even though you do bad because you are bad at exams if you still have the spark of proving yourself then you should eventually get where you want to be in college) pass through college and now is the top lawyer in her law firm. I don't think exams a made to have bias because depending where you are there will always be problems. If you live in Newark then it only logical that the people won't be able to supply the city with funds like Wayne. Another thing is if that still makes you think the exams are bias. People from the poor areas like Newark get funded by federal government more than some poor guy from Paterson. Also if think about it in that way they still give a chance to those from Newark to go to college and it all depends on the person what they are going to do. So again the SAT/ACT only separates those who want to excel from those who don't try to.
3- I like that you agree with me that these test are to test student to succeed in the future and i also am glad you said that college are for people who want to learn which again proves my point that the SAT separates those who want to learn from those who don't. Again its true that colleges look at the score but it doesn't mean that those who don't score can't get into college it only means when they get into college they have to try much harder to show there talent. No one will question how one acts or applies knowledge in his daily life but they will question the results of his actions, which again leads back to my previous argument that the SAT is the results of your effort a person puts into studying in that persons daily life and studying to gain knowledge is duty. This statement breaks down the only skill of these tests you mentioned before "it demonstrates primarily one skill: The ability to take tests." The reason for that is you neglect all the work done to even take this test. The ability to study, the way you ask questions for something you don't understand, the ability to organize your time, and many more that i don't have time to explain. So if people only wanted to know how to take a test its easy just go to the test center and sit down in a chair, hold a pencil and begin putting down your answers on a sheet of paper until the time is up. I believe every one can take exams but some depending on the amount they studied excel and do better than others. The abilities you stated also are there when the person goes to a college for an interview. This test helps every student (who want to be successful focus) on that goal rather than be distract by those who are carefree and don't want to learn. I can assure you anyone who is carefree won't get into college and carefree meaning they want to party all the time without a thought about there future, people who do not pursue knowledge. "No test can show whether a prospective student has, or is going to develop, true life skills. I was also looking at a article and it talked about race and it stated that Caucasians will tend to do better on these standardized exams than African Americans will do." this was what you said but if we don't have a standardized exam like the SAT how can we test our true like skills? anyone who is walks the path toward a successful life will do anything to achieve it and to achieve it he will study and to prove that he is more skilled than his competition he would like a test to prove that he tried and is knowledgeable and can continue toward a great future but we can't do that and we can't distinguish which students tried and which didn't without the SAT/ACT and the results of this will give college an idea of what type of student they are expecting and how this student will do. Not that students who don't do well don't have the same chance they just need to try harder. The SAT does not truly determines the chance of success it is just an exam that distinguishes students and in this way colleges can pick the students and give them opportunities aka scholarships. The same opportunities can be given to student who don't do well on the exams. An answer to your question is we can't judge anyone but ourselves if we want to be successful then we shouldn't let anything stand in our way and take down every prob;em one by one.
The first question is yes if a student even after doing bad in the SAT exams tries to be better in college I can guarantee you he will be successful.
The second question hell no even I know if they are not studying they can't get higher than an F in high school , college or the SAT exams.
If a students want to improve and tries to improve and is determined to change this habit of his then hell ya he can do it. So stop repeating yourself and get back to the main argument of SAT/ACT.
2-To answer your second question can people who know more than others be known as more knowledgeable than others? if so the fact that they are more knowledgeable makes them smarter than others and don't people in the modern time refer to someone who knows more about something smart because he is a smarter at than them in that field? how about tutors if they are not smarter than me then why should I seek there help? I only want to learn from people who are smarter than me. Even though this isn't relevant to this debate I will still prove this point. People have to be smarter than others in life so others can learn from them and work hard to become smart. An example a teacher teaching his class English.
3-For the next question you have "third is yes you are right people can take exam and do well but why do you need to take an exam to prove to a school whether or not you can apply yourself." Well lets take a moment to think about this point if people didn't need to prove to schools that they can apply themselves then people who don't know how to apply themselves have the same opportunity as those who worked hard and really tried. this isn't fair because people who don't try and don't deserve to be in the same position as other students who do deserve stole these spots that could of been for the student who are well equipped to be in them. This is the same as what your trying to point out with the SAT and having the exam is a minor problem compared to the problem we would have without the exam.
4-With all do respect you keep getting off topic we are jumping from studying one exam to many other topics I will prove you wrong in this point too. There are people in this world that work all the time to support themselves and don't have time for anything except to study and work and that is there business we have no right to say that someone studies too much and one reason would be they might enjoy the feeling of success and want it. another is that those who study and are successful have a great social life in the future. Even now I have friends who enjoy themselves at work and school and these are social environments so everyone has a social life no matter how we look at it. When you start an argument please stay under topic other wise the minute you go off topic you lose.
To address your second argument. Intelligence itself is not a measurement of success. All the knowledge in the world is meaningless unless it can be applied to some human condition. Therefore those individuals that can be labeled as successful or valuable to society are those that are most efficient at applying knowledge. Therefore an exam such as the SAT's are not a good measure for predicting future success since they do not measure your abilities to apply knowledge to human conditions
Your third argument can easily be refuted by simple statistical significance; your performance throughout high school reveals much more information about your overall skills than an exam taken at one point in time.
To close my argument the SAT's and ACT's test a very limited skill-set. Although Math, English and Writing are necessary to be efficient in a work environment mastering them does not prohibit you from becoming an important and efficient member to society. For example a singer, a song writer, a performer, an athlete, a construction worker, a farmer, a truck driver, etc. These professions are undeniably valued by society, but high scores on the SAT's / ACT's cannot predict your ability to succeed in them.
Finally I would like to state that my argument was the best because I provided you with concrete information on why SAT's and ACT's should not be a factor in determining someone's success in the future. As I stated before, SAT's and ACT's do not make the success of a person in the future. It is still impossible to continue to base scores from an exam that is only taken once in your life that really is not going to serve you any justification in the end because when you enter college you still have a lot of other exams that you will take that will further test your ability to know the information that is covered and furthermore as your prepare to go into your major you will have the ability to put forth all that knowledge that you learned and showcase it but it does not have to always be in the form of an exam, such as the SAT's and or the ACT'S. I hope that you can clearly see my reasoning on why I am against your thought or reasoning of, a student's score on the SAT or ACT being good enough to predict their future success? Thank you again for taking the time to voice you pros and reason on why you believe that it should be. Well the only thing to do now is wait to see who is going to win this debate.
I agree with your point about my argument but you are forgetting you can't take a test without information. if a test was only test us on how we take it then I don't think people really need to study because they aren't being tested on there knowledge. So for this reason tests test our ability to learn and study. We apply what we learned and studied on these tests to show people that we have knowledge.
As for the second argument without any type of intelligence there is no possibility of success. A mechanic who has no knowledge about cars will never be successful. If some can apply something in their lives that means they have knowledge therefore with knowledge comes there intelligence.
Again concluding everything I said, the SAT/ACT does not determine our future just a test to put us in college and separates those who study from those who don't and it also enlightens us on what college will feel like.
1-The con did not explain himself clearly even though he thought he did.
2-The con kept going off topic and did not stay consistent with his initial argument
3-the con agreed with most of what I mention and did not make a strong comeback nor give precise examples of his view.
4- My points were only based on common sense and reasoning. My arguments were unquestioned and even though my opponent went off topic.
I enjoyed this debate but I will have to say that I urge my opponent to stay under topic and explain more so I can understand your point. I believe that my argument was stronger due to the fact I pointed out every flaw in the cons arguments and stated my reasons clearly. Used examples to further increase understanding to the con. lastly I debated everything and connected it back to the main topic. Thank you I hope you all vote for who every gave the strongest debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.