The Instigator
dvhoose
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Yraelz
Con (against)
Winning
21 Points

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

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...
Yraelz
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/24/2009 Category: Education
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,423 times Debate No: 7539
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (3)

 

dvhoose

Pro

I'd like to wish my opponent luck. Due to a previous meeting, I know I can expect some great arguments :) That said, let's get onto the case...

DEFINITIONS:

ideal- a conception of something in its perfection.

CONTENTIONS-

1) NCLB is already proving successful

"Spellings also said big gains on the 2004 National Assessment of Educational Progress show the law is working. The nation's 9-year-olds posted their best reading and math scores in more than 30 years on the test, sometimes referred to as the nation's report card." [1]

2) NCLB has good intentions

"Ronald Forster, a Georgia lawmaker, said he and several other state legislators recently sat down with her to discuss the negative response to No Child Left Behind. Mr. Forster said he asked Ms. Spellings why the act asked for an unobtainable 100 percent graduation rate.

‘Why not have a high goal like 95 percent? Something more reasonable,' he said. ‘She looked at me and said, "OK – who do you want to leave behind?"'" [1]

I'm running short on time, so I'll leave it at this. But first, an analysis.

When we see that NCLB has good intentions, that it aims to make America a better, more prosperous nation, coupled with the facts that we're seeing results stemming from NCLB, creating an ideal from of NCLB would rid it of problems and allow the good to shine brighter than ever before.

Good intentions + Ideal policy = Amazing results.

--SOURCES--
[1] http://www.ed.gov...
Yraelz

Con

I wish my opponent luck also. And nice job on our last debate by the way.

First I think we're going to need a few more definitions:
1. NCLB - A program aimed at improving student performance in schools.
2. Beneficial - Better than the status quo. A step up.

Let's look at my opponents contentions.
=========================
1. My opponent basically points out that NCLB right now appears to be doing a really great job. I'd argue this analysis may have some flaws in it but I'll do that in just a little bit.

2. Secondly my opponent argues that NCLB has good intentions. In fact he cites the 100% graduation rate example. Thus the ideal form, the form in it's perfection, would indeed achieve a 100% graduation rate. Unfortunately this is a little bit problematic.

a. The problem with NCLB, even in it's perfection, is that it simply targets the wrong things. NCLB has a goal of 100% graduation rate. It has a goal of improving student test scores..... Unfortunately NCLB never focuses on the nations youth, rather simply students. Thus the first problem with this system is that many youth simply get excluded from the system. In fact schools, in order to meet test scores, will expel the low performing students. The low performing students are often the ones that also disobey many of the rules, thus expelling them is but a simple task. And the best part? At the point where they aren't students anymore NCLB doesn't have to make them graduate or do anything about them. Thus under an ideal form of NCLB we would only see more expulsions from school in order to meet the 100% criteria. I would argue that this is far less beneficial than the status quo because it would mean that less people are educated in our society. This functions as an effectual turn on my opponents first and second contentions.
And here is a source that discusses this problem: http://www.helium.com...
I'll find a few more for my next speech also.

b. Additionally though there exists yet another problem. This problem would be that NCLB defines it's success based on the test scores which it initiates. However the standards for students can and are being changed all the time. This poses the exact same problem as in my a point. Schools will literally make their criteria easier in order to meet the goals set out in NCLB and will make their criteria easier in order to spend more time teaching towards the tests in order to meet the goals. While NCLB in it's ideal may very well meet it's goals in it's perfection there is still a loophole in which institutions can literally change their strategies in order to meet those goals. Sadly these strategy changes in many cases actually hamper the education of our students and once again would simply make the current problem worse under an ideal. Thus we once again see a move away from the beneficial.

I think as far as offense goes this is probably enough for the time being. However I would like to go into a little more detail on what exactly NCLB is.

No Child Left Behind is a federal program. Keep the federal part of that in mind. Under NCLB the federal government will cut funding to states and schools that do not meet the standards. Thus an ideal form of NCLB would perfect the approach from the federal government side of things. However NCLB is not a state program thus NCLB doesn't actually mandate state's do anything. Nor does it mandate schools do anything. In fact we can look at Utah as the best example of this. Utah simply rejected the NCLB program and now doesn't receive as much federal funding. Thus under the ideal program it would still be very possible for states to reject the ideal form of NCLB. In fact I'd argue that the ideal from would just make things harder on states and would actually lead to more states rejecting NCLB. Sadly this leads to less money for education.

With that I'll close for now. I wish my opponent luck. Hopefully I gave a bunch of other random debaters good ideas also.
Debate Round No. 1
dvhoose

Pro

Thanks you :)

I'll go ahead an accept my opponent's definitions.

As for my opponents contentions...

a) He claims that an ideal form of NCLB would see an increase in expulsion rates because schools are feeling the pressure to pass these tests. However, this isn't the case. Whenever you have an ideal form of anything, it's perfect. It neither relies too heavily nor too little upon the test scores. Right now, I think most would agree that the pressures applied on schools to pass tests, and the punishment for lack thereof, is a little high/harsh. Once an ideal form is implemented, schools won't have as much as a burden and school could actually become that fun, engaging place it was intended to be. When school becomes a more inviting place, as opposed to one of boring lectures and simply copying notes, students will become more engaged, and in turn, do better on tests. One of NCLB's goals is to provide quality, qualified teachers to all schools, and ideally, this would happen. Ideally, NCLB would accomplish all of it's goals, thus benefiting the welfare of the U.S

b) NCLB tests are measured against standards, I'll grant that. But these standards are based upon a curriculum that allows students to survive in the "real world". A twelve part study that offers the skills necessary to get a job and provide for a family. However schools need to teach said standards so as to allow society to benefit is perfectly fine. As long as the students can do the problems on the test proficiently, they'll do just fine in society.

And then my opponent describes NCLB and poses the idea of schools choosing not to participate in NCLB, using Utah as an example. However, with an ideal NCLB, one that would absolutely guarantee that NCLB would accomplish all of its good intentions, why would anyone choose to opt out? Opting out would place a state's children at a disadvantage. And maybe the ideal NCLB mandates that states must participate, to ensure that education is getting the funding it deserves?

I'll close there, and turn the floor back over. I apologize for my delay in replying, it's been a hectic three days :\
Yraelz

Con

And thus we see the problems with the ambiguous wording of the resolution. All the same, an ideal form of NCLB is never going to be a good idea. Here is why:

1. First lets go to my argument on how children would be getting expelled. My opponent argues that something in it's perfection would neither allow to heavily or too lightly on test scores. Unfortunately this is a massive fallacy in my opponents logic. Something in it's perfection achieves it's goals perfectly. My opponent mistakes something in it's perfection to do all that is good. But this simply isn't true.

Consider the perfect way to kill someone. Is this a good thing? I'd argue no. Simply an amazing way to kill someone.
Consider the perfect way to torture someone. Would the perfect way to torture someone be good? No, in fact it would be pretty lame.

Thus something in it's ideal form, in it's perfection simply meets it's goals perfectly. The Ideal form of NCLB would do nothing perfect outside of it's goals. It would simply do it's goals perfectly. This is a devastating problem for my opponent.... He claims that the test criteria would be just the perfect amount as not to be too easy as to not educate and not be too difficult as to force expulsion. Unfortunately NCLB never claims to retain school children. Retention is not a goal under NCLB, thus the ideal form of NCLB does not solve for retention what-so-ever. In fact, the ideal form of NCLB has to literally force expulsion. NCLB believes that all children should be held to the same standards in this country. Which literally means, the moment NCLB starts functioning in it's perfection, by meeting it's goals 100%, the majority of mentally handicapped students will be expelled.

Secondly though this also means that many other low performing students who just don't care would be expelled. Furthermore keep in my mind that NCLB's goals are not to be fun nor are they to make students want to learn. This means an ideal form of NCLB never does either of those things. An ideal form of NCLB simply perfectly meets it's goals.

2. My second point. My opponent gives some analysis about how students who pass the tests are ready for the real world. This doesn't respond to my point at all. So let me repeat that first. My argument is that schools will lower their own curriculum. Schools will stop teaching students as much. Schools will make it far easier to get A's in classes. Schools will lower their subject matter. Why will schools do this? Because schools will need to increase the amount of time they dedicate to the NCLB tests. In a world where a school literally has to make sure 100% of students graduate, and 100% of students score high on tests then the school cannot afford to focus on it's own curriculum. It MUST teach to the test.

Furthermore though my opponents analysis poses major problems. He's saying that in an ideal world of NCLB the tests would be perfect. This would mean that everyone would be able to go out and function in the real world because everyone would be doing well on their tests. There are three problems with this.

a. The first is that teaching to the test does not mandate the student learns the material at all. Rather it simply mandates the students memorize the exact types of questions that will be on the test. As an example: I may be amazing at taking the SAT but that does not mean I can succeed in the real world. I can literally learn the testing format, and testing strategies that make it easy for me to acquire a high grade. That doesn't mean I actually knew much of the material.

b. The second problem. And the worse of the two. NCLB tests only make sure students are PROFICIENT. Proficient at a high school level. Under and ideal form of NCLB schools would make sure every student (not counting those one's they expel) becomes proficient at a high school level. This conversely means that less time is dedicated to the extremely intelligent kids. In other words it levels the playing field at just proficient. A nation of proficient children. This is a really bad thing in today economic climate. The reason America has power in today's world, economically, is because we can support high end jobs through our education system. On the other hand the majority of what would be considered proficient jobs are disappearing to places such as china where hyper inflation makes it easy for companies to make large profit margins. Check Walmart.

c. Which leads me to the third problem. Jobs in America are decreasing in the status quo..... meaning in the best case scenario. Even if my opponent can claim to educate millions of children those jobs can't go anywhere because we're already maxed out and decreasing. Check unemployment rate.

3. Finally we reach my third point. Yet another problem with ideal is the sheer demand of what it would be doing. 100% graduation, test scores ++, and qualified teachers. In fact NCLB itself mandates that some of the schools money (I believe it was 5%-10% last time I read through NCLB) be given to help teachers attain the right amount of certification. This is not only heavily demanding in a fiscal sense on schools, but also is highly demanding in a simple time and management since. Furthermore extend all of my analysis on how NCLB ideal would simply lead to children being expelled. I argue that this, in many cases, would simply lead to more states leaving the program, which in turn would lead to the decrease in funding. The decrease in funding = less viability for education.

Finally on this point my opponent makes a statement about how the ideal form of NCLB might mandate that states participate this would be blatantly unconstitutional. The federal government has no direct power to regulate schools in the constitution. This means the power goes to the states.

Thus at the end of this round I advocate the current form of NCLB. I argue that it avoids all of the above disadvantages. Furthermore extend my opponents analysis on how the current form of NCLB is working really well. I'd say we stick with the current system as it's much more beneficial. Thanks you!
Debate Round No. 2
dvhoose

Pro

dvhoose forfeited this round.
Yraelz

Con

Alright, final round, this one will obviously be a lot shorter.

The thesis of my argument is simple. A thing in it's ideal will meet it's goals perfectly, but only it's goals. Not other goals. Thus at the end of this debate I believe I have found multiple loop holes in which an ideal form on NCLB would only worsen the situation while perfectly meeting it's goals. Additionally, considering that NCLB is only a federal program which does not specifically mandate it's goals there also exists loop holes in which states can just flat out leave under too much pressure.

All of this in mind, I ask that my last round arguments simply be extended into this round considering that none were refuted. Especially the argument about how schools will be forced to lower their own curriculum. I'd argue, as my opponent said, that the current situation is already pretty sweet. Stick with it, an ideal, in this case, would quite simply not help at all. Thank you all. Have a nice read!
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
"Thus at the end of this debate I believe I have found multiple loop holes in which an ideal form on NCLB would only worsen the situation while perfectly meeting it's goals. Additionally, considering that NCLB is only a federal program which does not specifically mandate it's goals there also exists loop holes in which states can just flat out leave under too much pressure."

I ended up voting CON off of this, but I must object to this ironically based on the mercury example. :D

How does ideal mercury treatment meet it's goals?
Posted by Yraelz 7 years ago
Yraelz
Has this actually even been up long enough for someone to vote.....
Posted by dvhoose 7 years ago
dvhoose
dang... so I just sat down to type my speech... and i was an hour late :\ Sorry Yraelz and everyone else.
Posted by Yraelz 7 years ago
Yraelz
Haha, true that but I'm at a 9 hour lay over in Denver! Debate.com ftw!
Posted by Crust89 7 years ago
Crust89
Hmmm...Yraelz just left for Stockton, California for the NPDA national tourny. I hope he has enough time to post his arguements. If there is any reason he doesn't, that would be it.
Posted by Yraelz 7 years ago
Yraelz
Lawl!! The last line made me laugh. Thanks for the debate DVHoose. I'll engage you hopefully sometime late tomorrow.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Crust89 7 years ago
Crust89
dvhooseYraelzTied
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 Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
dvhooseYraelzTied
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 s0m31john 7 years ago
s0m31john
dvhooseYraelzTied
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