The Instigator
I-am-a-panda
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
ournamestoolong
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points

Resolved: An ideal from of NCLB would be beneficial to welfare in the U.S.A

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: 3/22/2009 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,021 times Debate No: 7514
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)

 

I-am-a-panda

Pro

==DEFINITIONS:==

NCLB: NCLB is an abbreviation for the No Child Left Behind act signed into law on January 8, 2002. It is :

"The law reauthorized a number of federal programs aiming to improve the performance of U.S. primary and secondary schools by increasing the standards of accountability for states, school districts, and schools, as well as providing parents more flexibility in choosing which schools their children will attend."

Ideal:
1. a conception of something in its perfection.
2. a standard of perfection or excellence.
3. a person or thing conceived as embodying such a conception or conforming to such a standard, and taken as a model for imitation

Welfare:
1. the good fortune, health, happiness, prosperity, etc., of a person, group, or organization; well-being

(http://dictionary.reference.com...)

==NOTES:==

This debate concerns a version of NCLB that is ideal, i.e. it is perfect. It is like arguing for an ideal form of democracy, you cannot argue the flaws of democracy.

=====CON ARGUMENT:======

==ARGUMENT #1: IT BENEFITS THE WELFARE OF EDUCATION==

1-A) Obviously, NCLB is an educational act. If it is ideal, it must surely benefit education

1-B) The system is based on standardized testing. If students scores are on the same test, then institutions can see the strengths and weaknesses of the current system, making it even more ideal.

I await my opponents response, and thank the readers and judges for reading this debate.
ournamestoolong

Con

Thank you, I-am-a-panda and everyone involved in this tournament

"1-A) Obviously, NCLB is an educational act. If it is ideal, it must surely benefit education"

Even in its ideal form, the very premise of the law is skewed. To test schools and increase funding to the schools who score well, is a horrible premise. The schools who score well aren't the schools who need the money to help themselves. Saying that this is the basis of the law, it doesn't matter if it's in its ideal form, this idea will stay the same.

"1-B) The system is based on standardized testing. If students scores are on the same test, then institutions can see the strengths and weaknesses of the current system, making it even more ideal."

This is not true if the tests are innacurate. They are racist (http://www.raceandhistory.com...) (http://www.gale.cengage.com...)

Standardized tests damages education, becuse students learn to the test, and fail to learn essential skills for life.
(http://www.fairtest.org...) (http://www.highbeam.com...)

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 1
I-am-a-panda

Pro

I would like to thank ournamestoolong for his response and wish him a good debate.

===CON:===
>>Even in its ideal form, the very premise of the law is skewed. To test schools and increase funding to the schools who score well, is a horrible premise. The schools who score well aren't the schools who need the money to help themselves. Saying that this is the basis of the law, it doesn't matter if it's in its ideal form, this idea will stay the same.<<

===REBUTTAL:===

In the world of jobs, as you progress, you get paid more. If you have a profession that requires intelligence, you will be paid more. The system works in that it rewards schools eager to push their students to their capacity and granting them more money because of this. Schools that do not attempt to push their students have thir funds cut because obviously they are not working for the betterment of their students.

===CON:===

>>This is not true if the tests are innacurate. They are racist <<

===REBUTTAL:===

1) I quote this article that:
" It is important to note that neither IQ, future academic performance, nor life success can be predicted from an individual's race or ethnicity. " [Source: http://social.jrank.org...]

This means that results of IQ tests do not determine the total outcome of a persons success in life. Furthermore, SAT's are not IQ tests.

2) The form of NCLB is an ideal form. My source says that:

"Researchers have suggested several possible explanations to account for racial and ethnic differences in intellectual performance. The first explanation is that standardized IQ tests and testing procedures are culturally biased toward European-American middle class knowledge and experiences."

Taking this into account, it is obvious under an ideal form of NCLB, the tests would be balanced to include fair questions towards Hispanics, native American, European-American, African Americans and all other ethnicities of society.

===CON:===

>>Standardized tests damages education, becuse students learn to the test, and fail to learn essential skills for life.<<

===REBUTTAL:===

Standardized testing does not mean students learn to the test. There are ways to combat this, namely, rotating the questions randomly each year. This way, students learn to the course.

I would like to ask my opponent what he sees as essential skills for life. Subjects thought in school are essential to future jobs (E.G. Maths, Science) and therefore are beneficial to further life.

Furthermore, standardized testing allows for the better recording of test results. Teachers quickly spot where students are lacking, and therefore have the ability to teach was used to be a weak point. Education is quickly bettered. However, this system is already ideal.

I would like to thank the judges and readers or taking the time to read.
ournamestoolong

Con

Thank you for your response.

===REBUTTAL===

PRO: "In the world of jobs, as you progress, you get paid more. If you have a profession that requires intelligence, you will be paid more. The system works in that it rewards schools eager to push their students to their capacity and granting them more money because of this. Schools that do not attempt to push their students have their funds cut because obviously they are not working for the betterment of their students."

There are multiple reasons students in a specific school may not be scoring well. It may not be for the sole reason that schools aren't "Pushing for the betterment of their students". They could be located in a "run down" neighborhood. Their students may not have a back round of education. If the school starts out with these disadvantages, they need funds to improve. By cutting their budget, NCLB is dooming the school to under-performance.

PRO"1) I quote this article that:
" It is important to note that neither IQ, future academic performance, nor life success can be predicted from an individuals race or ethnicity. " [Source: http://social.jrank.org......]

This means that results of IQ tests do not determine the total outcome of a persons success in life. Furthermore, SAT's are not IQ tests."

The articles I provided DID talk about standardized testing as a whole, not just IQ tests. NCLB focuses on different tests (SAT and EST) to gauge students intelligence.

PRO:"2) The form of NCLB is an ideal form. My source says that:

"Researchers have suggested several possible explanations to account for racial and ethnic differences in intellectual performance. The first explanation is that standardized IQ tests and testing procedures are culturally biased toward European-American middle class knowledge and experiences."

Taking this into account, it is obvious under an ideal form of NCLB, the tests would be balanced to include fair questions towards Hispanics, native American, European-American, African Americans and all other ethnicities of society."

It doesn't matter what test you take, the entire premise they use to allocate funds is skewed. Even with the ideal (perfect) test, you are not necessarily gauging the success of the school, but rather, the intellect of the students. The problem with this is that too many variable besides the school contribute to the intellect of a student.

PRO:"Standardized testing does not mean students learn to the test. There are ways to combat this, namely, rotating the questions randomly each year. This way, students learn to the course.

I would like to ask my opponent what he sees as essential skills for life. Subjects thought in school are essential to future jobs (E.G. Maths, Science) and therefore are beneficial to further life.

Furthermore, standardized testing allows for the better recording of test results. Teachers quickly spot where students are lacking, and therefore have the ability to teach was used to be a weak point. Education is quickly bettered. However, this system is already ideal"

Standardized tests mean that the questions are all the same, no matter how well a student is doing. If a student is doing fine in math, but failing science, he may not get the extra help he needs because that may not be what the test covers. If tests only cover certain subjects, some students needs are bound to be ignored.

As I said before, teachers may not know if they are failing the student, or if an outside factor is contributing to a student's test score.

I would like to thank anyone reading this, and all of those who are involved in the tournament.
Debate Round No. 2
I-am-a-panda

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent for this fantastic debate.

===CON:===
>>There are multiple reasons students in a specific school may not be scoring well. It may not be for the sole reason that schools aren't "Pushing for the betterment of their students". They could be located in a "run down" neighborhood. Their students may not have a back round of education. If the school starts out with these disadvantages, they need funds to improve. By cutting their budget, NCLB is dooming the school to under-performance.<<

===REBUTTAL:===

If a school is doing well, why should the government continue to increase it's funding whilst other schools with a great amount of potential have their funds cut. The government should increase funds for schools doing well for their expansion. They can take on more students and subsequently increase the level of education.

There are schools out there with top scores and a vast potential to expand that aren't given the chance to do so. Letting schools that perform badly, for any reason, and increasing funding to schools that are doing well, is only logical.

CON may argue that many of the best schools are fee-paying schools, not free schools. Well, subsidizing school fee's or increasing the funding until it does not need to be fee-paying is logical, and makes more sense than funding failing schools.

===CON:===
>>It doesn't matter what test you take, the entire premise they use to allocate funds is skewed. Even with the ideal (perfect) test, you are not necessarily gauging the success of the school, but rather, the intellect of the students. The problem with this is that too many variable besides the school contribute to the intellect of a student.<<

===REBUTTAL:===

The premise of a school is to teach students, i.e. increase their intellect. If a schools fails in this, they are obviously failing and therefore do not deserve funds. As aforementioned, this funding should go to schools that are able to perform.

My opponent states there are too many variables besides the school to gauge intelligence. I am assuming he is referring to financial background primarily. This actually works towards my argument. Students of a better financial background tend to do well because of their schooling in better schools. If schools in run-down areas are removed, students are given the chance to go to better schools. Thus, the system works in increasing intelligence.

===CON:===
>>Standardized tests mean that the questions are all the same, no matter how well a student is doing. If a student is doing fine in math, but failing science, he may not get the extra help he needs because that may not be what the test covers. If tests only cover certain subjects, some students needs are bound to be ignored.

As I said before, teachers may not know if they are failing the student, or if an outside factor is contributing to a student's test score.<<

===REBUTTAL:===

I find the logic of my opponents comment to be skewed. If a student is failing Science, he can obviously get help because he is being tested on the areas that are tested. If the Physics course covered Energy, but not Magnetism, then obviously the teacher wouldn't test Magnetism, nor would they address it as a serious problem because he won't be test doing it.

As I have said before, even if an outside factor is contributing to a students failure, moving to a school with better grades can only be beneficial.

I would like to thank my opponent for this debate, and thank the readers and judges for reading. Thank you.
ournamestoolong

Con

ournamestoolong forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by ournamestoolong 8 years ago
ournamestoolong
I am so sorrry I forfeited.

You see, I have been on vacation in Guatemala for gthe past week, and didn't have internet access
Posted by I-am-a-panda 8 years ago
I-am-a-panda
I've had 2 forfeits on my debates on this, both PRO and CON. o.0
Posted by ournamestoolong 8 years ago
ournamestoolong
Though your question in the debate doesn't seem relavent, I will answer it.
The essential skills in life greatly vary on your profession. I am not likely to need to know how to fix a vaccum if I am a Senator, but that skill is essential for a repairman.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by The_Booner 8 years ago
The_Booner
I-am-a-pandaournamestoolongTied
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