SAT Private Tutoring Should be Banned
Debate Rounds (3)
If private tutoring for standardized tests is unfair, then why shouldn't we also ban private tutoring for regular school? A high school college applicant's GPA is just as important as their SAT/ACT score. Private tutoring for school is sometimes only available to people with the money to pay for it, yet it would be ridiculous to try to ban students from trying to improve their chances of success in order to "make it fair."
I will offer rebuttals to some of your points.
"Not every student has Internet access. Some students don't even know that their are resources available."
It would be very hard to sign up for the test without being notified of the free (standard) prep material on the SAT College Board website. Speaking from personal experience, I received numerous emails and an offer in the mail notifying me of the material, as well as the fact that there are ads all over the website. It is not right to penalize everyone for the ignorance of a few. With regard to the lack of Internet access, public libraries offer it for free if it is really a need.
"If there were two students who were roughly of the same intelligence and one had a tutor and did not have a tutor, I believe that the one with the tutor would do better on the SAT."
I disagree that having a private tutor is a very significant factor in doing better on the test. They don't give their students any instruction that they can't find on their own. Showing students how to solve particular problems that they get wrong on a practice test is not very significant as the odds of getting the same question twice are ridiculously small. Analyzing their strengths and weaknesses won't change their score; it only tells them how well they are likely to do in certain areas, and they could do that on their own by taking practice tests.
As I said before, the main (and most helpful) things that tutors give students are strategies dealing with how to take the test. This is all available to students anywhere near a public library. Inevitably, this brings in the fact that not every single student lives in proximity to a library, so I will restate that free mail order test prep is available to anyone with a mailing address. A student who is an exception to every one of these generalizations (one without Internet access, money for a tutor, a public library, or even a mail address) falls victim to the fact that there is a limit to how much the system can be equalized. As it is, it would be unreasonably difficult to enforce the ban of private tutors; in addition, for the reasons I have given in this debate, it would be unnecessary.
morningowl200 forfeited this round.
Too bad we couldn't finish.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by STALIN 3 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||6|
Reasons for voting decision: Clearly Con is more convincing. He gives examples backed up by sources. Also, Pro FF.
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.