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

Standardized tests in all schools

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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/29/2014 Category: Education
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 603 times Debate No: 55665
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)




I feel standardized test are unfair to students that are still in school. If the student passes all of their classes and not the test they get held back that's not right.


I accept the debate and wish Con good luck.

Standardized tests, when properly administered, provide a standard assessment of students' learned knowledge and determine whether or not students are prepared to move on to the next progressive level of schooling. If administered properly, this type of testing is a fair process that simply gauges student ability.

In response to Con's claim that these tests are unfair, I would ask: What makes standardized tests unfair?
I would like to also note that one personal experience is not sufficient evidence to judge the entire testing practice.

Regarding Con's initial hypothetical that a student passes all of their classes, fails the test, and is held back:
It is possible that a student could technically pass a class (via cheating, getting a D or C, extra credit) and not have achieved the appropriate level of knowledge. It's the same concept as taking notes. I could take notes for an hour, and then not remember a single thing, as it is all written on paper. I have the information in hand, but I have the responsibility to use it as well.
Standardized tests are meant to be difficult. They are designed to test you, and you as the student have a responsibility to study for them if you want to perform well. Failing the standardized test is the result of a lack of preparedness, or the result of a failure to learn the proper information, either of which are the fault of the student, and in some cases, select teachers. If you pass your class, but don't learn anything, then what's the point?

So in round two:
I challenge Con to provide reasonable evidence that supports the claim that standardized testing is an unfair practice.
I also challenge Con to disprove my argument that students can pass a class without really learning the material.
Debate Round No. 1


I wish pro good luck also

If you pass the classes for the year until you take the standardized test and fail by let's say... 2points it seems unfair do u not think so .. I had a friend who had As and B's her senior year till she took the test and failed by three points and had to repeat the year even with all of her credits they made her repeat agin it's not fair.


Failing a test is always unfortunate, and I'm sorry to hear that your friend failed by just three points. In most situations, there is supposed to be an established retesting opportunity, which is intended to prevent students from having to repeat an entire semester/year of classes. I find it equally unfortunate that your friend was unable to capitalize on such an opportunity.

However, for the sake of the argument, let's suggest that a teenager is attempting to get their driver's license. They take and pass all of the proper courses, but then go to take their actual driving exam, and fall painfully short of passing the driving portion of the exam. In order to uphold the integrity of the process, that is a fail. It would be irresponsible to grant that person a driver's license when they have not thoroughly proven themselves capable of driving safely. Likewise, to curve the grade and bump up a failing student to a passing student would be damaging to the integrity of the test, and could also result in the student having a much more difficult time at the next level.

Hypothetically speaking, if the standardized test is an isolated incident, and the student knew everything that they were supposed to have learned, then retesting would be the best option. There is no way that you can argue that a student should be passed because they were close enough. If 3 points are accepted as close enough, then why not 4, then why not 5, and so on and so fourth. This results in a lowering of standards, which was a proven disaster with the "No Child Left Behind" Program during the Bush administration.

For the third and final round:
Once again I challenge Con to disprove my argument that students can pass a class without really learning the material.
I would challenge Con to prove beyond firsthand experience that standardized testing is unfair.
Debate Round No. 2


I never said you could pass a clas without learning the material maybe you could do all the work . And pass the small test but when it comes time to take the standardized tests. The student studys too hard there in which opposing the fact that they did learn the material. But studied too much . The fact that we have to have 21 credits alone to pass highschool . The standardized test should not exist . Ther in proving they are not fair


Con may have misunderstood that I was suggesting that you could pass a class without learning the material.

Con presents the hypothetical scenario that a student could no all of the appropriate material and then fail the test due to overstudying and stressing themselves out about the test. I understand that this is a possible scenario, but one hypothetical scenario is not a fair basis to condemn the entire testing process. As I stated in round two, a retesting opportunity would ideally be the solution to such a scenario.

However, in order for Con to win this debate, they would be required to have disputed my arguments, and given some reasonable logic to substantiate the claim that standardized testing is unfair. Con argued on the basis of personal opinions, personal experience, and hypothetical scenarios, while offering no credible evidence to support the claim that standardized testing is unfair. If Con had provided some concrete reasoning for how someone could pass a class and fail the exam, or justification for why this is an unfair process, then Con would have a much more firm argument.

In conclusion:
It is possible to pass a class without learning all of the proper material.
Standardized testing measures students' knowledge and ability before admitting them to the next level of schooling.
Standardized testing does not warrant any judgement as unfair unless it can be successfully argued as discriminatory or unreasonable.
Failing a standardized test results in a student's inability to proceed on to the next grade level.

Con has not successfully disputed any of these points.
Please vote Pro.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Cold-Mind 2 years ago
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 Checkmark1 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: 1) Con made only weak arguments. 2) Con went too personal 3) Pro made some good arguments.