The Instigator
aeopimp92
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
snelld7
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points

The no child left behind act of 2001 is flawed and should be removed

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 2 votes the winner is...
snelld7
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/8/2009 Category: Education
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,398 times Debate No: 7743
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)

 

aeopimp92

Pro

I am here to debate, and we shall.

Lets first start with what the no child left behind act of 2001 really is.

Quoted from Wikipedia.

The Act requires states to develop assessments in basic skills to be given to all students in certain grades, if those states are to receive federal funding for schools. NCLB does not assert a national achievement standard; standards are set by each individual state, in line with the principle of local control of schools and in order to comply with the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which specifies that powers not granted to the federal government nor forbidden to state governments are reserved powers of the individual states.
The Act also requires that the schools distribute the name, home phone number and address of every student enrolled to military recruiters and institutions of higher education, unless the student (or the student's parent) specifically opts out.

Now my argument.

The no child left behind act or NCLB act is useless it does not help school in fact it lowers the standards of the country's education to the fact that we are not even in the top 10 of education among country's around the world. We used to be though.

It hurts the children that actually have the gift of higher intelligence and prohibits them from their full potential of learning. Every year the standards of each state are lowering and its because if we dont lower the standards we do not get goverment funding. If we would get rid of this incredible stupid act then every state would get funding and each state would be able to raise their standards each year and eventually we would be on the top of education again.

Not much more to argue at the moment.
If my opponent accepts this debate i wish him/her/it good luck.

:)
snelld7

Con

I know absolutely nothing about the NCLB act but I will attempt to address the fallacy I see present in your agrument and resolutiion.
Good luck and I am eager and looking forward to a response.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The no child left behind act or NCLB act is useless it does not help school in fact it lowers the standards of the country's education"
============================================================================

You can ACTUALLY prove that it does not help? Does this mean, if I prove that it can help, then I win this debate round?

I'll let you revise before I post my argument.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"It hurts the children that actually have the gift of higher intelligence and prohibits them from their full potential of learning. Every year the standards of each state are lowering and its because if we dont lower the standards we do not get goverment funding. If we would get rid of this incredible stupid act then every state would get funding and each state would be able to raise their standards each year and eventually we would be on the top of education again."
============================================================================

There is a logical fallacy present here. You're under the misconceived notion that lowering the standards will hinder the more intelligent people. Now at first site, this makes sense, however under analysis the flaw is clearly present.

Lets just say the more intelligent people get a 30 out of 36 on their tests (using this as an analogy) but the requirement is 21 and the normal to less intelligent person scores about 19 or 20. Now if we lower the requirement to about 18 does that mean the people who score 30 are being hindered? Of course not! If anything it makes them look better!

Your whole argument is basically the states are lowering the requirements to help recieve aid, then you're stating the more intelligent people are somehow being harmed. You're failing to realize that the more intelligent people are seperated (in schools) with programs such as honors programs, IB programs, etc. These people are already meeting the standards so it's not their standards that lessens, but the people that aren't meeting it (in the regular school programs) are having theirs lowered so that they also can feel accomplished for once, and not behind.

Then in your closing you say if we remove it, schools will recieve the aid they need. Now, OBVIOUSLY, if these schools have to lower their standards in order to recieve the aid [...] THEY WON'T RECIEVE IT OTHERWISE!

thank you for opening this debate, and I look forward to learning more about this topic.
Debate Round No. 1
aeopimp92

Pro

Thank you for accepting my debate I'm looking forward to this :)

Now lets start.

Your last statement...Then in your closing you say if we remove it, schools will receive the aid they need. Now, OBVIOUSLY, if these schools have to lower their standards in order to receive the aid [...] THEY WON'T RECIEVE IT OTHERWISE!

This is wrong what I was trying to say was,If the act/law/what ever was removed then all school's would receive aid because they wouldn't have to lower the standards so yes they would receive aid.

Ok lets move on

Now lets say that your analogy was put into motion and they did lower the standards. Then wouldn't lazy students who didn't care about their grades pass the test and move on to the next grade? Which in turn would make trouble once they got out into the working world and didn't have the required skills to do the job that they had?

Also if we lower the standards time and time and time again to fit each year that goes by eventually no child would learn anything because all they would have to do is make like a 8 out of 36 or lower.

Now also from personal experience I am a 10th grader at Smithfield Selma high school of Johnston county in North Carolina. I have seen first hand how stupid this makes our school look I make good grades yes. But when the kids that don't try in school and have no motivation or what ever you want to call it get in a class that I am in and talk goof off and hinder me to learn I think yes it does hurt me and other students like me.

Now you could say that I should take honors classes but not every class has a honors course like Spanish, computer apps, Physical sience, etc what about those classes?

I do take some honors classes and they are not as bad for interruption I will give you that.

Finally I will state that it lowers our entire nations standards and makes the country look bad.

Thank you again for accepting my debate now I'll pass it on to you
snelld7

Con

Nice debate, I see you feel passionately about this subject (seeing as how you've added personal accounts).

"Now lets say that your analogy was put into motion and they did lower the standards. Then wouldn't lazy students who didn't care about their grades pass the test and move on to the next grade? Which in turn would make trouble once they got out into the working world and didn't have the required skills to do the job that they had?"
============================================================================

You're making the assumption that they will lower the standards to nothing. It isn't that lazy students will not have to do anything and they will pass to the next grade (seeing as how the act is in session right now and people are still being held back.). It's is for the students that work extremely hard, however they just weren't born with the same learning ability as another student.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Also if we lower the standards time and time and time again to fit each year that goes by eventually no child would learn anything because all they would have to do is make like a 8 out of 36 or lower."
===========================================================================

Once again, you're making the assumption that they're trying to lower the standards to nothing. Would you not say it is more reasonable that they will lower them from 21 out of 36 [....] to 18 out of 36?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Now also from personal experience I am a 10th grader at Smithfield Selma high school of Johnston county in North Carolina. I have seen first hand how stupid this makes our school look I make good grades yes. But when the kids that don't try in school and have no motivation or what ever you want to call it get in a class that I am in and talk goof off and hinder me to learn I think yes it does hurt me and other students like me."

===========================================================================

Thinking realistically, was the distraction present before the bill was put into place? If yes, then it's because that doesn't point out a wrong in the bill itself, but points out a wrong in the people that are distracting you.

If no, then either you are lying, or you hadn't started school yet and that's why it wasn't present.

I'm a 12th grader at Central High School in Springfield, Missouri (a school that was currently ranked 3rd nation wide).
I see first hand the students that are lazy and the students that disrupt the classes, but I also know the majority of these students aren't passing and moving on also! Another thing I see, is the students that struggle and study day in and day out, just to receive a C on a math exam because they weren't endowed the ability of other smarter students. Now you're saying, lowering the standard (not drastically, but just a little) so that, that student can receive maybe a B- or a C+ [....] hurts a student that is receiving an A? Of course it doesn't!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Finally I will state that it lowers our entire nations standards and makes the country look bad."

============================================================================

I'll give it to you, that the United States of America is not at the top of the charts when academics or intelligence is concerned. But then again, ask yourself this, were we ever? NOOOOOOO

Looking at our 10th in the world in education may not look the best at first site, but when you take into account that there are 195 nations, you realize that it is a great accomplishment.

Do you think you can come up with enough evidence that says being in the top 6% in the world in education is bad?
Debate Round No. 2
aeopimp92

Pro

aeopimp92 forfeited this round.
snelld7

Con

~extended arguments~
I wish you luck upon your next argument
Debate Round No. 3
aeopimp92

Pro

aeopimp92 forfeited this round.
snelld7

Con

I am terribly sorry you couldn't respond due to your break. Best luck to you!

Vote Con
Debate Round No. 4
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by snelld7 8 years ago
snelld7
When would you like to do so?
Posted by aeopimp92 8 years ago
aeopimp92
we need to have this debate again sometime u can keep your arguements just we need to redue lol no computer at the beach :)
Posted by aeopimp92 8 years ago
aeopimp92
sorry didnt get to the debate in time i was at the beach on spring break
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Lazy 8 years ago
Lazy
aeopimp92snelld7Tied
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 snelld7 8 years ago
snelld7
aeopimp92snelld7Tied
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