The Instigator
andreiranisav
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
simpleguy
Con (against)
Winning
9 Points

the geografical proximiy as a criteria for admission in high school

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...
simpleguy
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/8/2014 Category: Education
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 513 times Debate No: 48661
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (2)

 

andreiranisav

Pro

So,in most countryes from this word,the enty to high school it's made on what mark do you get to the national test. In this way there are elite high school( very few,but they have a grea promovabiliti at the bacalaureat exam) and a lot of bad high schools who have even 0% promovability. This motion tries to change the criteria for entry to high school in geografical proximity. So,if you live for example in Bronx you will go to the nearest high school. This thing happens in Britain,Spain,Finland and others.I want pro and against arguments.
simpleguy

Con

Introduction

I shall accept this debate at the risk of not being able to understand what my opponent is saying. That said, I thank you for opening this argument but I would like to clarify a few things.

1) The resolution: I believe the resolution should be "Geographical proximity as a criteria for admission into high school". Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

2) As pro has decided to use the whole world in his argument, I will simply be focusing on the education system in Australia to prove most of my points, but I may highlight flaws in his own arguments as well.

3) Most of the definitions are pretty clear in Pro's argument, but I simply cannot understand what "promovability" is. Until Pro clarifies the spelling and meaning of the word it cannot be counted as a legitimate argument.

High School

There are many different types of "High schools" all around the world, which cater for different age groups and have very different functions. As burden of proof is on Pro, I shall adjust the definition of "High School" with the examples he gives. For example, if he talks about America, I'll talk about American high schools in my rebuttal to avoid any confusion.

Rebuttals

Pro has made the argument that there are very few elite high schools and many bad high schools without citing any examples. Furthermore, Pro has failed to explain how this is a bad thing, an issue that is made worse by the use of 'promovability' which I just cannot decipher. Another contradiction is Pro saying that most countries have an exam based entry into high school, but then goes on to say that it is geographically based in Britain, Spain and Finland, which are pretty big and populated countries.

Arguments

As burden of proof is on Pro, I have no arguments at this time.
Debate Round No. 1
andreiranisav

Pro

As you know,after you finish the 12 grade you sustain an exam and nowadays in bad high school the people who succed to take it is 0 or somewhere to 5-10%. The motion is clearly easier for the oposition,but i really need argument to the government
simpleguy

Con

I would like to clarify that I am not here to provide you with a Pro argument, I am here to tell you why your points are flawed and to ultimately win the debate. You could ask for advice on the forums after this is finished.

Rebuttals

"after you finish the 12 grade you sustain an exam". Contrary to popular belief, I do not think that exams are sustained; they are in fact taken. Pro then goes on to provide us with some statistics, which is quite contradictory in itself as he does not seem to be able to decide between 0 or 5-10%, two very different things - both of which aren't backed up by sources of course. His main point in round two is that if you fail an entrance exam into high school, you will automatically fall into a 'bad highschool'. I will not rebutt against this point as Pro has yet to provide any evidence. I will, however, discuss the idea that the separation between elite and bad highschools are necessary.

Argument

Imagine this for a moment. You are a hard working, dedicated guy (another word for a nerd) who is trying to get into law school. You try your best in everything you do, and you are certain you are going to get into that elite high school. BUT WAIT. They removed it; now you will have to go to the school closest to your home. Your parents are too poor to move houses simply for your schooling. It shouldn't be too bad, you think to yourself. First day of school. You walk into the classroom. A ball of paper flies straight into your face. Then another. And another. It's not because they're targeting you in particular either, those low lives are simply looking for something to pass their time, beceause they don't care about their schooling, their parents simply force them to go. So I ask you, Pro, is this really fair on the smart people who want to do well in school and get a good job?

I would like to remind the audience that Pro has still failed to present a cohesive argument backed up by reliable sources and thus I still have nothing I need to prove.
Debate Round No. 2
andreiranisav

Pro

andreiranisav forfeited this round.
simpleguy

Con

As seen in the comments, my opponent has not only forfeited his round, but has also plagiarised by entire argument word for word here: http://www.debate.org... is an extreme case of misconduct and rudeness, and I can see no reason why he should get any points in this debate.
Debate Round No. 3
andreiranisav

Pro

andreiranisav forfeited this round.
simpleguy

Con

My opponent is a plagiarist and a quitter. Please vote Con.
Debate Round No. 4
andreiranisav

Pro

andreiranisav forfeited this round.
simpleguy

Con

simpleguy forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Blade-of-Truth 2 years ago
Blade-of-Truth
Lol, he forfeited all the remaining rounds on yours too huh? I just finished up mine with him and it was the same story. I'll vote con for ya on this if you vote con for me on mine :) We can both smite his legacy with 2 losses.
Posted by Blade-of-Truth 2 years ago
Blade-of-Truth
@Simpleguy, I accepted andreiranisav' s other debate with the same topic title and he copy and pasted your argument in round 2 as his opening argument in our debate. Check out the link of my debate with him and read his round 1 statement:

http://www.debate.org...

It's a word-for-word copy of your argument from round 2. Now, since he hasn't violated this debate itself I just wanted to bring this plagiarism to your attention. Personally, I'm torn between reporting him for mine or continuing simply so I can pummel this guy for the rest of my debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Blade-of-Truth 2 years ago
Blade-of-Truth
andreiranisavsimpleguyTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct - Con, because Pro FF several rounds S & G - Con, because Pro made several grammatical and spelling errors in his opening round. Convincing - Con, because he actually presented a thoughtful argument and rebutted Pro while remaining unchallenged.
Vote Placed by Relativist 2 years ago
Relativist
andreiranisavsimpleguyTied
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 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: Conduct for plagiarism and forfeit. Pro made arguments that were successfully refuted by Con, additional arguments of Con were left uncontested.