March Topic

[MauldinDebater]

The March topic will be boring. I hate education. Just my luck, just in time for districts. What do you guys think about it?

[jdcongresscapt]

Its not too bad. At least it's easily debatable :?

[The King of Red Lions]

March 4-5 is our districts. I'll be posting our case, it'll just basically be points with a cite next to it. Please post your cases, we don't have a tournament before districts, so we won't be able to practice.

[Notsowhitekid]

Our nat quals is comming up, any ideas for aff or neg, other than the obvious ones.

[The King of Red Lions]

Here's my case.

AFFIRMATIVE

(1A)

Our first point Despite their flaws, standardized tests give colleges a tool to evaluate a diverse group of students. Throughout the country there are many schools with different grading scales. Some classes have teachers that give away As, while others have teachers that make everyone work hard for a B. Someone who is a valedictorian at one school with straight As can be in a much easier curriculum than someone who has a lower GPA at a different school.

Our second point Standardized tests measure to some degree, success in college. University of Minnesota researchers have concluded that the SAT is a valid predictor of success in college. Using the statistical technique of meta-analysis, the researchers combined previous research on the SAT's ability to predict performance in college."We located more than 1,700 studies, representing over a million students, that had looked at how well SAT scores predicted first-year grade point average," said Sarah Hezlett, manager of the research team and a graduate student at the university. "People who do better on the test have higher GPA's in their first year in college." It is undeniable that standardized tests measure one important part of aptitude, test taking ability. Test taking ability is an important skill in higher education, where grades are often severely impacted by performance on a test. Thus, standardized tests give us an important gateway into the applicant's ability in the future. If a student does well in taking tests, they have a greater chance in succeeding in college.

Our third point Standardized tests can serve as a tool in addition to other criteria . In the Winter 2001/2002 Edition of Issues in Science and Technology, Richard C. Atkinson, President of the University of California says,"To do this, we must assess students in their full complexity. This means considering not only grades and test scores but also what students have made of their opportunities to learn, the obstacles they have overcome, and the special talents they possess." Judges, my partner and I advocate a broad-based system that considers test scores among many things such as grades, talents, and accomplishments. Such a system would provide for multifaceted evaluation of candidates. If standardized testing is removed, we would lose one method of evaluation, which would in turn hurt students.






(2A) In Issues in Science and Technology, Richard C. Atkinson, of the University of California says, "the best single predictor of student performance turned out to be the SAT II writing test. This test is the only one of the group that requires students to write something in addition to answering multiple-choice items. Given the importance of writing ability at the college level, it should not be surprising that a test of actual writing skills correlates strongly with freshman grades. "



NEGATIVE
"You're going to feel like (pause) you're going (pause) to puke" An instructor describes his own MCAT, or Medical College Admission Test experience to a classroom full of students two days before the test.

Judges, keep this in mind as you follow our argument as we stand in absolute negation of the resolution Resolved: Aptitude should be assessed through standardized testing. My partner and I will show you why first, standardized testing does not measure aptitude, second, when used in admissions, hurts talented students who score lower, and third, do not predict future success in academics.

Our first point --> Standardized testing does not measure aptitude. Standardized testing was originally created so that all students would have an opportunity at higher education based solely on merit. In theory, possibly. But in reality, this is pure fantasy.
Subpoint A --> Instead of measuring aptitude, standardized testing measures your race and ethnicity. In the August 2001 edition of Chronicle of Higher Education, "According to 1999 data from ETS for example, a white male has a 117 point advantage, on average, over a white female on the verbal, quantitative, and analytical parts of the GRE. A white woman gets a 108 point boost over a black woman...A white man can expect...a 139 point advantage over a black man"
Subpoint B --> Standardized testing does not measure aptitude. According to an an October 1997 edition of Business Week, Bruce Alberts, the president of the National academy of Sciences says that the Biology SAT II Test emphasizes rote memorization and word association over conceptual knowledge, and is a poor judge of students' abilities. Cornell University's Prof. Wendy Williams says, "It's obvious that the tests are not corresponding to real performance". Clearly standardized tests do not measure any real aptitude, and are a poor judge of abilities. They measure the wrong skill, as Alberts says, and they don't correlate to real life, like Prof. Williams says.

Our second point --> Standardized tests can hurt talented students if they score lower. Harvard University physicist Howard Georgi says, "The GRE physics subject test may do more harm than good" Many top graduate programs rarely accept anyone whose score falls below a certain level. Which hurts students who might be better scientists than some who ace the tests. Judges, you must recognize that in physics, the real world is far different from the world of the standardized test. The real world calls for creativity, brilliance, practicality, things that cannot always be measured by a test.

[MauldinDebater]

Make sure you know the difference between aptitude and achievment testing. Good luck at districts everyone!

[Rachel]

The King of Red Lions--both of your cases are falling into the same trap I saw time and time again in the past 2 weekends. Things like the SAT and the other tests you advacate are achievement based tests, not aptitude like the resolution says. I think the strongest positions my partner and I hit were the ones that strictly base off of aptitude. There are atleast 5 really good reliable aptitude tests that are able to take out a ton of the bias of most standardized tests. Also, aptitude isnt used in college admission process so your 2nd aff point kinda falls.

On the neg, I think the general idea is good just get more aptitude based evidence. Also, Id decide if you want to advocate not testing aptitude at all or if you want to say their are better ways to do it. Its basically what the neg comes to during the round. Both work to an extent Id just add it to your case.

[MauldinDebater]

SAT is an aptitude test, and is used in college admissions. There are so many resources out there, just search "SAT Accuracy" and things like that and thousands of hits will come up.

[Rachel]

SAT is an aptitude test, and is used in college admissions.

I accually found evidence from college board saying it is achievement based. Its from like 1995 i belive but they say in there that the name change is because they can no longer measure aptitude but can only measure achievement.