Final exams should be abolished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 1 vote and with 3 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 2
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
No information
2: coming at the end : being the last in a series, process, or progressthe final chapterfinal exams
: to end the observance or effect of (something, such as a law) : to completely do away with (something) : ANNULabolish a law
So basically, the topic intends to justify removing all processes intended to test knowledge at the end of a learning stage.
- Dropping only finals and no other exams.
- Drop other exams, in the set also includes the finals.
- The information taught after a point of a semester's learning course is always unimportant and unworthy of a test to be given out.
- Information taught to students should never be tested regardless of the present time-stage.
The biggest and main argument is the one of getting sick
Helping them to see how well they have retained knowledge throughout the year is a myth
"There is no final examination to mark the end of upper secondary school education. Each pupil receives the Gymnasieexamen (upper secondary school certificate) from their school, consisting of a summary of the courses studied and the marks received over the three years, including the certificate project." (Swedens educational system link)
The biggest and main argument is the one of getting sick, mentally and physically. Truth be told I myself have graduated with the IB, and in a lot of subjects 100 - 75 percent of the grade is put on the final exam. It was tragic and emotional for him and his siblings, however inflexible schedules of the IB they did not overturn, even given this disastrous situation.
Each pupil receives the Gymnasieexamen (upper secondary school certificate) from their school, consisting of a summary of the courses studied and the marks received over the three years, including the certificate project."
this is clearly a false statement, because of the fact that each exam is still able to cumulate from the previous exams
- All that a final needs is to be the last one in the semester and to test on some form of knowledge they have learned within said semester.
- Finals do not have to be limited in any one given form. Driving tests and shooting tests are finals, so are certificate projects if they are done near the end of the course.
- Pro argues against certain formats of finals, not the entire idea of finals existing. To the perspective of the topic, Pro amounted to nothing.
- Pro forfeited 50%. That is bad conduct!
I vote Con.
On the definitions, they are uncontested, so I use these metrics to evaluate the round. Pro needs to define "final exams" as a term of art for final paper tests in academic classes that are X% or more of the class to win any offense.
On the question of things like driving, like, this is where I end up pulling the trigger and voting, but I would love Con to do more work. If we can't test people who drive, then there are really bad drivers, and this causes more accidents and deaths. This gives me something to weigh against the Pro a lot easier. Pro should answer this at all.
On sickness, I buy Cons defense that reforms to testing solve as opposed to abolition outright. Pro needs to be present for the first speech, or the Con gets golden uncontested answers to your case, especially in a two round debate.
Checking info being a myth, I have a couple comments.
1. Even if this is true, this is not impacted to driving tests, and only answers academic tests.
2. Neg said it didn't have to be for the entire class, which is a golden answer I buy.
No finals in Sweden, I buy Cons golden answer that they do have one, which destroys any ability to even imagine a world of the Pro, so I don't even know what I would be voting for.
Lastly, Con tells me to vote Con on conduct for the forfeit, but I don't for two reasons
1. Life is hard, I don't know what Pro has going on and
2. You should have had this in your first speech for Pro to have a chance to answer it, otherwise, it feels too new in the last speech for me to vote on.
Great debate, if either debater has questions, please send me a question, message, or comment!
It's an intentional change IIRC, since the contender hadn't completed the required qualification of completing five debates (in order to create a rated one). Personally I dislike how it applies retroactively, I think it's sort of unfair.
I gained nothing by winning this one even though it was rated from the start. Is this a bug worth fixing?
please dont put me in ptsd by mentioning written final exams.