<p>Well, I am doing a debate on the SAT for class. I just want to get some arguments to why the SAT should be kept so I can do a good job. I of course got some good ideas, but I feel you guys know more about the SAT than I do! So, why should it be kept? What arguments can I make against those that want to keep them? Most obvious argument for getting rid of them is it is geared towards rich white males and is not a good indicatior for college success. Anyways to argue against this? Thanks. Just for the record, I personally do not support the SAT. However, if I want to be a lawyer I will need to argue over things that I am uncomfortable over.</p>
<p>the SAT establishes a benchmark against which students who have varied academic backgrounds may be compared. without a universal standard, college admissions officers would be lost in their comparisons of students. every high school teacher would provide identical recommendations; extracurriculars are already identical. </p>
<p>i think i read a thread on this forum that went into detail about this topic. try searching for it.</p>
<p>There’s a nice, concise introduction to the costs/benefits of requiring the SAT in this report. Some of the actual data later in the report will also be useful to you. </p>
<p><a href=“http://www.mtholyoke.edu/~mirobins/monks.pdf[/url]”>www.mtholyoke.edu/~mirobins/monks.pdf</a></p>
<p>Some quick advice about using the advantage given to affluent students by the SAT as the linchpin of your debate: while it’s true that there’s a huge and discouraging positive corrolation between income level and SAT scores, that doesn’t necessarily mean that the test itself is biased against the poor or minorities. The other team could well respond that the this strong corrolation is just giving you a snapshot of the inequalities that are built into the entire educational system (and they’d probably be right). If you wanted to see who’s getting an advantage or disadvantage from the SAT, it would make more sense to see if the test overpredicts or underpredicts the college performance of some subgroups. Unfortunately, that data is much less tidy.</p>
<p>Good luck!</p>
<p>thanks! After I develop my arguments I will post here.</p>
<p>you may want to investigate the University of California and its decision to weight the SAT Subject Tests more than the SAT as being a better indicator of college success.
good luck on your argument.</p>
<p>well here is what i am gonna argue in the debate, let me know what you guys think. Keep in mind i got a 2.5 minute time limit for my speech and a 2 minute time limit for my cross examination. I also got a 3 minute rebuttal maximum. My partner will also have points to see for her speech, cross-examination and rebuttal so I cannot say everything. Well, here it is:</p>
<p>Speech:
Before the SAT, high school kids faced a wide array of college entrance exams, which were each designated by that particular institution. Each college had a different criteria and testing dates for students. The SAT was developed by an association of colleges called the College Entrance Examination Board as a service to students, schools, and academic professionals. The SAT was developed to make the college admissions process simpler and fairer for all students, irrespective of their background or the schools that they attend. The test provides a way for students to demonstrate their academic preparation and ability to perform complex college-level work. The test is useful to colleges because there are a variety of ways to be educated that include home schooling, high school, and even a GED program. It puts students at an equal playing field and measures problem-solving and critical skills that are needed for college success. These skills cannot be found in a school textbook. Colleges cannot solely rely on high school grades because of grade inflation and deflation. With over 25,000 high schools with a wide array of curriculum and difficulty of courses offered, there needs to be a universal way to score performance. The validity and effectiveness of the SAT in measuring how students will fair in colleges has been proven by a variety of studies. Studies show that students increase their scores if they study subjects at school rigorously. Statistical averages of students from rich white families performing better on the SATs are just statistical averages that only present broad generalizations. I myself purchased a $20 preparation guide by the College Board full of many practice tests, because I did not have the money for an expensive prep course. I did better on the SAT than many of those who attended a prep-course like the Princeton Review. Instead of blaming the SAT, we should start dealing with the inequalities and inadequacies, which it reflects. </p>
<p>Cross-examination questions:
- Are you aware that a study done by the UC school system showed that the SAT actually benefited minorities, since it helped the school system predict a slightly higher GPA for them than they actually earned?</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Are you aware of the grade inflation and grade deflation problem that makes it difficult for colleges to compare students?</p></li>
<li><p>Do you think that there should be a means to measure what an A means in each school? </p></li>
<li><p>Have you ever felt a student received a grade they felt was unjust?</p></li>
<li><p>Would you feel content with a GPA that appeared to be too low for colleges because they had a hard time evaluating what your GPA meant?</p></li>
<li><p>Doesnt the SAT allow colleges to have another piece in the college admissions process that can characterize students with more depth?</p></li>
<li><p>Who do you think would do better on the SAT, someone who is prepared, or someone that goes into the test not knowing what to expect?</p></li>
<li><p>Do you agree that practice and preparation can increase SAT scores?</p></li>
<li><p>Isnt it better to have 1 universal test for college admissions, rather than a different test provided by each college?</p></li>
<li><p>Wouldnt this variety of tests make it difficult for a student to prepare for them?</p></li>
</ol>
<p>My rebuttal: </p>
<p>The SAT remains useful in the college admissions process. It provides a uniform playing field for all students. It helps colleges determine if there is grade inflation or deflation in a school, which would otherwise be quite difficult since there are so many schools in the U.S. Since so many students report having an A average, colleges need the SAT to further evaluate what those grade point averages mean on their scale. Although rich white kids seem to have an upper hand, the fact remains that anyone can do well on the SAT if they have enough preparation. You do not have to pay for an expensive prep-course such as the Princeton Review. You can buy a book full of practice tests at bookstores for $20 or under. With the right determination and practice one can succeed at getting a good score. Students should remember that the SAT is not the only component for college admissions. The high school transcript is the most important, but the SAT helps to evaluate that transcript to the needs of the colleges. Like I said earlier, instead of blaming the SAT, we should start dealing with the inequalities and inadequacies, which it reflects.</p>