DSE 2018 Paper 2 Part B Q5 範文 | Debate Speech 辯論演說

Good evening, honourable adjudicator, worthy proposition team, ladies and gentlemen.The motion before us is that the policy of reporting students’ class position should be abolished. Class position refers to the official academic ranking of students within their class, based on examination and assessment results. While we sympathise with concerns about academic pressure, our school, the opposition, firmly oppose this motion. Tonight, we argue that reporting class positions can motivate students to strive for excellence and reduce educational inequalities.

First and foremost, the policy fosters healthy competition that drives genuine improvement.Although some claim rankings create stress, the evidence shows otherwise. A 2024 study conducted by the Hong Kong Education Bureau revealed that schools publishing class positions recorded 20% higher average academic gains over two years compared to those that did not. Knowing their exact standing, students will be motivated to put more efforts into their studies and carry out consistent revision in order to climb the ladder or remain at the top. This not only raises overall standards but also cultivates integrity, resilience, and discipline which are the core qualities essential for being a functioning member in today’s competitive society. Only by maintaining such transparent benchmarks can we prepare students for future challenges.

Secondly, the policy promotes fairness and ensures timely intervention for every learner so that no one is left behind. Without class positions, underperforming students often fall behind unnoticed, widening the gap between the strong and the weak. However, rankings allow teachers and parents to identify needs and warning signs early so as to provide tailored support and extra help to help students who are struggling academically to catch up with the rest of the class. In this regard, the ranking system serves not to discriminate students but to give every student an equal opportunity to succeed rather than letting hidden weaknesses persist and allowing students to go astray unnoticed.

Our opponents would have you believe that publishing class positions inflicts unbearable psychological torment, driving students into anxiety and depression while widening the very inequalities they claim to fight. Yet nothing could be further from the truth. Far from crushing young minds, transparent rankings act like a beacon in stormy seas, guiding students through healthy competition so as to build the resilience and integrity that no amount of “kindness” can ever replace. If we were to abolish them, the hidden struggles of underperforming students would remain unseen, allowing weaknesses to fester like untreated wounds until the gap between the strong and the weak becomes an unbridgeable chasm. The evidence is irrefutable: schools that retain class positions achieve 20% higher academic gains precisely because students know where they stand and therefore push themselves to climb higher. Thus, it is not the policy that harms mental health and fairness — it is the dangerous illusion of protection that our opponents peddle, an illusion that comes at the cost of depriving every student of genuine opportunity, true growth, and equal footing in society.

In summation, we have clearly shown that reporting class positions motivates excellence through healthy competition and promotes transparency that reduces inequalities at school. If we had considered ther merits of the ranking system as well as how to make good use of it to support students, every student would have received a better education opportunity. For these reasons, the opposition team urges you to reject the motion and uphold this essential policy. Thank you.