2. The argument’s conclusion is that standardized tests are against students who do not care about school. First, if the test is “standardized” how can it be “disadvantaging” students? There is a clear contradiction, according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary “standardized” means something that compare to a standard or that is equal. One of the premises in the video is that schools are only advantaging students that study, for example, a student that does not read through all a paper has 89% lower chance to answer correctly the question… This is weak, because they say “a new study found”, they don’t actually backup the study with sources or experts, which means that the premise is not well supported by a relevant figure of authority. Secondly, in the video they also say that the purpose of school is to prepare kids to the real world, but the real world people does not give a shit about school too… This second premise is also weak, because it is a fallacy that we call generalization. They say “people in the real world” we don’t know who, and they pretend to represents everyone in this world. One concrete contradicting fact is my father, he really cares about my grades and he always tells me how school is important in my life and how my life would be miserable without having acquired knowledge from school. Thirdly, they say that textbooks are only talking about motivated people like George Washington… In this premise they creates generalization again, because they say “Textbooks”, they don’t actually cite names or authors. Moreover, they do not have statistic to support what they say, all they are delivering are opinions or “facts” without any supports. Also, they only had a 2 min discussion which makes this conversation not serious at all, they are just yelling things, or trying to convince people of facts that they are not sure.