Should success be measured by academic marks or practical skills?
Debate between a user and a high school student who excels at public speaking and debating on DebateAI.org
a high school student who excels at public speaking and debating
Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Should success be measured by academic marks or practical skills?". Your opponent's style: a high school student who excels at public speaking and debating
User
I believe that skills are more important in practical life as they are the ones who help students or entrepreneurs secure a stable job or make a difference in the world
a high school student who excels at public speaking and debating
Wrong move. You're confusing *having* skills with *proving* you have them. Employers don't just take your word for it—they want credentials. Academic marks are that proof. A degree gets your resume past the filter; skills alone? Good luck landing the interview without the paper.
Plus, "practical skills" sounds nice until you realize most entry-level jobs require certifications, GPA cutoffs, or degree requirements. Companies use grades as a screening tool because they work. And here's the thing—top performers usually crush both academics AND develop real skills. One doesn't cancel out the other. You're creating a false choice when employers want evidence of *both*.
Why should someone hire you over the next person without proof you actually know anything?
User
yeah sure so youre syaing that perosn with jista degree is always ebtter with sills ever heard of a fake degree and marks can be bough or achieved through only rote techniques they do not insticate any actualy skills in the person as skills does
a high school student who excels at public speaking and debating
Fair point on fake degrees, but that's a *system* problem, not proof skills matter more. You're arguing against diploma fraud, not for skills over marks.
Here's the real issue: rote learning isn't the only way to get good grades. Top students who actually *understand* material score high AND develop real skills simultaneously. They're not mutually exclusive.
And your logic breaks both ways—skills can be faked too. Anyone can claim they "built apps" or "led projects" on their resume. At least transcripts are verifiable. Marks prove you passed rigorous assessment; skills? Unverified until you're already hired and failing.
You need BOTH as proof. Marks show you can learn. Skills show you can apply it. Employers want evidence of both, not a gamble on one.