COMPETITION. On Sullivan 4, sophomores Neha Sunil, Mohit Dighamber, Theodore Weng, Samuel Risma, and Carolyn Zhang participate. The teams were comprised of the five most qualified debators from each class, so Sullivan 4 was comprised of Mrs. Melissa Sullivan’s fourth bell class. “It was great that I got to experience a situation in which I was presenting to that many people and debating,” Sunil said.

TENSION. The debate is presented to all sophomores, and the winner is picked based off of impartial judges. Bruner’s speech was well-received due to his use of a vegetable metaphor in which he compared trivial letter-grades to gross vegetables. The speech caused the audience to chuckle and helped his team.

NEGATIVE. Sullivan 3 is comprised of sophomores Madeleine Weiss, Luis Pereda Amaya, Christine Zou, Grant Bruner, and Andrew Han. Sullivan 3 was the negative, so they were arguing against Sullivan 4’s alternative grading system. The alternative system suggested a standards-based system. “It was fun working as a group and thinking on your feet during the debate; the only downside was the amount of class missed,“ Weiss said.

FINISHED. SHS sophomores celebrate the final chapter of sophomore debates. On April 13, debate finalists competed. The topic was letter-based grading, and it was between Sullivan 3 and Sullivan 4. All photos courtesy of McDaniel’s Photography.

WINNER. Sullivan 3, the negative, wins. Their argument was primarily that letter-grades were already working, and a standards-based system would only mess with the current structure. It was a close debate, but Sullivan 3 came out ahead. “After my speech, I was hallucinating a nap,” Han said.