What do the speakers mainly discuss?

S: I’m sorry. I just don’t agree with you at all.
P: Look. Take the example of an international student applying for university admission. If the student has a 500 on the TOEFL or an 80 on the Michigan Test, most admissions officers will accept the applicant. The student with a 499 or 79 won’t be considered. The officer won’t even look at transcripts.
S: Right. But I think that proves my point, not yours.
P: How?
S: Well, it’s the admissions officer who decides how to use the test. The TOEFL and the Michigan are good English proficiency tests, but that’s all they are. And English proficiency is necessary for success in an American university, but so are several other factors, including good academic preparation.
P: Good academic preparation is more important.
S: Maybe. I don’t really know. But what I’m trying to ex-plain to you is that admissions officers should use the proficiency test as one of many considerations, and as such, they really shouldn’t insist on a rigid cut-off score like 500 or 80.
A: Isn’t this the basic disagreement that Paul thinks the tests are bad in themselves, and Sally believes that the tests are good, but that many people don’t use them for their intended purpose.
P: I don’t agree with having the tests, Professor Ayers, and that’s my position.
S: But Pat, what would you do to evaluate the English proficiency of a student ten thousand miles away without a standardized test?
P: I admit that’s a big problem.
S: It sure is.
A: Okay, class, for wednesday, let’s consider the problem of evaluation without standardized tests like the TOEFL, the SAT, GMAT, and GRE. Paul says that there ought to be an alternative. Sally doesn’t seem to believe that there is an appropriate alternative. Please bring in your ideas and suggestions, and we’ll discuss them.