The Group Project Paragraph
Four students write a group paragraph arguing that their school should start later. Their draft reads: "Schools should start later. Many students are tired in the morning. Studies show teens need more sleep. Our school starts at 7:30, which is very early. Some people say sports would be affected. But sleep is important. Therefore we should start later." The teacher's rubric requires: a clear claim, at least two pieces of cited evidence, acknowledgment of a counterclaim, and a rebuttal. The group insists the paragraph already has all four because it "states the claim, gives evidence, mentions sports, and concludes."
1. Evaluate the draft against each of the four rubric items and identify which are actually met.
Read the worked answer
Claim: met - "Schools should start later" is a clear position. Evidence: not met as written. "Studies show" and "Many students are tired" are unsupported assertions; the rubric requires cited evidence, meaning a source or specific data (e.g., "a 2018 pediatric study found..."). Counterclaim: partially met. "Some people say sports would be affected" names an opposing concern but does not state it as a real argument with reasoning. Rebuttal: not met. "But sleep is important" does not answer the sports objection; it changes the subject. So the group meets one item fully, one partially, and two not at all. Their belief that "mentioning" equals "meeting" is the core error - the rubric asks for function, not presence of a topic word.
2. Rewrite the counterclaim-and-rebuttal portion so it satisfies the rubric, and explain what makes it work.
Read the worked answer
Model: "Critics argue that a later start would push sports practice past dark and conflict with after-school jobs. However, districts that shifted start times by 45 minutes reported adjusting practice schedules with minimal disruption, and the academic gains from added sleep outweighed scheduling costs." What makes it work: (1) the counterclaim is stated fairly, with its actual reasoning (practice time, jobs), not just a label; (2) the rebuttal directly answers that concern with a concession plus a response; (3) it does not simply repeat the claim. A strong rebuttal either shows the concern is smaller than claimed or shows the benefit outweighs it. The original failed because "sleep is important" never engages the sports objection, so the reader's real question goes unanswered.