Overview
This is a self-contained, no-technology substitute packet in which students read an
original argumentative essay, "Keep the Doors Open," and analyze how it builds a case.
Working alone with a pencil, students predict the author's position, warm up on rhetorical
terms, read the essay, identify the claim, label the three rhetorical appeals
(ethos, pathos, logos), judge which support is strong and which
is weak, locate the counterargument and the author's rebuttal, and
choose the evidence that best supports the claim. They finish with a short analytical
response evaluating how effective the argument is, citing two appeals or pieces of
evidence and judging their quality. On a block period, they also revise the weakest
paragraph. Every text-dependent question can be answered directly from the printed essay.
Accessible version of the student activity
The full student activity, including the complete essay, is reproduced below in plain,
screen-reader-friendly HTML. It reflows on phones and at 200% zoom. Write your answers on the
printed packet.
Start (5 minutes) — Predict & warm up
- The essay is titled "Keep the Doors Open: Why Lincoln High Should Not Close Its Campus at
Lunch." From the title alone, predict the author's position — what does the writer want, and
which side of the debate are they on?
- Rhetorical-term warm-up. Match each appeal to the support it makes: A. ethos (credibility),
B. pathos (emotion), C. logos (logic/facts). Which appeal is each of these?
- "A 2019 district survey found that 61% of students skipped lunch on closed-campus days." (logos)
- "As a nurse who works with teenagers, I have seen what a skipped meal does to a young person." (ethos)
- "Imagine your own child sitting hungry through fifth period, unable to focus." (pathos)
Build (12 minutes) — Read the argument
Words to know (for analyzing argument and rhetoric)
- claim
- the main position the writer is trying to prove.
- evidence
- facts, data, examples, or expert statements used to back up a claim.
- ethos
- a rhetorical appeal to the speaker's credibility, character, or authority.
- pathos
- a rhetorical appeal to the audience's emotions.
- logos
- a rhetorical appeal to logic — facts, data, and reasoning.
- counterargument
- a point from the opposing side that the writer raises.
- rebuttal
- the writer's response to a counterargument, explaining why their position still stands.
"Keep the Doors Open: Why Lincoln High Should Not Close Its Campus at Lunch" — an original argument
Paragraph 1. Next month, the Lincoln High School board will vote on whether to close
our campus during the lunch period, meaning students could no longer walk to the diner, the
taquería, or their own kitchens for the thirty-five minutes we have to eat. Supporters of the
closed-campus plan say it is about safety. I understand that concern, and safety must come
first. But closing the campus at lunch is the wrong tool for the job: it would harm student
health and trust while doing little to make anyone safer. Lincoln High should keep an open
campus at lunch.
Paragraph 2. The strongest reason is what an open campus does for students who cannot
eat the food served here. Last spring, our own student council surveyed 480 students. In that
survey, 61% of students said they skip lunch entirely on the days they cannot leave — many
because of allergies, religious dietary rules, or simply because the cafeteria runs out of food
before the last lunch period is served. A student who does not eat at noon is a student who is
running on empty through the whole afternoon. When more than half of us are going hungry, the
schedule is the problem, not the students.
Paragraph 3. The health cost of that hunger is not just an opinion. According to Dr.
Alvarez, the school nurse who has worked with teenagers for fifteen years, skipping a midday
meal leaves students with lower concentration, headaches, and irritability by the afternoon. "I
see the same faces in my office every closed-campus day," she told our newspaper. When the
person who treats these students every day tells us that hunger is hurting them, we should
listen. Her years of firsthand experience carry more weight than a rule written by people who
never see the nurse's office at 1:00 p.m.
Paragraph 4. Now picture your own younger brother or sister sitting through fifth
period with an empty stomach and a pounding head, watching the clock, unable to hear a word the
teacher says. That is not a rare student; on our campus it is hundreds of them, every single
closed-campus day. We should not build a policy that leaves so many young people hungry and
unable to learn.
Paragraph 5. Supporters of the closed-campus plan raise a fair point: they worry that
students who leave for lunch are more likely to be late, skip class, or get hurt crossing the
busy street outside. That concern deserves a real answer, not a shrug. But the answer is not to
lock everyone in. A neighboring district kept its campus open and cut tardies by adding a
crossing guard and a clear sign-out system; their after-lunch attendance actually improved. We
can protect students who leave without punishing the hundreds who simply want to eat.
Paragraph 6. Some will say that an open campus has always caused a few problems, and
that is true — every policy does. But everyone knows that closing the doors is what responsible
schools do, and no one who really cares about students would vote to keep them open. Besides, my
cousin at another school says their closed campus is "totally fine," so ours would be too.
Paragraph 7. Closing the campus would trade real, measurable harm to student health
for a safety benefit no one has actually shown. Keep the doors open, fix the real problems with
guards and sign-outs, and trust students to feed themselves. A school that feeds its students'
bodies is a school that can finally reach their minds.
- In paragraph 2, what specific finding from the student-council survey does the author use to
support keeping the campus open? Answer using details from the essay.
Apply (20 minutes) — Analyze the argument
- Identify the claim: in one sentence, state the author's main claim — the position the whole
essay is trying to prove. (paragraph 1)
- Label the three appeals: the essay uses ethos, pathos, and logos at least once each. For
each appeal, copy one sentence (or close phrase) from the essay that shows it, and name the
paragraph.
- Evaluate evidence quality: paragraph 2 and paragraph 6 each try to support the claim. One
relies on strong evidence and one on weak evidence. Decide which is which and explain why (is
the support factual, relevant, and reliable, or does it lean on unproven assumptions?).
- Find the counterargument and rebuttal: in paragraph 5, the author raises an opposing point
(counterargument) and answers it (rebuttal). State the counterargument in your own words, then
explain how the author responds to it.
- Which evidence best supports the claim (that the campus should stay open)? Choose one.
- A. "My cousin at another school says their closed campus is 'totally fine,' so ours would be too."
- B. "Everyone knows that closing the doors is what responsible schools do."
- C. "A student-council survey of 480 students found that 61% skip lunch entirely on days they cannot leave."
- D. "An open campus has always caused a few problems."
Then (8b) explain in one sentence why the evidence you chose is stronger than the others.
Explain (10–15 minutes) — Evaluate the argument's effectiveness
Question 9. Write an analytical response (not a summary) judging how effective this
argument is. Take a position on whether it is convincing overall, and support that position by
discussing two specific appeals or pieces of evidence from the essay, judging the quality of each
(strong or weak, and why). Use the Claim–Evidence–Reasoning frame and name the paragraph for each
piece you cite.
Sentence stems you may use: "Overall, this argument is (convincing / partly convincing / weak)
because…"; "One appeal the author uses is ___ in paragraph ___, which is effective/ineffective
because…"; "A second piece of support is ___ (paragraph ___); its quality is strong/weak because
it is factual / from a credible source / merely opinion / an unproven assumption…"
Question 10 (block period only). Paragraph 6 is the weakest part of the essay (bandwagon
"everyone knows," an insult, and one cousin's opinion). Rewrite paragraph 6 so it strengthens the
argument, replacing the weak reasoning with real evidence or an appeal used elsewhere in the essay
(the survey in 2, the nurse in 3, or the neighboring district in 5).
Close (5 minutes) — ACE
- Articulate: say the author's claim in your own words, in one sentence.
- Connect: name the one appeal (ethos, pathos, or logos) you think does the most to make the argument convincing, and point to the paragraph.
- Extend: name one weak spot in the argument and tell what the author could add to make it stronger.
Continue (optional) — Early finisher
Write a rebuttal paragraph: take the opposite side (argue the campus should close), include one
counterargument the "Keep the Doors Open" author might raise, and write a rebuttal that answers
it. Use at least one rhetorical appeal on purpose and label which one you used.
Turn in
Hand in the whole packet with your name, class period, and date, with questions 1–9 and the ACE
box answered. Question 10 is for block periods; include the optional rebuttal if you did it.