Analyzing Argument and Rhetoric

"Keep the Doors Open: Why Lincoln High Should Not Close Its Campus at Lunch" — an original argument

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.