Writing prompt Grade 11 English Language Arts
Whose Water First? A Grade 11 Argument Prompt on Drought Cuts
A grade 11 argument prompt on whether a drought-stricken state should cut farm irrigation before city water use, using real figures on water share and supply.
Objectives
- Students will write an argument essay that states a claim, addresses a counterclaim, and supports both with evidence.
- Students will use real figures on agricultural and urban water use to evaluate a drought policy tradeoff.
- Students will explain how an alternative water supply might factor into a drought-allocation decision.
Vocabulary
- Desalination
- Turning salty water, like ocean water, into fresh water people can use. It works, but it takes a lot of energy and leaves behind very salty water that must be handled carefully.
Also: allocation, irrigation, counterclaim
Teacher overview
A fictional Western state, now in its fourth year of severe drought, must decide which water users absorb the deepest cuts first: the farms that irrigate crops or the cities that supply households. Agriculture and cities depend on the same shrinking rivers and reservoirs, and neither side can be cut without real consequences. This prompt asks students to take a position on that allocation question using real figures on how much water each sector actually uses, and on what an alternative supply like desalination can and cannot replace.
Prompt
Background: Agriculture accounts for roughly 70 percent of global freshwater withdrawals, the largest share of any single use. Irrigating crops at scale requires far more water than households consume. By comparison, the average US household uses about 300 gallons of water per day, roughly 70 percent of it indoors. That is a real draw on a region's supply, but a much smaller one. Some regions have built alternative supplies to ease pressure on rivers and reservoirs. The Carlsbad, California desalination plant, the nation's largest, produces about 50 million gallons of drinking water per day, roughly 10 percent of San Diego County's total supply. It draws from the ocean rather than a river that can run dry. Desalination can supply cities, since ocean water is treated to drinking-water standards. It is not currently used to irrigate crops at a comparable scale, because the cost per gallon is too high for most farms.
Writing task: A fictional state's drought task force must choose one approach. It could cut agricultural irrigation allocations first. It could cut municipal (city) water allocations first. Or it could cut both sectors by the same percentage. Write an argument essay that states a clear claim on which approach the task force should take. Address at least one counterclaim a reader from the opposing sector might raise. Support your position with evidence from the background material above.
Planning Organizer
| Category | Your notes |
|---|---|
| Claim (which sector should be cut first, or should cuts be equal?) | |
| Reason 1 + evidence from background material | |
| Reason 2 + evidence from background material | |
| Counterclaim a reader from the opposing sector might raise | |
| Your rebuttal to the counterclaim | |
| Concluding statement |
From Water for Schools (waterforschools.org). This material is in the public domain (CC0) and may be copied, edited, and shared freely.
Exemplar & Rubric
Exemplar response:
The state's drought task force should cut agricultural irrigation allocations before reducing municipal water use, because agriculture's share of total water withdrawals is simply too large to leave untouched while cities absorb the full burden of a drought. Agriculture accounts for roughly 70 percent of global freshwater withdrawals, meaning even a modest percentage cut to irrigation frees up far more water than an equivalent cut to household use ever could. A typical household uses about 300 gallons of water per day, a real but comparatively small draw even when summed across a city's population, which means cutting municipal water first would force millions of people to sacrifice for a fraction of the water that a proportional cut to irrigation would free up.
Farmers and agricultural groups will reasonably argue that irrigation cuts threaten crops already in the ground, and that a single bad season can cost a farm operation more than it can recover from. This is a legitimate concern, and the task force should not treat agricultural cuts as costless. But cities facing drought have fewer alternatives to reduce their water use quickly without threatening public health, since a household cannot simply skip using water the way a farm can fallow some fields for a season, or irrigate others less and accept a smaller harvest. Where possible, the state should pair agricultural cuts with support for farmers, such as low-interest loans or drought-tolerant crop assistance, rather than leaving the sector to absorb the reduction with no help at all.
Alternative supplies like desalination offer only a partial answer here. The Carlsbad plant proves seawater desalination can supply a meaningful share of a coastal city's water, about 10 percent of San Diego County's total supply, but it does not currently supply irrigation water at any comparable scale, since the cost per gallon remains too high for most farm operations. That means desalination can ease the burden on cities specifically, freeing up river and reservoir water that would otherwise go to municipal use, but it cannot substitute for the irrigation cuts agriculture will still need to make. The task force should prioritize agricultural cuts, pair them with support for affected farms, and invest any available desalination capacity toward reducing the cuts cities themselves would otherwise need.
Rubric:
| Criterion | Emerging | Developing | Proficient | Advanced |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claim | No clear position stated | States a position but it shifts or is vague across the essay | States one clear, consistent position on which sector should be cut | States a clear position and previews the essay's supporting reasoning |
| Evidence & reasoning | No evidence from background material | Restates one fact without explaining its relevance to the claim | Uses at least one specific figure and explains how it supports the claim | Uses two or more specific figures and explains how each supports the claim |
| Counterclaim | No counterclaim addressed | Mentions an opposing view without a rebuttal | States a counterclaim and offers a rebuttal | States a counterclaim, rebuts it specifically, and ties the rebuttal back to the claim |
| Organization & conventions | Ideas are disconnected; frequent errors interfere with meaning | Some organization; errors are noticeable but do not block meaning | Clear paragraph structure; few errors | Clear, purposeful structure with a strong concluding statement; virtually error-free |
Differentiation
Support
Provide sentence starters for each Planning Organizer row ("The task force should cut ___ first because ___, since the background material shows ___.") and allow the counterclaim and rebuttal to be combined into a single simpler sentence.
Extension
Ask students to research, using only the background material provided rather than outside sources, what specifically limits desalination's use for irrigation, and add a second counterclaim addressing whether that limit could change if desalination technology became less expensive.
ELL supports
Pre-teach "allocation," "irrigation," and "counterclaim" with visuals (a farm field and a city skyline sharing one river) before the writing task. Allow the Planning Organizer to be completed with phrases rather than full sentences before drafting begins.