Writing prompt Grade 7 English Language Arts
Should Hartwell Limit Summer Lawn Watering? Argument Prompt
A grade 7 argument writing prompt where students take a position on a drought watering limit, address a counterclaim, and support both with the background material.
Objectives
- Students will write an argument that states a claim and addresses a counterclaim about a drought rule.
- Students will support a position using evidence drawn from the background material.
Vocabulary
- Drought
- A long stretch of drier-than-normal weather that leaves too little water for people, farms, and nature. Droughts build slowly and can last for years.
- Reservoir
- A human-made lake, usually created by a dam, that stores water for later. Reservoirs supply cities and farms and help control floods.
Also: conservation, counterclaim, rebuttal
Teacher overview
The fictional town of Hartwell is in its third dry year, and its only reservoir is running low. The town council has proposed limiting summer lawn watering to two days a week. The rule would save water but would frustrate residents who take pride in green lawns and gardens. This prompt asks students to take a position and, as grade 7 argument writing requires, to answer a counterclaim rather than ignore it.
Prompt
Background: Hartwell gets all of its water from one reservoir, which rain and snow refill. For three years less rain has fallen than normal, and the reservoir has dropped to a level the town rarely sees. The average home uses about 300 gallons of water a day, and in summer, lawn watering can grow into one of the largest parts of that use.
The town council has proposed a plan: from June through August, homes could water lawns only two days a week, on set days. Supporters say the plan would stretch the low reservoir through the dry season and would treat every home the same way. Opponents say a green lawn matters to families and that some gardens need more water, and they argue the town should ask people to save water instead of forcing a rule. The council will vote next month.
Writing task: Should Hartwell adopt the two-day watering limit? Write an argument essay. State a clear claim. Give at least two reasons from the background. Name at least one counterclaim an opponent might raise, and answer it. End with a conclusion that restates your position.
Planning Organizer
| Category | Your notes |
|---|---|
| Claim (should Hartwell adopt the limit?) | |
| Reason 1 and evidence from the background | |
| Reason 2 and evidence from the background | |
| Counterclaim an opponent would 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:
Hartwell should adopt the two-day-a-week summer watering limit, because saving the reservoir now protects everyone's water later. The town gets all of its drinking water from one reservoir, and after three dry years it has dropped to a level the town has rarely seen. If the town does nothing, the reservoir could fall so low that people lose water for cooking and cleaning, not just for lawns. Limiting lawn watering targets the right problem, since outdoor use climbs in summer and can become one of the largest parts of a home's water use. Cutting back on one of the biggest summer uses saves a large amount of water.
Some residents will argue that a green lawn matters to families and that the town should ask people to save water instead of forcing a rule. This is a fair point, and the council should explain the rule clearly and kindly. But a request alone is easy to ignore, and during a serious drought the town cannot count on everyone choosing to cut back. A clear rule that applies to every household is more fair than hoping some people save while others waste, because everyone shares the same reservoir.
For families with gardens that truly need more water, the council could allow hand-watering of gardens on any day while still limiting sprinklers on lawns. That change would answer the strongest worry without giving up the water savings.
Hartwell should pass the watering limit. The reservoir is too low to risk, lawn watering is one of the largest summer uses to cut, and a fair rule protects the water everyone depends on. Protecting drinking water is worth the cost of a less-green lawn for one dry summer.
Rubric:
| Criterion | Emerging | Developing | Proficient | Advanced |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claim | No clear position stated | States a position but it shifts or is vague | States one clear, consistent position | States a clear position and previews the reasoning |
| Evidence and reasoning | No evidence from the background | Restates one detail without explaining it | Uses at least one detail and explains how it supports the claim | Uses two or more details and explains how each supports the claim |
| Counterclaim | No counterclaim addressed | Mentions an opposing view with no rebuttal | States a counterclaim and offers a rebuttal | States a counterclaim, rebuts it specifically, and ties it back to the claim |
| Organization and conventions | Ideas disconnected; errors block meaning | Some structure; errors are noticeable | Clear paragraphs; few errors | Clear, purposeful structure with a strong conclusion; nearly error-free |
Differentiation
Support
Provide sentence starters for each organizer row, such as "One reason Hartwell should (or should not) adopt the limit is ___, because the background says ___." Allow the counterclaim and rebuttal to be written as two linked sentences rather than a full paragraph.
Extension
Ask students to add a second counterclaim and rebuttal, and to propose one fair exception to the rule (like the garden hand-watering idea) that keeps most of the water savings. They should explain why their exception is fair.
ELL supports
Pre-teach "drought," "reservoir," "counterclaim," and "rebuttal" with simple definitions and a picture of a low reservoir. Allow students to complete the Planning Organizer in phrases and to draft with a partner before writing their final argument alone.