Water for Schools
Menu

Debate kit Grade 7 English Language Arts

Should New Homes Be Required to Have Water-Efficient Fixtures?

A grade 7 debate kit on whether a town should require water-efficient fixtures in every new home, with two-sided evidence on conservation and construction cost.

Objectives

  1. Students will evaluate evidence on both sides of a resolution about a water-efficient fixture mandate.
  2. Students will construct an argument that states a claim and responds to the strongest opposing point.
  3. Students will cite specific evidence from the Evidence File to support a debate position.

Vocabulary

WaterSense
An EPA label on toilets, showerheads, faucets, and irrigation controllers that meet water-saving standards. It works like the ENERGY STAR label, but for water.

Also: fixture, mandate, affordability

Teacher overview

This is a two-team structured debate for a 50 to 60 minute block, with prep time continuing into a second, shorter session if needed. Students argue for or against a rule in the fictional town of Nutwood Corners requiring every newly built home to include water-efficient fixtures, a resolution with real tension between long-term water savings and the up-front cost of new construction.

Should New Homes Be Required to Have Water-Efficient Fixtures? — Grade 7 English Language Arts
Name: ____________________________ Date: ______________

Resolution & Background

Resolution: "Nutwood Corners should require every new home to include water-efficient fixtures, such as low-flow showerheads and WaterSense-certified toilets, even though this will raise building costs."

Background: Water-efficient fixtures use less water to do the same job as a standard fixture. A standard showerhead flows at 2.5 gallons per minute. WaterSense-labeled models use 2.0 gallons per minute or less. That difference adds up over the life of a home. At the same time, any new construction rule adds cost to building a home. Housing costs are already a concern. Many Nutwood Corners families raise that concern, using the word "affordability," at town meetings.

Evidence File

Case for the mandate:

  1. A standard showerhead flows at 2.5 gallons per minute. WaterSense-labeled models use 2.0 gallons per minute or less. A new-construction rule locks in that water savings for the life of the home. It does not wait for an owner to replace old fixtures later. (Source: EPA WaterSense.)
  2. In a 2016 Water Research Foundation study of single-family homes, toilets accounted for about 24 percent of indoor household water use. Showers accounted for about 20 percent. A rule covering both fixtures addresses nearly half of a home's indoor water use, starting on the day it is built. (Source: Water Research Foundation, Residential End Uses of Water, 2016.)
  3. A fictional Nutwood Corners Public Works memo estimates that efficient fixtures would add about $200 to a typical new home's cost. That is a small amount next to the total cost of construction. (Illustrative estimate created for this debate, not a documented figure.)

Case against the mandate:

  1. The average US household already uses about 300 gallons of water per day. Roughly 70 percent of that is used indoors. (Source: EPA WaterSense.) Many builders point out that buyer demand already pushes new homes toward efficient fixtures. No government rule is needed to make that happen. (Illustrative builder argument created for this debate.)
  2. A fictional local trade group, the Nutwood Corners Builders Alliance, wrote testimony for this debate. The group argues that any new construction rule raises the price of new homes. Housing affordability is already a serious concern for many families. (Illustrative testimony created for this debate.)
  3. A mandate applies only to newly built homes. Most existing homes in Nutwood Corners would stay completely unaffected. Those existing homes already account for most of the town's total water use, so opponents argue the rule would change very little townwide.

From Water for Schools (waterforschools.org). This material is in the public domain (CC0) and may be copied, edited, and shared freely.

Rubric
Criterion Emerging Developing Proficient Advanced
Evidence use Repeats a claim with no cited evidence Cites one piece of evidence without explaining its relevance Cites at least two pieces of evidence and explains how each supports the team's position Cites multiple pieces of evidence, explains their relevance, and anticipates the opposing side's likely response
Rebuttal quality Does not respond to the opposing team's points Responds to an opposing point but without new evidence Directly rebuts a specific opposing point using evidence from the file Rebuts multiple opposing points and explains why the team's evidence outweighs them
Organization & delivery Argument is difficult to follow; no clear structure Argument has a structure but transitions are unclear Argument follows a clear claim-evidence-conclusion structure Argument is clearly structured, confidently delivered, and directly responsive to the resolution

Differentiation

Support (below grade level)

Provide a simplified evidence card for each side listing only the single strongest point, and give sentence starters for rebuttals, such as "Our opponents claim ___, but the evidence shows ___."

Extension (above grade level)

Using only the Evidence File, have students draft a compromise rule, such as requiring efficient fixtures only for certain fixture types, that responds to at least one point from each side of the debate.

ELL supports

Pre-teach "WaterSense," "fixture," "mandate," and "affordability" with simple definitions and a labeled picture comparing a standard showerhead to a WaterSense-labeled one. Allow students to deliver rebuttals from written notes rather than extemporaneously.