Water for Schools
Menu

Debate kit Grade 7 Social Studies & Civics

Should Rivermont Sell Its Water System? A Grade 7 Debate

A grade 7 debate kit on whether a fictional town should sell its public water system to a private company, with two-sided evidence on repairs, rates, and control.

Objectives

  1. Students will evaluate two-sided evidence on whether a town should privatize its water system.
  2. Students will build and deliver a rebuttal supported by named evidence from the file.

Vocabulary

Key words: privatization, public utility, profit, rate, affordability

Teacher overview

This is a two-team structured debate for a 60-minute block, with a second session for prep if needed. Students argue for or against a town selling its public water system to a private company. The question is genuinely contested: aging pipes need costly repairs, and a private company could bring money and skill, yet it must earn a profit and could raise rates on families who have little say. Assign one team to the affirmative side and one to the negative, with a few students as judges who score the rounds with the rubric.

Should Rivermont Sell Its Water System? A Grade 7 Debate — Grade 7 Social Studies & Civics
Name: ____________________________ Date: ______________

Resolution & Background

Resolution: "Rivermont should sell its public water system to a private company that promises to repair the pipes."

Background: The fictional town of Rivermont owns its water system and runs it itself, the way most American towns do. Rivermont's pipes are old, and fixing them will cost a lot of money. A private company has offered to buy the system and pay for the repairs. In return, it would own the system and run it for profit, and it could also raise water rates over time. In most states, a state utility commission must approve rate increases by a privately owned water company.

The need to fix pipes is real across the country. In 2025, a national report card gave United States drinking water only a C-, and somewhere in the nation a water main breaks about every two minutes. The federal government says the country needs about $625 billion over 20 years to fix its water systems. Water bills are also going up: they rose about 24 percent from 2019 to 2024 and about 5.1 percent more in 2025, faster than prices in general.

Roles: The affirmative team argues for selling the system. The negative team argues for keeping it public. Judges do not take a side. They score each team with the rubric and explain their scores at the end.

Evidence File

Case for selling the system:

  1. Rivermont's pipes need costly repairs. The town cannot easily pay for them. Nationwide, the government says about $625 billion is needed over 20 years to fix water systems. A private company could bring repair money to Rivermont now. Then residents would not have to wait years for repairs. (Source: EPA Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey and Assessment.)
  2. The country's water systems are in rough shape. In 2025, United States drinking water earned only a C-. A main breaks about every two minutes somewhere in the nation. A company that fixes pipes for a living may do the work faster than a small town office. (Source: ASCE 2025 Report Card for America's Infrastructure.)
  3. A fictional Rivermont budget office says the town cannot raise enough repair money on its own. The only way would be a large tax increase. Voters have already turned that down twice. Selling the system moves the repair cost onto a company instead of onto taxpayers. (Illustrative report created for this debate, not a documented figure.)

Case against selling the system:

  1. A private company must earn a profit. That gives it a reason to raise water rates. Bills are already climbing. Water and sewer costs rose about 24 percent from 2019 to 2024. They rose about 5.1 percent more in 2025. Higher rates would hit families with the least money the hardest. (Source: Bluefield Research / industry rate surveys.)
  2. A widely used rule of thumb treats water and sewer costs above about 4.5 percent of a household's income as a high burden. It comes from adding two EPA benchmarks. EPA itself has no single official cutoff. Suppose a company raises rates to pay for repairs and profit. Then more Rivermont families could cross that line. They would struggle to pay. (Source: EPA Water Affordability Needs Assessment, December 2024.)
  3. Once the system is sold, residents lose direct control. A fictional resident group, Rivermont Water Watch, makes this point. People can vote out a water board that raises rates too far. They cannot vote out a private company. (Illustrative testimony created for this debate, not a documented figure.)

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 evidence from the file Cites one piece of evidence without explaining it Cites at least two pieces of evidence and explains how each supports the team's side Cites several pieces of evidence, explains each, and shows why it outweighs the other side
Rebuttal quality Does not respond to the other team Responds but without evidence Directly answers a specific opposing point using evidence from the file Answers several opposing points and explains why the team's evidence is stronger
Organization & delivery Hard to follow; no clear structure Some structure but unclear transitions Clear claim, evidence, and conclusion that stay on the resolution Clear, confident structure that responds directly to the resolution throughout

Differentiation

Support (below grade level)

Give each team a simplified card listing only the single strongest point on its side, and provide rebuttal sentence starters ("Our opponents say ___, but the evidence shows ___."). Let students deliver from written notes rather than speaking without a script.

Extension (above grade level)

Ask students to propose, drawing on the Evidence File, one condition a sale contract could include to protect Rivermont families, such as a cap on how fast rates can rise, and to add that idea to their argument or rebuttal.

ELL supports

Pre-teach "privatization," "public utility," "profit," "rate," and "affordability" with simple definitions and a labeled drawing of a town-owned system versus a company-owned system. Allow students to deliver rebuttals from written notes, and provide the key figures on a visible reference card.