📐 SAT
📝 ACT
🎓 AP Exams
About Contact Blog Privacy Policy

AP English Language: Rhetorical Situation (Writing Drill 2)

Drill 2 · Writing · Rhetorical Situation — Writing

0 / 5
←
Previous drill
Drill 1
Next drill
Drill 3
→
More Ap English Language Rhetorical Situation Writing drills
Drill 1 5 questions →
Drill 2 — current you are here
Drill 3 5 questions →

About This Drill

AP English Language: Rhetorical Situation (Writing Drill 2) is a Writing practice drill covering Rhetorical Situation — Writing. It contains 5 original questions created by Brian Stewart, a Barron's test prep author with over 20 years of tutoring experience.

Writing drills ask you to read like a writer, analyzing a student draft and choosing revisions that improve its rhetorical effectiveness. This drill focuses on revision choices that sharpen the writer's sense of audience: identifying the revision that best adjusts tone or word choice to fit the intended reader.

Passage

The following is a draft of a student op-ed submitted to a school newspaper. The intended audience is high school students, parents, and administrators. The writer argues that school start times should be moved later. [1] Schools start too early. [2] Most high schools in this district begin at 7:15 a.m., which means students are expected to be alert and learning at an hour when their brains are not yet fully functional. [3] This is not laziness. [4] It is biology. [5] Research by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Centers for Disease Control has found that adolescents are biologically programmed to fall asleep later and wake up later than children or adults, a shift in circadian rhythm that begins at puberty and persists through early adulthood. [6] When schools require teenagers to be present and attentive at 7:15 a.m., they are requiring them to perform at the equivalent of 5 a.m. by adult standards. [7] The consequences are well documented: lower academic performance, higher rates of depression and anxiety, increased risk of accidents among teenage drivers, and chronic sleep deprivation that compounds over the school week. [8] Some administrators argue that later start times would create logistical problems, particularly for bus schedules and after-school activities. [9] These are legitimate concerns. [10] But other districts have managed the transition. [11] Seattle moved its high school start times from 7:50 a.m. to 8:45 a.m. in 2016 and found that students gained an average of 34 additional minutes of sleep per night, academic performance improved, and attendance rates increased. [12] The logistical challenges were real but solvable. [13] The student body is asking the school board to consider this change. [14] We deserve a school day that works with our biology, not against it. [15] A later start time is not a luxury. [16] It is a health issue, an equity issue, and an academic issue. [17] We hope the board will take it seriously.

Questions & Explanations

Question 1. The writer wants to revise sentences 1 and 2 to create an opening that more effectively establishes the essay's credibility with a skeptical adult audience. Which revision best accomplishes this?

  • A) High school students are always tired, but most people just assume this is because they stay up too late scrolling on their phones.
  • B) Many students in this district have complained about early school start times, and their concerns deserve to be heard.
  • C) The question of school start times may seem like a minor scheduling issue, but it has significant consequences for student health and learning.
  • D) The science is unambiguous: requiring adolescents to begin school before 8:30 a.m. contradicts decades of research on sleep biology and produces measurable harm to student health and academic performance. ✓

Explanation: Choice D is correct. A skeptical adult audience, administrators and parents, is more likely to engage with a claim grounded in scientific authority and specific consequences than with an assertion from students. Choice D opens with credibility ('The science is unambiguous'), specificity ('before 8:30 a.m.'), and stakes ('measurable harm'). Choice A leads with a stereotype about phone use that alienates the adult audience. Choice B frames the issue as student complaints, which is less authoritative. Choice C is an improvement but is more tentative than Choice D.

Question 2. The writer wants to revise sentence 6 to make the comparison between adolescent sleep needs and adult experience more vivid and accessible for a general audience. Which revision best accomplishes this?

  • A) Asking a teenager to be alert and productive at 7:15 a.m. is the biological equivalent of asking an adult to report to work, take a test, and make important decisions at 5:00 in the morning, before their body's clock has signaled that it is time to be awake. ✓
  • B) At 7:15 a.m., most teenagers remain in a stage of sleep that adults typically pass through several hours earlier in the night.
  • C) The circadian shift that adolescents experience means that their optimal sleep window runs approximately two hours later than that of adults.
  • D) Most adults would struggle to function effectively at 7:15 a.m. without coffee, yet we expect teenagers to take tests and absorb new material at that same hour, which shows that early school start times are mainly a matter of adult inconvenience rather than a biological necessity.

Explanation: Choice A is correct. The original sentence makes the comparison but does not fully develop it. Choice A extends the analogy, 'report to work, take a test, and make important decisions', grounding the abstract biology in specific, familiar adult activities that make the inequity visceral. The phrase 'before their body's clock has signaled that it is time to be awake' adds explanatory clarity. Choice B uses technical language that is less accessible. Choice C states the circadian offset but does not create a vivid picture. Choice D is effective but less specific about what 'struggling to function' means in a school context.

Question 3. The writer wants to revise sentence 10; 'But other districts have managed the transition', to make the rebuttal of administrators' logistical concerns more specific and persuasive. Which revision best accomplishes this?

  • A) However, change is always difficult, and districts that have tried it have found ways to make it work.
  • B) But if other districts can solve these scheduling problems, then there is no real reason our own district cannot do the same thing.
  • C) In fact, over 1,000 districts nationwide have already shifted to later start times, demonstrating that the logistical challenges, while real, are consistently solvable with adequate planning. ✓
  • D) Additionally, many students and parents have said they would be willing to adjust their own schedules to accommodate a later start time.

Explanation: Choice C is correct. The original sentence is vague ('other districts'). Choice C replaces vagueness with a specific claim (over 1,000 districts) that transforms an isolated anecdote into a pattern, and acknowledges the challenges while asserting they are 'consistently solvable.' This is more persuasive than the original because it anticipates the 'but our situation is unique' objection. Choice A is generic and adds no specificity. Choice B is slightly more persuasive than the original but still lacks specific evidence. Choice D shifts to a different kind of evidence (student and parent willingness) that does not directly address the logistical concern.

Question 4. A classmate suggests that sentence 16; 'It is a health issue, an equity issue, and an academic issue', would be more persuasive if each claim were briefly elaborated. Which revision best accomplishes this while maintaining appropriate length for an op-ed?

  • A) It is a health issue because students are tired, an equity issue because some students are more affected than others, and an academic issue because grades suffer.
  • B) It is a health issue, chronic sleep deprivation raises rates of depression and anxiety. It is an equity issue, students who rely on school transportation or have working parents cannot simply sleep in. And it is an academic issue, sleep-deprived students learn less, retain less, and perform worse on every metric that matters. ✓
  • C) It is, first and foremost, a health issue, but it is also an equity issue and an academic issue, all of which the school board has an obligation to address.
  • D) It touches on health, equity, and academics, three broad areas that should be central to any responsible school board's decision-making.

Explanation: Choice B is correct. Each of the three claims in the original sentence is given a brief, specific elaboration that shows, rather than merely states, why the label applies. The parallel structure ('It is a health issue...It is an equity issue...And it is an academic issue') also creates rhetorical momentum. Choice A elaborates but in vague, predictable terms ('students are tired,' 'grades suffer'). Choice C restates the original without elaborating. Choice D consolidates the claims but removes the specificity that makes them persuasive.

Question 5. The writer wants the op-ed's conclusion (sentences 13–17) to end with more rhetorical force. Which revision of sentence 17 best accomplishes this?

  • A) We hope the board will carefully consider everything we have said here and ultimately make the right decision for its students.
  • B) Thank you for reading, and we look forward to a productive conversation about this important issue.
  • C) The research supports this change, the evidence from other districts confirms it is feasible, and the students who will benefit are asking for it.
  • D) The board has the power and the evidence to act. The only question is whether it will choose to treat the health and learning of its students as a priority worth the effort of change. ✓

Explanation: Choice D is correct. 'We hope the board will take it seriously' is a weak, deferential ending for a piece that has built a strong evidence-based argument. Choice D replaces deference with a direct challenge, acknowledging the board's power, affirming the evidence, and framing inaction as a choice with moral weight. This is more rhetorically forceful without being disrespectful. Choice A is slightly more direct than the original but still passive. Choice B is a polite closing that dissipates the argument's momentum. Choice C is a solid summary but lacks the forward-looking pressure of Choice D.