Chapter 5
If you choose to complete the ACT Writing Test, you have 40 minutes to examine an issue and three possible perspectives and write one essay. Be sure to present a clear and logical analysis with specific supporting detail and use language precisely. Write your essay by hand and be sure it’s legible.
Your essay is not an analysis of the validity of each of the three provided perspectives. Rather, create and support a thoughtful, persuasive argument that advances your opinion on the issue.
When working through the practice essays based on the sample topics in this chapter, be prepared to do the following:
Your challenge is to complete a quality essay in 40 minutes. Avoid these common pitfalls:
Follow these instructions for Questions 997–1001:
997. Educators and school administrators have proposed implementing a ban on possessing cellphones on school grounds for all area high school students. A recent survey reveals that more than one third of high school students have used their cellphones to cheat on high school exams. Administrators argue that, because cellphones are small and easy to conceal during an exam, the only way to ensure that students do not cheat with their cellphones is by banning cellphones altogether. Students and many parents oppose the ban, stating that banning cellphones from school would deprive students of a means of communicating with parents and would decrease student safety. They cite recent instances of school violence that were reported to the outside through students’ cellphones.
Read and carefully consider these perspectives. Each suggests a particular way of thinking about the proposed ban on student cellphone possession on school grounds.
Perspective 1: Just as most haven’t for hundreds of years, today’s students do not need cellphone access while at school. It is an unnecessary distraction, and there are other phones available for use in an emergency.
Perspective 2: Cellphones are part of the modern way of life, and they are necessary for safety as well as convenience. Students should have access to their cellphones throughout the day because they aren’t going to have time to travel to the office or another landline location if an emergency occurs.
Perspective 3: Students should not be refused the right to possess their cellphones on school grounds. However, teachers should have the right to collect cellphones at the start of class and then return them afterward, after the day’s work is performed.
998. In response to recent incidences of school violence, a high school has encouraged teachers to listen in to students’ conversation during periods of downtime in the classroom. School administrators believe that students do not have and should not expect to have a right to privacy in the classroom and that increased teacher attention and awareness can help increase the safety of all students. The theory is that, when teachers are more in tune with what’s being said in their classrooms, tragedies such as the one that took place at Columbine High School may be avoided.
Read and carefully consider these perspectives. Each suggests a particular way of thinking about the proposed listening-in policy discussed in the prompt.
Perspective 1: Asking teachers to listen in on high school students, some of whom are legal adults, is an egregious invasion of privacy that can be likened to installing video cameras in bathroom stalls.
Perspective 2: In this day and age, you simply cannot be too careful, and evidence has shown that many instances of school violence have been foiled by people listening in and speaking up. The listening in policy may also help reduce instances of bullying on high school campuses.
Perspective 3: Whether teachers should listen in on student conversations is really a nonissue. If students are speaking loudly enough to be overheard, then no invasion of privacy is taking place. If they want matters to stay private, they can speak in hushed tones or save the conversation for later.
999. Physicians have been prescribing pregnant women with extreme morning sickness certain anti-nausea medications for years, and while these drugs are approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for use among cancer patients, they have not been specifically tested for side effects on pregnant populations due to the ethical considerations involved in doing so. Thus, doctors are prescribing the drug for what are considered “off-label” purposes. Many women who took these medications are now giving birth to babies with severe birth defects, and many attribute these defects to their use of the medications.
Consider the following perspectives regarding a pregnant woman’s use of prescription-label drugs for off-label purposes.
Perspective 1: Any doctor who prescribes a prescription drug for any use other than its intended one should be prosecuted under federal law. Without prior testing to determine whether a drug is safe for use by pregnant women, the risk is simply too great, and it is a physician’s job to keep the mother and baby safe to the fullest extent possible.
Perspective 2: Though it is risky to give a pregnant woman an anti-nausea medication that has not been tested on pregnant populations, going through pregnancy with severe morning sickness and the nutritional deficiencies it can cause is no safer. Most pregnant women who take these drugs during pregnancy give birth to healthy babies without birth defects.
Perspective 3: By prescribing pregnant women anti-nausea medications that haven’t been specifically tested on this population, these women are essentially becoming the very human guinea pigs it’s considered “unethical” to formally test. At least a formal clinical trial would likely furnish critical information about the safety and effectiveness of these drugs when used by pregnant women.
1000. What bathroom individuals who identify as transgendered should legally use has become an increasingly hot-button issue in recent years, with several major nationwide retailers taking their own stances and enacting their own guidelines. The results thus far have been mixed, with some shoppers supporting the decisions of these retailers and others decrying it.
Consider the following perspectives regarding public bathroom use by transgendered individuals.
Perspective 1: Transgendered individuals should simply use whichever bathroom corresponds with their anatomy. If they have male anatomy, they should use the men’s room, and vice versa.
Perspective 2: Transgendered individuals should have the right to use the bathroom intended for use by whichever sex they identify with. If they were born female and have not undergone gender reassignment surgery but still choose to live life as a man, they should be able to use the men’s bathroom.
Perspective 3: Business and public places should have to have unisex bathrooms available after they reach a certain size to avoid issues with discrimination. Businesses that are too small to offer unisex bathrooms should simply have several single bathrooms that are intended for use by either sex.
1001. In recent years, many fast food industry workers have gone on strike and engaged in other efforts to try to boost their hourly wages to about $15. They argue that anything less will likely keep them below the poverty line, even if they work full-time, and that the current federal minimum wage is simply not sufficient enough to cover the typical cost of living. Others argue against a $15-per-hour rate for workers within the fast food industry, arguing that most of these jobs don’t require much of an educational background and therefore shouldn’t reward workers with a salary more than twice the federal minimum wage.
Consider the following perspectives regarding whether fast food workers should receive at least $15 an hour.
Perspective 1: Not all fast food workers are there because they are uneducated. On the contrary, tough economic times have landed people from all walks of life in these positions, and people who work full-time to support themselves and their families should be compensated appropriately for doing so.
Perspective 2: A raise for fast food workers is not an outlandish request, but a raise to $15 an hour is above and beyond a reasonable hike. This amount is more than some workers with degrees make, such as many who work in the nonprofit industry, and salary should be commensurate with one’s skill set and level of education.
Perspective 3: Most positions in the fast food industry require minimal skills and education, and therefore, those who hold these positions should not expect to receive more than the federal minimum wage. The minimum wage is set after the nationwide cost of living is taken into account, so the government will raise it when it deems appropriate, and fast food industry workers should wait until this occurs.