The task
The two articles below take opposite positions on one question:
Should the Westbrook School District require high school students to lock their phones in pouches from the first bell to the last, including lunch?
Read both. Then analyze both positions to determine which one is better supported by evidence. Use specific evidence from both articles in your answer.
You are not being asked which side you agree with, and you will not be scored on which one you choose. You are being asked to judge the arguing — and either article can be argued for. Allow about 45 minutes.
Article 1
Give Them the Day Back
1Westbrook’s current rule says phones must be off during class. In practice, our teachers spend much of their day enforcing it. Last school year, they wrote 1,140 referrals for phone use, more than for any other kind of problem. A rule that has to be enforced a thousand times a year is not working.
2Last spring, our ninth grade tried locking pouches for eight weeks. Students placed their phones in the pouch at the first bell and unlocked it at dismissal. Phone referrals in the ninth grade fell to nearly zero. In a survey afterward, 21 of the 24 ninth-grade teachers said students were more focused in class.
3New York State has tried this on a much larger scale. It began requiring phone-free schools, from the first bell to the last, in September 2025. In June 2026, the state reported a survey of 585 teachers and principals. Eighty percent said the policy had produced positive results at their school, 76 percent reported better student behavior and participation, and 60 percent reported less bullying.
4The strongest evidence comes from Norway, where a researcher studied more than 400 middle schools that banned phones at different times. After the bans, girls made fewer visits to doctors and mental health specialists, and bullying fell for both girls and boys. Girls’ grades rose, and girls from lower-income families gained the most. Schools that collected phones did better than schools that only asked students to keep them on silent.
5Lunch matters too. Lunch is when students talk to one another. A day without phones gives them that time back.
Article 2
Not the Whole Day
1I support a firm rule against phones in class. What I do not support is locking phones away for the whole day, including lunch, at a cost of tens of thousands of dollars, on evidence that is weaker than it looks.
2The most careful study of this question in a school system like ours was published in February 2025 in a medical journal, The Lancet Regional Health – Europe. Researchers at the University of Birmingham in England compared 30 schools, some with strict phone rules and some with loose ones, and studied 1,227 students. They found no difference in the students’ mental well-being, anxiety, depression, or sleep, and no difference in their English and math grades or their behavior in class. Students at strict schools used their phones about 40 minutes less during the school day, but what mattered for their health was how much they used their phones overall, at home as well as at school.
3The pouches cost about $28 per student. For our 2,300 high school students, that is about $64,400 in the first year, before replacing lost and broken pouches and buying the stations that unlock them. Our district has cut two school counselor positions in the last three years.
4Families need to reach their children. When the parent council surveyed families this fall, 412 parents responded, and 68 percent said they need to be able to contact their child during the school day. Many of our students work after school, pick up younger brothers and sisters, or care for a family member. In an emergency, parents want to hear from their children directly.
5Let us enforce the rule we already have, every period and in every classroom, and teach families about phone use at home, where most of it happens.
Your 45 minutes
Stop here if you have not written yet. What follows names the evidence in both articles and shows where each one is weak. Read it before you write and you will not be practicing the thing the test measures — which is finding all of this yourself, in forty-five minutes, with nobody helping.
After the clock — what was actually on the table
What each article put in front of you
Give Them the Day Back
- A local measurement of the problem. 1,140 phone referrals last year, more than for any other kind of problem.
- A local trial. Eight weeks of pouches in the ninth grade: phone referrals near zero, and 21 of 24 teachers reporting students more focused.
- A statewide survey. New York, June 2026: 585 teachers and principals; 80 percent positive results, 76 percent better behavior and participation, 60 percent less bullying.
- A large study in another country. More than 400 Norwegian middle schools: fewer visits to doctors and mental health specialists for girls, less bullying for all, higher grades for girls, especially girls from lower-income families.
Not the Whole Day
- A published study with measured outcomes. Birmingham, 2025: 30 schools and 1,227 students, with no difference in mental health, sleep, grades, or behavior between strict and loose schools.
- A finding about the cause. Overall phone use, at home and at school, was what mattered for students’ health.
- A cost figure. About $28 a student, or about $64,400 for 2,300 students in the first year, set beside cuts to counselor positions.
- A local survey. 412 parents; 68 percent need to reach their child during the day.
Where each one is thin
Neither article is the right answer. Each has evidence a careful reader can question. Naming those weak points, in specific words, about a specific sentence, is most of what the first scoring trait rewards.
Give Them the Day Back
- The New York survey measures opinions, not results. Teachers and principals were asked what they thought of the policy they were carrying out. That is evidence, but it is weaker than measuring students’ grades, attendance, or health.
- The local trial was short and small. Eight weeks, one grade. Referrals fell, but with phones locked away, there was little left to refer. That shows the pouches stopped phone use. It does not show that learning improved.
- Norway is a different country, and the study was of middle schools. Westbrook’s question is about high school students in this district. A careful reader can ask whether the results carry over.
- She does not answer the cost or the family-contact concern. Article 2 raises both. Article 1 never mentions either.
Not the Whole Day
- The Birmingham study compared schools; it did not run an experiment. The researchers studied schools that had already chosen strict or loose rules. Those schools may differ in other ways. Mr. Webb presents the study as “the most careful,” but Norway’s study was larger, with more than 400 schools.
- The parent survey heard from the parents who chose to answer. He does not say how many families were asked. Parents who feel strongly are the likeliest to respond.
- The emergency concern has no evidence behind it. Paragraph 4 says parents want to hear from their children in an emergency, but it gives no example and no data about what happens during emergencies when students have phones.
- His alternative is the rule that Article 1 says is failing. Article 1 reports 1,140 referrals under the current rule. Mr. Webb proposes enforcing that rule more firmly, but he does not explain how, or answer that number.
- The counselor cuts are a comparison, not a cost of the pouches. Setting $64,400 beside lost counselors makes the cost feel larger. It does not show that the money would come from counselors.
Two essays, either of which could score well
If both of those look like real essays to you, the set is working as intended. On the test you will have two articles built the same way, and no time to find a perfect answer, because there is not one. Choose the side you can support in forty-five minutes, and support it.
Check your own
The Extended Response is scored on three traits. Read your draft against them, one at a time — and then read How the essay is scored, which has the full rubric and two responses to the same task, one earning a 6 and one earning about a 2.
- Analysis of argument and evidence. Did you say which article is better supported, in a sentence, near the beginning? Did you quote or name specific evidence from both articles — not just the one you chose? Did you say what is wrong with the evidence on at least one side, rather than only what is right?
- Development and organization. Does each paragraph do one job? Does a reader who has not seen the articles know what they said? Did you get to the end, or did you run out of clock in the middle of a paragraph?
- Clarity and command of English. Read it aloud. Sentences that you stumble over reading are sentences a scorer stumbles over too. Check that every sentence has a subject and a verb and ends where it should.
One more, which is not on the rubric and costs you the most: did you argue about which side is right instead of which side is better supported? That essay can be beautifully written and still score low, because it answers a question nobody asked.