Y07W19PA - Should There Be a Curfew for Under-16s?

This week you wrote a persuasive letter to your local council about an under-16 curfew. Now you'll read another student's letter and decide how well they build their case. Looking at someone else's work sharpens your own persuasion.

Part 1

The Assessor Scorecard for

Persuasive – Persuasive letter

Markers look for a clear stance backed by evidence and reasoning, rooted in real experience or observation. Check each strand below to see what strong work looks like.

Ideas & Content

Clear position on the curfew stated early. Two or three reasons supported by your own experience. Understanding shown for the other side of the argument. No bare claims without evidence.

  • Evidence: position is clear; reasons are backed by observation; the other side is addressed.

Structure & Cohesion

Greeting, opening position, body paragraphs, close and sign-off. Reasons and evidence flow in a clear order. The other side is acknowledged before the final close. No jumping between unconnected points.

  • Format: follows letter format; ideas progress logically; opening and close are strong.

Audience & Purpose

Written for elected councillors making a real decision. Tone is respectful and formal, but not stiff. Recognises their role and decision-making power. No casual language or wrong tone for the reader.

  • Authority: written for councillors; tone is respectful; their role is recognised.

Language Choices

Specific language, vivid examples, varied sentences. Appeals to values — fairness, safety, freedom. Precise verbs over flat or general words. No clichés or emotional pressure.

  • Persuasion: specific language; appeals to values; varied sentences; no clichés.

Conventions

Correct spelling, punctuation and grammar throughout. Errors that suggest carelessness in a formal letter. Correct letter conventions and layout.

  • Technical: spelling, punctuation and grammar are accurate; letter conventions are correct.

Part 2

Today’s Marking Targets

Task in one sentence

Write a letter to your local council arguing for or against the proposed under-16 curfew, using reasons and evidence from your own experience.

Let’s Focus

Two strands matter most this week: Ideas & Content and Language Choices. Your position needs specific evidence from what you've seen — not assumptions. Even strong evidence falls flat without precise, vivid language that makes councillors care.

Ideas & Content

Strong writing this week takes a clear position and backs it with two or three reasons from real experience or observation. The other side is acknowledged but answered. Evidence feels real and specific — not invented or generalised.

What markers scan for

  • Clear position stated early in the letter.
  • Two or more reasons with specific evidence.
  • Evidence drawn from observation, not guesswork.
  • The other side acknowledged and answered.

Score Bands

  • Basic

    Position is unclear; evidence is vague; the other side is ignored.

  • Strong

    Clear position with two supported reasons; the other side is mentioned.

  • Excellent

    Strong position with compelling reasons; evidence is specific and the other side is answered.

Language Choices

Strong letters use specific language that appeals to values — fairness, safety, community. Skip clichés like "keep our youth safe." Show through detail why a councillor should agree. Mix short urgent sentences with longer explanations to build persuasive rhythm.

What markers scan for

  • Specific, vivid language across the letter.
  • Appeals to values without clichés.
  • Varied sentence rhythm — short and long.
  • Language that would move an official.

Score Bands

  • Basic

    Language is vague or full of clichés; few value appeals; little sentence variety.

  • Strong

    Some specific language; value appeals present; mostly convincing tone.

  • Excellent

    Precise, vivid language across the letter; value appeals and rhythm work together.

Now read · Student sample

Should There Be a Curfew for Under-16s?

Year 7 sample · \~350 words

Student sample for assessment

Written by a Year 7 student in Parramatta, New South Wales, Australia.

Dear Councillors,

I am writing to oppose the proposed 9 p.m. curfew for under-16s on school nights. I understand the council wants to improve safety and reduce crime, but a curfew targets the wrong problem and will push young people further away from community trust. I have observed the impact of distrust on my neighbourhood. When young people are treated as a threat rather than as part of the community, they stop trying to be part of it. I know three teenagers who volunteer at the community centre—fixing bikes, mentoring younger kids, showing up every week. Under a curfew, they would stop volunteering. Not because they are breaking the law; because they would feel targeted and unwelcome. The council loses their contribution, and they lose the space where they belonged. Second, a curfew does not address the causes of crime; it only restricts movement. If a young person is committing crime, a 9 p.m. deadline will not stop them. If they are not committing crime, the curfew is unfairly restrictive. I finish school at 3 p.m., homework takes two hours, and I need time with my family and to exercise. A 9 p.m. curfew leaves very little evening time. For young people who work part-time or do sport, 9 p.m. is impossible. You would be punishing responsibility, not preventing crime. I recognise the council's concern about safety. Night-time safety is real and matters. But the solution is not to ban young people from public spaces; it is to improve street lighting, increase community presence, and work with young people to understand what unsafe feels like from their perspective. These approaches treat young people as part of the solution, not part of the problem. The council has the opportunity to strengthen community or divide it. A curfew divides. Young people will lose respect for rules created by people who do not respect them. A curfew will not make anyone safer; it will make young people feel unsafe, unwelcome and unseen. I ask the council to reject this proposal and instead invest in the approaches that build trust. Yours respectfully, [Student name]