Y10W13PA · Peer Assessment · Grade 10
- Should Standardized Tests Be Abolished as the Main Pathway?
WEEK 13 OF 44
This week you wrote a persuasive submission to a national education review arguing about standardized testing in college admissions. Now you’ll read a practice submission and judge how strong it is. Working through how assessors evaluate formal persuasive writing sharpens your ability to apply the same lens to your own work.
Part 1
The Assessor Scorecard for
Persuasive – Submission
A strong persuasive submission takes a clear position, supports it with specific reasoning and evidence, addresses the strongest counterargument and closes with a specific recommendation. Assessors evaluate whether the argument genuinely convinces its professional audience.
Ideas & Content
Specific reasoning — not just asserting a position but identifying the mechanism behind the problem. The evidence that supports the claim, named clearly. The precise way the strongest objection fails to undermine the case.
- Specific reasoning: shows mechanism, evidence and objection handling instead of assertion alone.
Structure & Cohesion
A deliberate move from position statement to positive case to counterargument to recommendation. Structural weakness shows when sections lack transitions. A vague recommendation also signals structural weakness.
- Submission pathway: moves from position to case, counterargument and recommendation with purpose.
Audience & Purpose
Calibrated for its specific professional audience. Weakness appears when the framing does not match what the audience can evaluate. Weakness also appears when the recommendation is not actionable.
- Framing in terms: the professional audience is equipped to evaluate is the primary mark of audience strength.
Language Choices
Formal submissions require precise analytical language. Key claims must be expressed exactly. The recommendation must be stated in specific, actionable terms. Vague or informal language reduces formal credibility.
- Actionable precision: states claims and recommendations in exact, formal terms.
Conventions
Accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation are expected in formal submissions. Errors reduce professional credibility. Sentence variety and controlled complexity show command of formal expression.
- Formal control: uses accurate mechanics and controlled sentence complexity to sustain credibility.
Part 2
Today’s Marking Targets
Write a submission to the national education review arguing for or against abolishing standardized tests as the primary college admissions pathway — taking a clear position, supporting it with reasoning and addressing a counterargument.
Three strands matter most this week: Ideas & Content, Structure & Cohesion and Language Choices. The quality of ideas decides whether the argument is genuinely analytical or merely assertive. How the submission is structured — moving from case to counterargument to recommendation — decides whether the reader can follow the reasoning. The precision of language decides how clearly each analytical claim is expressed.
Ideas & Content
Strong writing this week shows Ideas & Content applied consistently — not just in isolated moments. Assessors look for depth that serves this task: genuine analytical reasoning with mechanism and evidence, not bare assertion.
What markers scan for
- Ideas & Content applied consistently throughout — not only in isolated moments.
- The demands of this submission visibly shaping the depth of reasoning.
Score Bands
-
Basic
Ideas & Content is present but applied inconsistently or only at a surface level.
-
Strong
Ideas & Content is applied consistently, with genuine understanding of what this task requires.
-
Excellent
Ideas & Content is applied with sustained precision throughout, shaped by the specific demands of this task.
Structure & Cohesion
Strong writing this week shows Structure & Cohesion applied consistently — not just in isolated moments. Assessors look for organization that serves this task: a clear move from case to counterargument to recommendation with explicit transitions.
What markers scan for
- Structure & Cohesion applied consistently throughout — not only in isolated moments.
- The submission format visibly shaping the order and transitions.
Score Bands
-
Basic
Structure & Cohesion is present but applied inconsistently or only at a surface level.
-
Strong
Structure & Cohesion is applied consistently, with genuine understanding of what this task requires.
-
Excellent
Structure & Cohesion is applied with sustained precision throughout, shaped by the specific demands of this task.
Language Choices
Strong writing this week shows Language Choices applied consistently — not just in isolated moments. Assessors look for choices that serve this task: precise analytical language that expresses each claim exactly.
What markers scan for
- Language Choices applied consistently throughout — not only in isolated moments.
- The formal analytical demands of this task visibly shaping word choices.
Score Bands
-
Basic
Language Choices is present but applied inconsistently or only at a surface level.
-
Strong
Language Choices is applied consistently, with genuine understanding of what this task requires.
-
Excellent
Language Choices is applied with sustained precision throughout, shaped by the specific demands of this task.
Now read · Student sample
Should Standardized Tests Be Abolished as the Main Pathway?
Student sample for assessment
A Grade 10 practice sample written for WritePath. It is not the work of a real student.
This submission argues that standardized testing should be reformed rather than abolished as a primary college admissions pathway, on the grounds that abolition without a credible replacement would create greater inequity, not less.
The case for abolishing standardized tests rests on well-documented concerns: they reward a narrow range of academic skills, create extreme pressure in the final years of high school, disadvantage students from schools with fewer resources and bear little relationship to success in many fields of college study. These concerns are legitimate and the review should take them seriously. However, abolishing the tests does not resolve these concerns — it merely relocates them. If colleges select students through interviews, portfolios, recommendations or personal essays, the advantages will accrue to students whose schools, families and private consultants can coach them in those formats. The evidence from the test-optional era suggests that alternative selection processes are not neutral: they tend to favor students who already have the most social and cultural capital, which is precisely why several selective universities have recently reinstated testing requirements.
The stronger position is to retain standardized testing while reforming the system around it. Reforms should include: offering the tests free during the school day so access does not depend on family resources, expanding fee waivers and high-quality preparation for under-resourced schools, and requiring colleges to report transparently on the outcomes of students admitted through different pathways. These changes address the legitimate objections to testing while preserving the one feature it has that genuinely resists gaming: it produces a comparable, externally administered score that is harder to manipulate than holistic selection processes.
The review should also consider that the strongest advocates for abolishing tests are often found at colleges that already have the brand equity to attract high-demand applicants regardless of how they are selected. For students from schools with limited reputational networks, a transparent numerical score may be the most equitable tool available. The panel is asked to weigh the rhetoric of reform against the evidence of what has happened where testing requirements were dropped.
Now apply
The assessment will open in a new tab — keep this page open so you can refer back to the prompt, evidence pack and sample text as you work.
Start the Peer Assessment →