Question

Read the rough draft of a student’s conclusion to an argumentative editorial. (1) Year-round schooling would help student achievement. (2) Not so much information would have to be crammed into nine months. (3) Furthermore, the elimination of long breaks, particularly summer break, would significantly reduce "learning loss” and the additional time wasted at the beginning of each academic year to reteach previously learned material. (4) It is clear that year-round schooling helps students learn and retain more. (5) The United States is not the only country to experiment with a year-round school schedule. (6) Although many still claim that evidence about year-round school and its link to higher achievement is inconclusive, these people need to open their eyes and see that students in these schools consistently score higher on certain assessments than students who attend schools with traditional nine-month calendars. (7) It is about time that we replaced our outdated and inefficient school calendars. Why should sentence 4 be removed from this conclusion? It criticizes those who disagree with the writer. It strengthens the viewpoint of the opposition. It states a fact that is unrelated to the topic. It unnecessarily restates the editorial’s claim.

Answer 1

It should be removed from the editorial piece because it is repetitive to the rest of it pointing out the fact they we in the United States should get rid of nine-month calender's and continue with year-round schooling. Also in sentence 1) it should either be (help a student's achievement) or (help student's with their achievements)