Thesis: Previewing Reasoning or Structure Practice Test
•15 QuestionsRead the student essay excerpt below, paying attention to how the argument is organized.
A lot of schools are banning phones, and I get why: nobody wants a classroom full of glowing screens. But the conversation often treats phones like they are only distractions, when they are also tools students already use to manage their lives. At my school, the proposed policy would require students to place phones in locked pouches from first bell to dismissal, including lunch and passing periods. The principal says it will “restore focus,” but focus is not the same thing as control.
For one thing, a total ban ignores the reality that students have responsibilities that don’t disappear during the school day. Some students coordinate rides with siblings, babysitters, or parents working unpredictable shifts. When the office is the only communication route, it creates bottlenecks and delays, and it assumes every home situation is stable. A policy that treats every student as equally supported at home ends up punishing the ones who are not.
Also, the ban would make school less safe, not more. Schools constantly tell us to report concerns immediately, yet a locked-pouch rule delays communication during emergencies or even smaller issues like harassment in a hallway. Adults might say “just find a teacher,” but teachers aren’t always there in the moment. The point is not that students should be scrolling in class; it’s that access matters at specific times.
Finally, banning phones all day is a missed opportunity to teach self-management. We say we want students ready for college and jobs, but those environments require you to regulate your own attention. If we never practice making choices, we don’t build the skill. A smarter policy would set clear classroom boundaries while allowing limited access in lunch and passing periods.
Therefore, schools should not ban phones.
Which revision of the bolded thesis best previews the reasoning that follows?
Read the student essay excerpt below, paying attention to how the argument is organized.
A lot of schools are banning phones, and I get why: nobody wants a classroom full of glowing screens. But the conversation often treats phones like they are only distractions, when they are also tools students already use to manage their lives. At my school, the proposed policy would require students to place phones in locked pouches from first bell to dismissal, including lunch and passing periods. The principal says it will “restore focus,” but focus is not the same thing as control.
For one thing, a total ban ignores the reality that students have responsibilities that don’t disappear during the school day. Some students coordinate rides with siblings, babysitters, or parents working unpredictable shifts. When the office is the only communication route, it creates bottlenecks and delays, and it assumes every home situation is stable. A policy that treats every student as equally supported at home ends up punishing the ones who are not.
Also, the ban would make school less safe, not more. Schools constantly tell us to report concerns immediately, yet a locked-pouch rule delays communication during emergencies or even smaller issues like harassment in a hallway. Adults might say “just find a teacher,” but teachers aren’t always there in the moment. The point is not that students should be scrolling in class; it’s that access matters at specific times.
Finally, banning phones all day is a missed opportunity to teach self-management. We say we want students ready for college and jobs, but those environments require you to regulate your own attention. If we never practice making choices, we don’t build the skill. A smarter policy would set clear classroom boundaries while allowing limited access in lunch and passing periods.
Therefore, schools should not ban phones.
Which revision of the bolded thesis best previews the reasoning that follows?