Brennan went on Friday morning, second in the session. He stood at the front with the ease of someone used to being watched, and his one-minute summary was smooth — clear main point, structured support, confident finish.
A few students nodded. Ms. Nair waited, then asked the first question: he’d argued that banning phones would not reduce distraction because students would find other ways to zone out — did he have any evidence for that, or was it an assumption? Brennan said it was common sense. She said the rubric asked for evidence or examples and asked if he had one. He said most people would agree with him.
She moved to the second question: his essay claimed schools that had already banned phones had seen no improvement in grades — where had he found that? He said he’d read it online. She asked where online. He said he didn’t remember the exact site. She asked what the strongest reason was for someone to disagree with his argument. He said some people thought rules were important. She asked how his essay responded to that. Four seconds passed. He said the essay covered it pretty clearly. She wrote on her rubric, thanked him, and called the next student. The room was very quiet.