AP Lang Essay Series: Argument

I teach AP Language and Composition. Among other things, students (theoretically) learn how to write three types of essays. At the end of the year, they have to write all three types in response to three prompts that someone at College Board dreams up. They have to do all three in 135 minutes which puts them at about 45 minutes per essay after their 15 minute reading period. It's a lot. And I lost count on how many times I asked students to do it for practice during the course of the year. Welp, at the end of this year it seemed only fair that I make myself do it. What follows is a response to a prompt generated by ChatGPT (because I've seen and taught most of the provided prompts already, I wanted it to be fresh, although GPT uses my history so it generated a prompt I have some interest in. I'll tweak that for upcoming essays) for the third but arguably easiest essay: The Argument. All of this was done within the time constraints with the same testing conditions as students get. === The Prompt

In recent years, debates have intensified over the role of college athletes in the billion-dollar world of American sports. With the legalization of Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) deals, student-athletes can now earn money through endorsements and sponsorships while maintaining their amateur status. Supporters argue this change is long overdue and promotes fairness in a system that has profited from unpaid labor for decades. Critics, however, warn that NIL deals threaten the educational mission of college sports and may lead to increased inequities among athletes and institutions.

Carefully read the above passage. Then, write an essay that argues your position on the impact of NIL compensation on the purpose and integrity of college athletics.

In your response, support your argument with appropriate evidence from your reading, experience, or observations.

===

The Response While the pomp and circumstance of a Saturday afternoon in the fall can invoke some of the deepest passions about what it means to be an American, college athletics are not immune from evolving into something that we no longer recognize. With the introduction of NIL into college sports, the purpose and integrity of the games have been called into question and while they certainly don’t look the same as they did in the pre-NIL era there is still a place for the pride and school spirit of college athletics while allowing highly skilled athletes to receive compensation for their effort the way that any other highly skilled person would.

The world of college sports certainly looks different now than it used to but different doesn’t necessarily mean worse or bad. Consider that the draw to college sports for so many people is to gather among friends, relatives, schoolmates and anyone else who happens to share your community that centers around a university. The NIL era hasn’t taken that away. Places like Tuscaloosa, Knoxville, Eugene and Columbus all still buzz with excitement numerous times a year and their football stadiums are still packed in a way that rivals any gathering in the world. NIL has brought more money to the athletes but it hasn’t compromised the purpose of the game. Ultimately, fans have always been cheering for jerseys and the nature of college sports before or after NIL was that athletes would represent that school for at most five seasons and then that jersey would be worn by another. The maxim of playing for the name on the front of the jersey, not the one on the back is still alive and well in college sports and whether or not those wearing the jerseys are being paid, doesn’t take away anything from the hysteria of Cameron Indoor Stadium on a Friday night or the Big House in Ann Arbor on a Saturday afternoon.

For better or worse, America and Americans define themselves by how much they have, how much they get and how much they’re worth. This isn’t a sports issue, it is a culture issue and even referring to it as an “issue” doesn’t seem totally accurate. It is simply who we are. NIL allows college athletes to make money that is commensurate with their worth and what the economic structure of the country tells them they are worth. Heisman winning quarterback Johnny Manziel has spoken about his time in college at Texas A&M, his meteoric rise earned him the moniker, “Johnny Football” and he became a sensation following his team’s miraculous upset of perennial behemoth Alabama. Manziel recounts a story of looking into the stands and seeing his number 2 jersey dotted throughout the sold out Kyle Field in Texas. 100,000 screaming fans there to see him, many wearing his jersey and yet once he left the stadium, he would return to his apartment he shared with three teammates and eat Ramen noodles. The imbalance of those two images would be staggering enough without considering that the so called “professionals” who did indeed monetarily benefit from Manziel’s success. His coach, Kevin Sumlin, made over a million dollars a year for coaching the team, the university’s athletic department pocketed millions more thanks to the ticket sales, jersey sales and TV advertising that came with people clamoring to get a piece of Manziel. All while Johnny Manziel sat in his cramped apartment. This story is unfair. It depicts something that happened thousands of times throughout the NCAA’s monopolistic reign over so called “student-athletes.” To add to the indignity, Manziel was punished for selling his autograph while at Texas A&M because it violated the NCAA’s rules on “amateurism.” NIL was introduced to protect people like Johnny Manziel and make sure they get what they’re owed, in a country so obsessed with monetary status, why is that all of a sudden a bad thing?

NIL is imperfect to be sure, the usage of the transfer portal does start to fray some of the ties that fans have to athletes who represent their school. The level of money does sometimes disincentivize players from striving for improvement. It does allow for the influence of shady agents or meddling parents but in the end NIL allows for the ones who sell the jerseys and the tickets and bring the eyeballs to get their piece of the pie. President Trump has appointed legendary coach Nick Saban to oversee a committee that ensures fairness within college sports and it’s something that is probably necessary, even most professional leagues have salary caps and limits on player movement; some fine tuning of the system is certainly warranted. In the end, college sports are still college sports. A player on the field being paid in no way compromises the joy and deep roots that fans share with their teams. In that way, college sports are the same as they ever were except now, those players who are creating the joy and pain and excitement for millions around the world are being paid like the unique contributors to American culture that they are. That seems fair.

===

The Rubric: This is how students are scored. How did I do?

Thesis (0–1 point)

• 1 point: Responds to the prompt with a defensible thesis that presents a clear position.

• 0 points:

  • There is no defensible thesis.

  • The intended thesis only restates the prompt.

  • The thesis provides a summary of the issue with no clear claim.

  • There is a thesis, but it is not responsive to the prompt.

    
    

Evidence and Commentary (0–4 points)

• 4 points:

  • Provides specific evidence to support all claims.

  • Clearly explains how the evidence supports the argument.

  • Demonstrates consistent coherence and clarity in reasoning.

• 3 points:

  • Provides specific evidence for most claims.

  • Explains how some of the evidence supports the argument.

  • Reasoning may lack full development or clarity.

• 2 points:

  • Evidence is general or somewhat vague.

  • Commentary may be uneven or limited.

  • The connection between evidence and argument is inconsistent or superficial.

• 1 point:

  • Minimal evidence is provided.

  • Explanations are simplistic or repetitive.

  • Argument is mostly unsupported.

• 0 points:

  • Little or no evidence or explanation.

  • Only restates the thesis or prompt.

  • Merely summarizes sources or examples without analysis.

    
    

Sophistication (0–1 point)

• 1 point:

  • Demonstrates a nuanced understanding of the topic.

  • Considers complexities or tensions in the argument.

  • Articulates a clear and convincing line of reasoning.

  • Employs a vivid, persuasive, or engaging style.

• 0 points:

  • Oversimplifies the issue.

  • Does not acknowledge complexity or nuance.

  • Line of reasoning is unclear or formulaic.

  • Language and style are flat or mechanical.