Question

read the rough draft of a students 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 - which revision would most improve sentence 7? suggesting an alternative plan to replace the current school calendar explaining why the current school calendar is outdated and inefficient expressing an opinion about those who oppose changing the calendar restating the strongest piece of evidence used to support the claim

Explanation:

The editorial is arguing for year - round schooling. Sentence 7 (not shown but based on the context) would be improved by explaining why the current school calendar is outdated and inefficient as it directly supports the argument for a change to year - round schooling. Suggesting an alternative plan is too early without first justifying the need for change. Expressing an opinion about opponents is off - topic. Restating evidence doesn't add new value to the argument in terms of improving the overall structure.

Answer:

explaining why the current school calendar is outdated and inefficient