APSeminar SummerReading SampleRubric - AP Seminar Free-Response Questions

Sep 20, 2026

Uploaded by Pentious

A set of AP Seminar free-response tasks built around the passage “Why the Voting Age Should Be 17” by Peter Levine. Part A prompts students to identify the author’s argument, main idea, or thesis, then explain the line of reasoning by locating claims and how they connect. A final prompt asks students to evaluate how effective the evidence is in supporting the argument. The text includes background on lowering voting ages and evidence from studies and examples.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryExam

FormatPDF

Pages21

Reading Time53 min

AccessFree to download

AP Seminar Free-Response Questions

Part A

Passage: “Why the Voting Age Should Be 17”

Task sale2019 AP®SEMINAR FREE-RESPONSE QUESTIONS # AP SEMINAR Part A Suggested time —30 minutes Directions:Read the passage below and then respond to the following three questions. 1.Identify the author's argument,main idea,or thesis.(3 points) 2.Explain the author's line of reasoning by identifying the claims used to build the argument and the connectionsbetween them(6 points) 3 Evaluate the effectiveness of the evidence the author uses to support the clams made in the argument.(6 pounts)Write your responses to Part A only on the designated pages in the Free Response booklet. From “Why the Voting Age Should Be 17”by Peter Levine(Poltico Magazine,February 24,2015) It is time to try lowering the voting age to 17 nationwide.Takoma Park,Maryland,has done It.Iowa.too,forcaucuses.Scotland went down to age 16 for its recent independence referendum Evidence suggests it will boostinformed participation in our democracy over time. In 1971,at the peak of the youth protests of the baby boom,the Unted States passed the 26th Amendment,loweringthe voting age from 21 to 18.Congress and the necessary 38 states passed the measure in a mere three months,thefastest passage of any amendment in U.S.history.Why?Because the nation grasped that it was unacceptable to draftpeople and not allow them to vote on matters of war and peace,life and death. If the government affects you,you get to vote.That is the fundamental principle of democracy.Of course,smallchildren are too young to vote wisely and independently.But how could 18-year-olds be too immature to vote if theywere mature enough to wear the uniform in a foreign land? Those arguments for the 26th Amendment all made excellent sense,and yet 18 may have been a bad age at which tosettle.Most of us will not vote unless we see people around us voting;that is where we get the idea that it is a civicresponsibilty To get into the voting booth,we also need to hear arguments,debates and emotional appeals about thee1mportance of current issues.... Penn State political scientist Eric Plutzer has shown that voting is habitual.Once you vote,you are more likely tovote again.By the same token,not voting is also a habit If people miss the first election that they face as elgiblevoters,they are starting off with a habit of nonparticipation.In the 2014 elections.just 5.2 percent of eligible18-year-olds voted in the state of California,lower than the turnout of any other age. # 2019 AP®SEMINAR FREE-RESPONSE QUESTIONS The political scientist Mark Franklin studied 22 democracies and found a pattern:Lowering the voting age to 18actually caused turnout to fall in most countries.Why?Because 18-year-olds are less likely to vote than21-year-olds And once those 18-year-olds missed therr first year as eligible voters,they were less likely to voteagain—not even when they reached 21.Frankln argued that,in the United States,changing our voting age to 18 maybe the sole reason voter turnout has declined since the 1970s. But 17 may be a better age At 17,most people are stillliving at home,where they can see parents voting andprobably hear about local issues and candidates.They also are still n school,where voting can be encouraged andbecome a social norm. Indeed.Notre Dame professor David E.Campbell finds that people in ther 30s stull have a higher turnout rate if theyattended high schools where a majority of students believed that they should vote That means that civic engagementof high school students has long-term implications for our democracy But what about the argument that teenagers just don't know enough to vote?We mght reasonably worry thatAmericans of all ages are not adequately informed.But Rutgers-Camden professors Daniel Hart and Robert Atkinsfound that 16-year-olds'political knowledge was about the same as that of 21-year-olds And one unque advantageof high school students is that we can improve their knowledge of the Constitutron,the political system and currentissues before an el

FAQs

What does Part A of the AP Seminar free-response require?

Students must respond to three prompts: identify the author’s argument/main idea/thesis, explain the line of reasoning by identifying claims and connections, and evaluate the effectiveness of the evidence supporting the argument.

What evidence does the passage discuss regarding voting age changes?

It references historical action lowering the voting age from 21 to 18 and includes research findings and examples from multiple places showing different effects on turnout and civic engagement.

How does the passage argue for why voting at age 17 could be better?

It claims that at 17 people may still live at home and are in school, making voting more visible and helping civic knowledge spread through high school settings, with long-term implications for democracy.

Sep 20, 2026

Uploaded by Pentious