The question of whether hope survives, or ever truly exists, within Night is one that different careful readers can answer differently, which makes it an ideal prompt for an argumentative essay rather than a straightforward analytical one. Students need to take a clear position and defend it, rather than simply describing what the text says, which raises the stakes and the potential quality of the writing.

Because the question is genuinely debatable, grading needs to focus entirely on the quality of the argument and evidence rather than which position the student takes. An essay arguing that hope is ultimately extinguished by the text's end can be just as strong as one arguing that small moments of hope persist, as long as both are supported with careful textual evidence.

Students sometimes assume there's a "correct" answer the teacher wants, which can lead to a less confident, hedging essay. Making clear upfront that both positions are equally valid, and that the grade depends entirely on execution, tends to produce more committed, better-argued essays.

This clarity also makes grading more consistent, since teachers can apply the same evidence-based standard regardless of which side of the debate a given essay takes.

Evidence That Supports Each Position

Students arguing that hope persists often point to Eliezer's continued will to survive, his bond with his father, and small moments of solidarity among prisoners. Those arguing that hope is destroyed often cite the loss of faith, the numbing of emotional response, and the ambiguous, unresolved ending of the memoir itself.

• A clear, defensible position stated early and maintained throughout
• At least three distinct pieces of textual evidence supporting that position
• Direct acknowledgment of at least one counterargument
• A response to that counterargument, rather than simply ignoring it
• A conclusion that reinforces the argument without introducing new, unsupported claims

Grading Counterargument Handling

Because this topic is so genuinely debatable, essays that ignore the opposing view entirely tend to feel less persuasive, even if the core argument itself is reasonably strong. A rubric line specifically addressing counterargument handling encourages students to engage with the topic's real complexity rather than presenting a one-sided case.

This is also a useful opportunity to teach the broader argumentative writing skill of steelmanning an opposing view, which transfers well beyond this specific essay assignment.

Keeping Grading Fair Across Opposing Arguments

It can help to grade essays in mixed batches rather than sorting them by position first, which prevents a teacher from unconsciously calibrating differently depending on which side of the argument they're currently reading. Spot-checking a few essays from each position against the same rubric criteria after grading is also a useful consistency check.

This attention to fairness matters particularly for a topic this open-ended, where it would be easy for grading to unintentionally favor whichever position the teacher personally finds more persuasive.