Moral dilemmas make for compelling writing assignments because there is no single correct answer to hide behind. In Shiloh, Marty chooses between honesty with his parents and protection for a dog he believes is in danger. Students can argue for several different actions, and each requires them to weigh competing values. This is precisely the kind of thinking that argument writing standards ask students to develop.

Before assigning the writing, spend a class period helping students map the dilemma. List the values in tension, such as honesty, loyalty, obedience, compassion, and fairness, and ask which characters hold each one. Marty's father, for example, values doing the right thing according to the law, while Marty values the dog's safety. Having this map on the board gives struggling writers a vocabulary to draw from during drafting.

Argument writing about ethical choices can slip into sermonizing if students are not careful. An essay that simply declares that lying is wrong has not engaged with the fact that Marty lies for reasons many readers sympathize with. Grading should reward students who acknowledge the complexity of the situation and still reach a defensible position. That balance between conviction and fairness is the central skill this assignment develops.

Design a prompt that invites weighing, not just judging

The wording of the prompt determines how deeply students think. A question like "Was Marty right to hide Shiloh?" tends to yield short verdicts, whereas "Which of Marty's choices was hardest to defend, and why?" encourages comparison of several decisions. Prompts that ask students to consider consequences for multiple characters also produce richer essays. Testing your prompt on a colleague or with a few students before assigning it can reveal ambiguities.

• A clear position on the dilemma stated near the beginning
• Reasons grounded in specific choices Marty makes in the novel
• Recognition of the values held by other characters in the story
• An explanation of the consequences of the choice for Marty and others
• A conclusion that connects the dilemma to a wider ethical question

Score reasoning quality using observable criteria

Because opinions vary, your rubric should focus on features of the writing that can be observed and compared. These include the clarity of the claim, the relevance of the reasons, the quality of the evidence, and the treatment of opposing views. Describing each level in plain language helps both you and your students understand what is expected. It also gives you a defensible explanation when a family asks why an essay received a particular score.

Watch for essays that confuse personal experience with textual evidence. A student who writes about their own dog may produce heartfelt sentences but neglect to use the novel to support their argument. Feedback can gently redirect by asking which scene from Shiloh best illustrates the point. Personal connection can enrich an essay, but it should supplement evidence rather than replace it.

Handle disagreements in the classroom respectfully

A dilemma unit will inevitably surface strong opinions, and some students may feel judged if their view differs from the majority. Setting norms before discussion, such as responding to ideas rather than people, keeps the classroom safe. It also helps to frame the writing assignment as an exercise in building the best possible case for a position, which separates the argument from personal identity. Students often become more open when they see that the goal is skill rather than victory.

One useful activity is asking students to write a paragraph defending the position they disagree with. This exercise strengthens their understanding of counterarguments and often changes how they write their own essays. Grading the practice paragraph on fairness and evidence rather than on agreement makes the purpose clear. The insight carries over to persuasive writing in social studies and science as well.

Support timely feedback on longer argument drafts

Argument essays are longer and more demanding to grade than short responses, and delays in returning them reduce the value of feedback. Teachers who can return drafts within a few days give students the chance to revise while the ideas are still fresh. AI-assisted grading can help by producing a first round of rubric-aligned comments quickly. The teacher then reviews these and adds nuance about the student's reasoning.

Whatever approach you use, the aim is feedback that helps students strengthen their reasoning, not just correct errors. A comment that asks how Marty's mother might respond to the student's argument pushes the writer toward deeper thinking. Those questions are more valuable than a list of grammatical fixes at this stage. Conventions can be addressed in a final editing pass once the ideas are solid.