Persuasive and Discursive Writing

Why You Need This Skill

Most FSCE 11+ creative writing preparation focuses on stories and descriptions. But the FSCE exam can also include non-fiction writing tasks — persuasive writing, discursive writing, or a combination of both. If you only prepare for narrative writing, you might be caught off guard.

Persuasive writing is writing that tries to convince the reader to agree with your point of view. You are arguing for something.

Discursive writing is writing that explores both sides of an argument before reaching a conclusion. You are weighing up different viewpoints.

Both require clear thinking, strong structure, and powerful language. The techniques you learn here will also improve your narrative writing, because persuasive language can be used by characters, in dialogue, and in reflective endings.

---

The AFOREST Techniques

AFOREST is a helpful acronym that reminds you of the most powerful persuasive techniques. Think of it as your persuasion toolkit.

graph TD
    A[AFOREST] --> B["A - Alliteration"]
    A --> C["F - Facts"]
    A --> D["O - Opinions"]
    A --> E["R - Rhetorical Questions"]
    A --> F["E - Emotive Language"]
    A --> G["S - Statistics"]
    A --> H["T - Three / Rule of Three"]

A — Alliteration

Using words that start with the same sound to create a catchy, memorable phrase.

"Plastic pollution is poisoning our planet." "We deserve a safer, smarter, stronger school."

Alliteration makes phrases stick in the reader's mind. Use it in key sentences — headings, opening lines, and conclusions.

F — Facts (or What Sound Like Facts)

Stating something as if it is a fact gives your writing authority and credibility.

"Over 8 million tonnes of plastic enter our oceans every year." "Children who read for pleasure achieve higher grades in every subject."

In an exam, you can use facts you know or facts that sound plausible. The examiner is testing your writing skill, not fact-checking.

O — Opinions (Presented Confidently)

State your opinion boldly and clearly. Do not say "I think" or "In my opinion" too often — just state it as if it is obviously true.

Weak: I think school uniforms are probably quite a good idea, maybe. Strong: School uniforms are essential. They create equality, build identity, and remove the daily distraction of deciding what to wear.

R — Rhetorical Questions

A question that does not need an answer — because the answer is obvious. This technique pulls the reader in and makes them think.

"Do we really want to live in a world where our oceans are more plastic than fish?" "How can we call ourselves a fair society if not every child has access to the same opportunities?"

E — Emotive Language

Words and phrases chosen to provoke an emotional response — to make the reader feel something: anger, sympathy, guilt, hope, pride.

Neutral: Some children do not have enough food. Emotive: Every night, thousands of innocent children go to bed hungry, their stomachs aching, their dreams haunted by a tomorrow that promises nothing better.

S — Statistics

Numbers and data add weight to your argument. They feel objective and scientific, even when they are estimates.

"73% of students say homework causes them unnecessary stress." "In the last decade, global temperatures have risen by 1.1 degrees."

T — Three (Rule of Three)

Listing things in groups of three is one of the oldest and most effective rhetorical tricks. Three items feel complete, balanced, and memorable.

"This policy is unfair, unworkable, and unnecessary." "We need courage, compassion, and commitment." "Education should inspire, challenge, and empower."

---

3 Worked Examples

Worked Example 1: Persuasive Letter

Prompt: Write a letter to your headteacher persuading them to allow students to use phones at lunchtime.

Dear Mrs Williams,

I am writing to you on behalf of Year 6 to make a case for allowing students to use their mobile phones during lunchtime. I believe this change would benefit our school community, and I hope you will consider our proposal.

Currently, phones must be switched off and stored in bags from 8:45 until 3:30. While I understand the reasoning behind this rule, I respectfully suggest that lunchtime — a period of free time — is different from lesson time. Allowing supervised phone use during lunch would show students that the school trusts them, which in turn encourages responsible behaviour.

Firstly, many students need to contact parents during the day. Whether it is confirming pick-up times, reporting a forgotten PE kit, or simply checking in after a difficult morning, a quick message at lunchtime could solve problems that otherwise distract students during afternoon lessons. Is it not better for a child to send a 30-second text at lunch than to spend all afternoon worrying?

Secondly, phones can be used positively. Students could research homework topics, read e-books, or listen to educational podcasts. A recent survey found that 68% of Year 6 students said they would use lunchtime phone access for revision — a figure that surprised even me.

Finally, this is about trust. We are preparing to move to secondary school, where phone policies are more flexible. Giving us the opportunity to practise responsible phone use now — in a supervised, supportive environment — would prepare us for that transition.

I am not suggesting phones should be used in lessons, corridors, or assemblies. Lunchtime only, in designated areas, with clear rules and consequences. A trial period of one half-term would allow the school to evaluate the policy without any long-term commitment.

Thank you for taking the time to read this letter. I hope we can discuss this further.

Yours sincerely, A Concerned Student

Techniques used: Rhetorical question ("Is it not better...?"), statistic ("68%"), rule of three ("confirming pick-up times, reporting a forgotten PE kit, or simply checking in"), emotive language ("worrying," "trust"), counter-argument acknowledged ("I understand the reasoning"), proposed solution with limitations.

Worked Example 2: Persuasive Speech

Prompt: Write a speech persuading your class that reading is more important than screen time.

I know what you are thinking. "Oh great, another speech about how we should all read more books." And yes, that is exactly what this is. But before you switch off, let me ask you something: when was the last time a YouTube video changed the way you think? When was the last time a TikTok taught you a word you did not know? When was the last time scrolling through Instagram made you feel genuinely, deeply happy?

Now think about the last book that gripped you. The last story that kept you reading past your bedtime. The last character who felt so real you forgot they were made of words on a page.

That is the difference. Screens entertain us. Books transform us.

Studies show that children who read for 20 minutes a day are exposed to 1.8 million words per year. Their vocabulary grows. Their empathy grows. Their imagination grows. And here is the really interesting part: their grades improve across every subject — not just English, but maths, science, and humanities too.

I am not anti-screen. I watch Netflix. I play video games. I scroll through my phone like everyone else. But I also read, and I know — I absolutely know — that the hours I spend reading are the hours that make me sharper, calmer, and more creative than anything else I do.

So here is my challenge. One book. Just one. Give it a chance. Find a genre you love — horror, comedy, fantasy, mystery, graphic novels — and read for 15 minutes a day. That is less time than it takes to watch a single episode of anything.

One book. Fifteen minutes. I promise you, it will be worth it.

Techniques used: Direct address ("I know what you are thinking"), rhetorical questions (three in the opening), rule of three ("Their vocabulary grows. Their empathy grows. Their imagination grows"), statistic ("1.8 million words"), counter-argument ("I am not anti-screen"), repetition ("One book"), emotive and motivating tone.

Worked Example 3: Discursive Essay

Prompt: Should school holidays be shorter? Discuss both sides.

The question of whether school holidays should be shorter is one that divides opinion sharply. Some argue that six weeks of summer is too long, while others believe it is essential. Both sides have compelling points.

Those in favour of shorter holidays argue that long breaks cause students to forget what they have learned. Research suggests that children can lose up to two months of mathematical ability during the summer, a phenomenon known as "summer slide." Teachers then spend the first weeks of the autumn term re-teaching material, which wastes valuable time. Shorter, more frequent holidays — perhaps four weeks in summer with an extra week at half-term — could reduce this learning loss and help students maintain their progress.

Additionally, long holidays can be difficult for working families. Many parents struggle to arrange six weeks of childcare, which can be expensive and stressful. Shorter holidays would ease this burden.

However, those who oppose shorter holidays make equally strong arguments. Summer is a time for children to rest, recharge, and develop outside the classroom. Many families use this time to visit relatives, travel, or simply spend time together — experiences that are educational in their own right. Compressing holidays could increase stress for both students and teachers, leading to burnout.

Furthermore, there is more to education than sitting in a classroom. Children who spend their summers playing outdoors, pursuing hobbies, reading for pleasure, and exploring the world develop independence, creativity, and resilience — qualities that no amount of extra maths lessons can teach.