Parent plan · Week 13 · Competing arguments and dramatic tests — English 11: American Voices, Identity & Public Memory

Parent teaching plan · 36 weeks

Units to teach or revisit

Chapter 3 · Informational Reading & Media

Assigned readings

Parent teaching schedule: assign the linked Chapter / Unit lessons alongside sustained reading and writing. Week numbers guide pacing; student lessons retain Chapter / Unit names.

This week’s goals

Read Du Bois Chapter III through the numbered account of Washington’s proposed concessions; read Hamlet Act III.

Five sessions of about 45–60 minutes plus 20–30 minutes of sustained reading most days. Divide longer readings and adjust for comprehension and writing stamina. Combine exam sessions to provide the full time stated on the paper.

Session 1 · Representing an opponent

Establish literal understanding before interpretation. Identify speaker, event, source and location; distinguish observation from report and later explanation. Apply the linked unit method to the exact assigned text.

Your task

Reconstruct Du Bois’s account of Washington’s position and label which claims are the critic’s representation.

  1. Prepare (5 minutes): retrieve the linked unit method and state the task.
  2. Read/study (10–15 minutes): locate and annotate relevant text, source evidence or draft.
  3. Apply (20–30 minutes): respond independently with precise references and explained relations.
  4. Reflect (5–10 minutes): check criteria, explain a choice, and record a next step.
Hint and response guidance

Start with an exact reference or before/after wording. Separate the source’s assertion from verified information and your interpretation. Test the strongest competing account.

Use the concession list and surrounding reasoning accurately. To claim the opponent’s exact words, consult an original statement; otherwise attribute the account to Du Bois.

  • Respond accurately to the stated task and purpose.
  • Use precise relevant references, evidence, or explained language changes.
  • Explain reasoning and preserve a meaningful qualification.

Session 2 · A test and its limits

Test a claim against another relevant detail. Explain its scope and a contradiction. In a language task, identify the grammatical or contextual relationship and preserve meaning.

Your task

Evaluate Hamlet’s use of the performance as a test of the accusation.

  1. Prepare (5 minutes): retrieve the linked unit method and state the task.
  2. Read/study (10–15 minutes): locate and annotate relevant text, source evidence or draft.
  3. Apply (20–30 minutes): respond independently with precise references and explained relations.
  4. Reflect (5–10 minutes): check criteria, explain a choice, and record a next step.
Hint and response guidance

Start with an exact reference or before/after wording. Separate the source’s assertion from verified information and your interpretation. Test the strongest competing account.

A response to staged material can be significant within the drama, but interpretation of reaction still has limits. Explain what Hamlet concludes and what the audience also learns.

  • Respond accurately to the stated task and purpose.
  • Use precise relevant references, evidence, or explained language changes.
  • Explain reasoning and preserve a meaningful qualification.

Session 3 · Audience and concealment

Organize the response around purpose and audience. Explain the evidence-to-claim relationship; a quotation, terminology label, or rule alone is insufficient. Compare functions as well as apparent similarities.

Your task

Compare a museum panel’s anticipated audience with one audience-directed choice in Du Bois.

  1. Prepare (5 minutes): retrieve the linked unit method and state the task.
  2. Read/study (10–15 minutes): locate and annotate relevant text, source evidence or draft.
  3. Apply (20–30 minutes): respond independently with precise references and explained relations.
  4. Reflect (5–10 minutes): check criteria, explain a choice, and record a next step.
Hint and response guidance

Start with an exact reference or before/after wording. Separate the source’s assertion from verified information and your interpretation. Test the strongest competing account.

Both select presentation for readers, but their purposes and historical positions differ. Analyze a specific choice and the evidential consequence rather than call all selection manipulation.

  • Respond accurately to the stated task and purpose.
  • Use precise relevant references, evidence, or explained language changes.
  • Explain reasoning and preserve a meaningful qualification.

Session 4 · Brief revision

Apply the method independently, request specific feedback, and revise reasoning and structure before editing. Retain first drafts and explain the purpose of an actual change.

Your task

Revise your informational brief after a reader marks inference, source claim, and recommendation in different colors.

  1. Prepare (5 minutes): retrieve the linked unit method and state the task.
  2. Read/study (10–15 minutes): locate and annotate relevant text, source evidence or draft.
  3. Apply (20–30 minutes): respond independently with precise references and explained relations.
  4. Reflect (5–10 minutes): check criteria, explain a choice, and record a next step.
Hint and response guidance

Start with an exact reference or before/after wording. Separate the source’s assertion from verified information and your interpretation. Test the strongest competing account.

The revised brief should label attributed judgments and remove a survey-based claim of accuracy. Explain how source limits affect the account rather than merely add a disclaimer.

  • Respond accurately to the stated task and purpose.
  • Use precise relevant references, evidence, or explained language changes.
  • Explain reasoning and preserve a meaningful qualification.

Session 5 · A competing interpretation

Use criteria to evaluate the independent attempt. Explain a choice and record a supported next step. Consult response guidance afterward; keep unseen exam answers closed.

Your task

Write 350–450 words testing a second reading of Hamlet’s Act III actions against exact scenes.

  1. Prepare (5 minutes): retrieve the linked unit method and state the task.
  2. Read/study (10–15 minutes): locate and annotate relevant text, source evidence or draft.
  3. Apply (20–30 minutes): respond independently with precise references and explained relations.
  4. Reflect (5–10 minutes): check criteria, explain a choice, and record a next step.
Hint and response guidance

Start with an exact reference or before/after wording. Separate the source’s assertion from verified information and your interpretation. Test the strongest competing account.

An account of delay, verification, or self-justification must face relevant action and speech. Use a specific challenge and distinguish audience knowledge from Hamlet’s assumptions.

  • Respond accurately to the stated task and purpose.
  • Use precise relevant references, evidence, or explained language changes.
  • Explain reasoning and preserve a meaningful qualification.

Submit this week

Parent / teacher weekly conference

Keep the historical critic’s representation distinct from an original opposing text. Discuss drama through wording and consequence without clinical diagnosis.

Browse all courses