Parent plan · Week 23 · Research argument draft and Gatsby IV — English 11: American Voices, Identity & Public Memory

Parent teaching plan · 36 weeks

Units to teach or revisit

Chapter 5 · Research & Source-Based Writing

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 Gatsby Chapter IV. Draft a 1,800–2,200-word research-supported argument using the completed historical texts and two verified contextual sources.

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 · Accounts of the past

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

Separate Gatsby’s account, the object he shows, and Jordan’s report in Chapter IV.

  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.

Different channels have different evidential roles. A displayed object can support a limited fact without verifying every narrated experience; attribute Jordan’s account rather than describe it as Nick’s direct observation.

  • 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 · Argument architecture

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

Outline the research essay by analytical claims, evidence relations, a counterargument, and limitations.

  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.

Each section should answer part of the narrowed question. Context should support a specific interpretation, and a counterargument should address an actual alternative rather than a weak invented opponent.

  • 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 · Sustained research draft

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

Write the 1,800–2,200-word draft with primary-text analysis, two checked contextual sources, and consistent attribution.

  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.

Develop paragraphs through claim, relevant evidence, explanation, and consequence. Do not let historical background replace the question, or turn several similar quotations into an unexplained proof.

  • 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 · Counterargument test

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

Write a 250–350-word counterargument and decide what it changes in the main draft.

  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 challenge may expose a gap between access to literacy and access to institutional power. Concede what the evidence requires and revise the actual claim, not merely add an isolated however sentence.

  • 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 · Draft conference

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

Ask a reader to locate the weakest synthesis and the most consequential factual claim; record two revision actions.

  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 feedback to identify missing relations and verification needs. State the actual planned change and its purpose rather than accept a general request to add more detail.

  • 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

The research project must be based on fully read sources. A Gatsby claim using Chapters I–IV should be explicitly bounded to those chapters, not presented as a finished interpretation of the novel.

Browse all courses