World Lit: Taking a Stand Against Hunger

Standard: ELAGSE9-10RI6 Determine an author’s point of view or purpose in a text and analyze how an author uses rhetoric to advance that point of view or purpose.

Learning Target: I can identify an authors purpose and analyze an argument presented, and I can synthesize information from print and nonprint persuasive texts.

Opening Session: Share Out! What’s your opinion on child hunger? You think it sucks, right? Do you think America is doing enough to combat child hunger? If not, what more could we do?

Work Session: Today and tomorrow we’re going to be doing activity 2.15 in your Springboard book, which starts on page 194. Today we’re going to read a Proclamation (woah, that’s a genre we’ve never read before!) and look at a chart and some statistics, so let’s get started!

After reading the proclamation, I want to have a brief discussion over the Second Read questions. Do you feel that the world is doing a good job of holding up the proclamation we just read? If not the world, is America? Is it the duty of Americans (or people from countries similar to ours) to make sure children in other parts of the world don’t go hungry? Why or why not?

Let’s now look at the charts and statistics given on page 197. Are these surprising? How do they square with the proclamation we just read? Let’s do a quick think-pair-share for Second Read question 3.

Closing Session: Vocab review – quiz is TOMORROW!

Assessment: Informal (book check)

Differentiation: Process (scaffolding)



World Lit: Taking a Stand on Legal Issues

Standard: ELAGSE9-10RI8 Delineate and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text, assessing whether the reasoning is valid and the evidence is relevant and sufficient; identify false statements and fallacious reasoning. 

Learning Target: I can analyze the use of rhetorical appeals in an argument and compare and contrast how different writers approach a subject or issue. 

Opening Session: Take a look at this banned commercial and tell me, do you think this is an appeal to ethos, pathos, or logos? 

Work Session: Today we’re going to be looking at different types of rhetorical appeals. This should mostly be review from what we did while talking about Antony’s “Friends, Romans, Countrymen” speech, but it’ll be some good practice at identifying which type of appeal is being used. While I was in a training class learning how to teach you guys using Springboard, my table of teachers actually disagreed on what kind of appeals were being used here – so you can see it’s not always clear-cut! 

We will be doing activity 2.14 in your book, starting on page 190. We’re going to read “On Surrender at Bear Paw Mountain, 1877” and “On Women’s Right to Vote”. These are two short texts that use different rhetorical appeals throughout. Afterwards, we will have a brief discussion on the different rhetorical appeals for review, and then I want you to do the “Writing to Sources: Explanatory Text” prompt on page 193. 

Closing Session: TOTD: which rhetorical appeal do you think is MOST effective on you personally? 

Assessment: Informal (Book check) 

Differentiation: Process (Scaffolding) 



AP Lang: Test Practice!


ELAGSE11-12RL1 Cite strong and thorough textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text, including determining where the text leaves matters uncertain.

Learning Target: I can hone my skills at selected-response questions from practice AP exams.

Opening Session: Sub attendance etc etc…. I’m not here today or tomorrow! I’m getting my wisdom teeth out!

Work Session: Work on the selected response section of practice test 1. Tomorrow, you will work on the selected response from practice test 2. Have fun! You may NOT work together. We will go over these when I return.

Closing Session: Please keep my classroom neat while I’m gone 🙂

Assessment: Practice tests will be formatively assessed for participation and growth.

Differentiation: Process (Scaffolding)

Homework: Continue reading your free choice books.


World Lit: Justice and Culture, Day 2

Standard: ELAGSE9-10RI8 Delineate and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text, assessing whether the reasoning is valid and the evidence is relevant and sufficient; identify false statements and fallacious reasoning. 

Learning Target: I can analyze and synthesize details from two texts about justice. 

Opening Session: Let’s review what we discussed yesterday with a video from 1994! 

Work Session: Today we’re continuing with what we were doing yesterday, reading about the Michael Fay case from 1994. The article for today is entitled “Rough Justice: A Caning in Singapore Stirs Up a Fierce Debate About Crime and Punishment”. We will read this article aloud, briefly do the Second Read questions aloud together, and then have a little silent debate! 

For this debate, you and the person sitting across from you will need a single sheet of notebook paper to share. One of you will be “for” the caning punishment, and one of you will be “against.” Decide now who is taking which side. 

Once you’ve chosen sides, take 3 minutes to mentally come up with 3 reasons that support your side. Then, when I say go, one if you will write that reason down. You have one minute! 

Now trade papers, and you have one minute to read the reason your partner wrote and explain why that reason is wrong. You may recall that this is known as refuting an argument. 

Now we repeat! The second partner (person who just refuted) will keep the paper and write down their first reason why they’re write, then trade, and the first partner will refute the argument. 

This will go on until each partner has written their 3 reasons down and the other partner has refuted them. The idea here is to practice refuting your opponent’s argument, in preparation for our next Embedded Assessment! 

Closing Session: Let’s reflect! How did you like today’s activity? Was it difficult? Annoying? Did it make you mad at your partner? 

Assessment: Informal (book check) 

Differentiation: Process (scaffolding) 



By request, the AP Lang essay I wrote in class today

Here’s the practice essay we wrote together in class today!

               When I was in the fifth grade, my school chose to participate in National Turn Off Your TV Week. Most of my friends, classmates, and teachers cheerfully flipped the switches on their screens and got their news from old-fashioned print for seven days, but at my house, we couldn’t ever just go along with the crowd. My dad, who had been a TV broadcaster since before I was born, wrote a letter for me to present to my teacher. In it, he wrote, “Television is a fertile ground in which wonderful plants can be grown. But as in any fertile ground, weeds will pop up faster than you can imagine. It is our jobs as viewers, just like it is the job of the farmer, to remove the weeds and be aware of what we are consuming.” These words remind me of Newton Minow’s famous speech in which he claims that television “is an awesome power” but that “it carries with it awesome responsibilities.” Newton is correct in his statement that television is a great force in the world and that it is all of our responsibility to use that for good.

               Watching old episodes of a TV show is often like a window into the past. Not only are shows generally set in the time in which they are made, but they also reflect the contemporary or historical context in which they were made. The ability of television to continue to disseminate values to the masses long after society’s values have changed is one of the “great powers” that must be handled with “great responsibility.” When these responsibilities are handled well, old episodes of TV shows can actually be a force for good. For example, the original Looney Tunes cartoons were beloved and hilarious in their time. When viewed with modern eyes, however, it is clear that most of the humor of these shorts are based on racism, misogyny, bigotry, and generally unacceptable themes. Because of their now-highly-offensive nature, Warner Brothers chose to begin every Looney Tunes DVD with a message explaining that the shorts were being presented without editing, with all the original racism intact, because to censor or edit them would be akin to pretending such bigotry never existed. In putting this message out there, Warner Brothers has acknowledged the atrocities of the past and their continued existence in the present, they have apologized for it, and they have made a strong statement condemning such beliefs.

               Spider-Man teaches us all that with great power comes great responsibility. It is certainly true that television, and now the Internet, are some of the greatest powers that mankind has ever known. With such powers at our fingertips, we would all do well to listen to Peter Parker and Newton Minow and recognize the awesome responsibility we have all taken on.

© Mrs. Bristow's Literature Classes