| Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reading: Literature | RL.1, RL.3, RL.4, RL.6, RL.7, RL.10 | — | RL.1, RL.6, RL.7, RL.9 | RL.1, RL.2, RL.3, RL.5, RL.7, RL.9 |
| Writing | W.2, W.4, W.5, W.9, W.10 | W.2, W.4, W.5, W.6, W.7, W.8, W.9 | W.1, W.4, W.5, W.7, W.8, W.9, W.10 | W.1, W.2, W.3, W.4, W.5, W.9 |
| Language | L.1, L.2, L.2a, L.2b, L.4, L.5a | L.2c, L.3a | L.2c, L.3a | L.2, L.4, L.5a, L.5b, L.6 |
| Speaking & Listening | SL.3 | — | SL.1, SL.2, SL.3, SL.4, SL.5 | SL.5 |
| Reading: Informational | — | RI.8, RI.9 | RI.1, RI.2, RI.3, RI.4, RI.5, RI.6, RI.8, RI.9, RI.10 | RI.7 |
From reading closely → to using evidence purposefully in writing and discussion
Students cannot write with evidence they have not yet learned to find and interpret. RL.1 and RI.1 establish the discipline of returning to the text before opinion. W.9 bridges reading and writing — it is the standard that says "now use what you read." The argument and informative writing standards then require students to deploy evidence strategically, which only works when they have internalized the evidence-finding habit.
Common sticking point: Students often confuse "evidence" with "restating the plot." Watch for responses that describe what happened rather than citing the specific language or detail that supports a claim. This signals RL.1 / RI.1 is not yet internalized. Return to short texts with targeted annotation practice before advancing to W.9 tasks.
From noticing language → to analyzing how craft creates meaning → to comparing across mediums
Understanding an author's choices begins at the word level (L.4/L.5 — what does this word mean and why use it?), moves to cumulative impact (RL.4 — how does word choice shape tone and meaning over time?), then to structure (RL.5 — how does the arrangement of events create effects?), then to perspective (RL.6 — whose cultural experience is shaping this?), and finally to medium (RL.7/RI.7 — what changes when the same story is told differently?). Skipping steps in this arc produces analysis that is thin at the craft level.
Common sticking point: The most common stall point is RL.4 → RL.5. Students can identify figurative language but struggle to explain its cumulative impact on tone. They see the device but not the effect. Use the Pygmalion close readings to practice this: ask not "what is the metaphor?" but "what is different about how Higgins feels in your reading after five acts of this word choice?"
From evaluating others' arguments → to constructing your own → to delivering and defending them
Students cannot construct a valid argument if they have never learned to evaluate one. RI.8 (delineate and evaluate arguments, identify fallacies) must precede W.1 because writing an argument without knowing what makes reasoning valid or fallacious produces arguments full of the errors students cannot yet see. SL.3 extends this to spoken reasoning. Only then should students write their own claims (W.1a), develop them with evidence (W.1b–e), and finally present them publicly (SL.4/SL.5).
Common sticking point: The move from RI.8 to W.1 is the hardest transition in the argument arc. Students who can identify a fallacy in someone else's argument routinely commit the same fallacy in their own writing. Build explicit practice where students audit their own drafts for fallacious reasoning before revision — this closes the gap between evaluation and construction.
From understanding how authors use sources → to transforming sources into original narrative
Module 6 (From Facts) and Module 7 (To Fiction) form an intentional two-module arc. Students first learn to analyze how nonfiction authors develop ideas (RI.5), take positions (RI.6), and use historical documents (RI.9). They also examine how literary authors transform source material (RL.9). Then in Module 7, students do that transformative work themselves — writing original narratives that require all the craft analysis from the Author's Craft arc plus the source awareness from Module 6. W.3 is the culminating performance standard for this arc.
Common sticking point: Students often treat historical fiction writing as "making things up." The Module 6 → 7 transition stalls when students have not internalized that historical fiction is disciplined imagination constrained by documented reality. Use the Literary Time Machine ILA to build this bridge — students who research their own historical period before writing produce dramatically richer narratives.
From word-level precision → to sentence-level control → to academic vocabulary across contexts
Language standards form a bottom-up progression. Word meaning (L.4) must come first — students cannot manipulate language for effect if they do not first understand what words mean. Grammar and conventions (L.1/L.2) establish the rule system, making L.3 (style choices) meaningful — you can only deliberately break or bend a convention you first know. L.5 requires understanding both denotation and connotation before figurative meanings become analyzable. L.6 (academic vocabulary) is last because it is the most contextualized — it requires students to encounter, use, and internalize words across a sustained reading experience, which in this course is provided by Shakespeare.
Common sticking point: The L.2 → L.3 transition is where grammar instruction most often fails to transfer into writing. Students who correctly answer grammar exercises continue to make the same errors in drafts. The Daily Grammar Challenges ILA is designed to address this through high-frequency low-stakes application — but only if students are required to apply corrections to their own writing, not just worksheets.