English 9 · Unit 02 · Week 06 · Independent Scholarly Demonstration
Comparative Myth Synthesis
Independent 700–900-word literary essay, 4–6 mapped patterns, a written or spoken defense, and educator-reviewed 8/10 mastery.
Checking learner record…
Connect · Apply · Reflect
Recall
Connect respectful myth interpretation, epic limits, source context, point-by-point comparison, and parallel structure from Weeks 4–6.
Independent demonstration
Defend a connection and a meaningful distinction using independently selected evidence and your specified editions, without generated first-draft answers.
Reflect after preservation
Explain the cultural or textual difference you initially underestimated and the evidence that sharpened your argument.
At a festival, elders recorded several versions of a legend rather than voting on a single correct one. Each speaker signed the account they knew.
Literary evidence question: Distinguish respectful comparison from flattening traditions.
Cite two details and preserve your response in existing coursework.
Day 30Unit 02 assessmentPortfolio80% mastery
Unit 02 Scholarly Demonstration
Today’s Question: Can I compare two traditions with precision, context, evidence, and intellectual fairness?
Learning Target
I can defend a comparative interpretation that recognizes a meaningful connection while preserving cultural and textual difference.
Submit · Part A
Comparative literary analysis, 700–900 words. Include a defensible thesis, evidence from both texts, point-by-point synthesis, at least one meaningful complication or difference, accurate attribution, and controlled language.
Submit · Part B
Visual archetype/pattern map. Include 4–6 patterns. For each: pattern name, Text A expression, Text B expression, similarity, difference, possible cultural meaning, and evidence. The map may show that a shared pattern performs different work.
Submit · Part C
Defense, approximately 2 minutes spoken or 180–250 words written. Answer: What comparison in your essay is strongest? What difference did you initially underestimate? What evidence made you revise or qualify your thinking?
Source / Translation Note
List the editions, translations, course packets, or Arshif context pages used. If no exact quotations are used from a source, say so. Contextual research should support rather than replace literary evidence.
Corrective Learning
8/10 = mastery. Below 8: identify the lowest rubric row, complete a targeted correction, revise that dimension, and resubmit. The standard does not change.
Unit 2 intellectual standard: “These texts share a pattern” is the beginning of comparative analysis, not the conclusion. The scholar’s work is to explain how the pattern changes across context, form, values, characters, and consequences.
Part A · Preserve the Independent Essay
The existing Week 6 Day 29 response remains intact. If it contains your independently written original 700–900-word Draft 1, you may copy it explicitly to the separate locked assessment field, without changing Day 29.
Draft 1: 0 words.
Not yet locked.
Final: 0 words.
Part B · Visual Archetype / Pattern Map
Complete 4–6 pattern entries. Each must identify the pattern, its expression in Texts A and B, a similarity, a difference, possible cultural meaning, and evidence. The cards form a printable map record rather than a claim that traditions are interchangeable.
0 of 6 pattern entries complete; 4 required.
Part C · Defend the Interpretation
Written defense: 0 words (180–250 required).
No Unit 02 submission yet.
Five-Criterion Local Educator / Parent Review
Review all three parts using the curriculum's ten-point rubric. Score 0, 1, or 2 in each criterion. Below 8/10 requires a corrective revision and reevaluation.
Authorization boundary: GitHub Pages cannot securely authenticate evaluators; this is local human-entered recordkeeping. A future private grading authority is required for certified school permissions.