Unit 05 · Drama, Choice & Consequence · Week 15
How can interpretation remain creative while accountable to evidence?
This five-day sequence teaches the required concepts directly, provides a local course-created text, and supports either handwriting or typing. External tools are not required.
Weekly targets
Course-created practice text
Use either the Week 13 station scene or the Week 14 gate scene. A new interpretation must preserve the printed dialogue. Performance choices may change pace, emphasis, blocking, gesture, silence, or focal point, but the student must explain how each major choice follows from evidence.
This original instructional text may be annotated, printed, performed and revised inside the course.
Distinguish an imaginative possibility from an evidence-supported interpretation.
Distinguish an imaginative possibility from an evidence-supported interpretation.
Rank four readings of the course scene from strongly supported to contradicted. For each, identify the warrant connecting evidence to the claim.
Write one defensible claim, one plausible counterreading, and one interpretation the text cannot support.
Enter discussion with organized evidence rather than a memorized speech.
Enter discussion with organized evidence rather than a memorized speech.
Prepare three claims, six precise references, two genuine questions, and one possible revision. Practice paraphrasing another speaker before agreeing or challenging.
Complete the seminar evidence sheet and source locator.
Build understanding collaboratively using accountable talk.
Build understanding collaboratively using accountable talk.
Use invite, clarify, connect, challenge, qualify, and synthesize moves. The evaluator records evidence use, listening, reasoning, and contribution—not personality or volume.
Write a post-seminar synthesis identifying one idea strengthened and one idea revised.
Use new evidence and counterarguments to improve a written or performed reading.
Use new evidence and counterarguments to improve a written or performed reading.
Return to the Week 13 scene or an approved play excerpt. Revise blocking, emphasis, thesis, or reasoning and document why the change is more defensible.
Produce a before/after revision record and a polished 500–700 word interpretation.
Defend how dramatic language and performance choices create meaning.
Defend how dramatic language and performance choices create meaning.
Present a 3–5 minute scene interpretation or accessible equivalent, followed by two evidence questions. Submit the written analysis and revision trail.
Complete the 10-point rubric, evaluator review, correction plan when below 8/10, and reflection.
Weekly mastery assessment
Submit the named product, the five daily responses, and a 150–250 word reflection answering the essential question. Objective completion alone does not establish mastery.
| Criterion | 2 · Secure | 1 · Developing | 0 · Insufficient |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claim and performance choices are evidence-based | Specific, accurate and complete | Partly demonstrated; revision needed | Missing, unsupported or inaccurate |
| Seminar contributions use and respond to evidence | Specific, accurate and complete | Partly demonstrated; revision needed | Missing, unsupported or inaccurate |
| Counterreadings are represented fairly | Specific, accurate and complete | Partly demonstrated; revision needed | Missing, unsupported or inaccurate |
| Revision record explains substantive changes | Specific, accurate and complete | Partly demonstrated; revision needed | Missing, unsupported or inaccurate |
| Oral/accessible defense and written conventions meet the standard | Specific, accurate and complete | Partly demonstrated; revision needed | Missing, unsupported or inaccurate |
Mastery: 8/10 after evaluator review. Below 8/10, revise the lowest criterion and resubmit. Submission is not the same as mastery.
□ Five daily responses
□ Principal product
□ Textual evidence
□ Revision record
□ Evaluator rubric
□ 8/10 or correction plan
Earlier notes remain in their original fields. Bring revisions and tool evidence here.