Subject-Area Unit Plans

By the end of Week 10, you will be able to:

1. Describe the three-part workshop structure (mini-lesson, work time, share) and explain the purpose of each component.
2. Plan a mini-lesson that teaches one focused skill or strategy and takes no more than fifteen minutes.
3. Design a week-long workshop sequence that balances reading and writing instruction.
4. Identify the components of a conceptual ELA unit (essential question, anchor texts, supporting texts, skill objectives, culminating task) and begin drafting your own.

1. Burke, Chapter 3: "How to Teach So Students Will Learn, Use, Remember, and Enjoy." Focus on the ten principles (pp. 48-50) and the section on planning the week and the unit (pp. 57-64).
2. Kittle, Penny. Book Love. Read Chapters 1-3. Kittle's argument about reading volume and student choice will challenge some of your assumptions about whole-class novels. Let it.
3. Gallagher, Kelly. Write Like This. Read the Introduction and Chapter 1. Gallagher organizes writing instruction around discourse aims (express and reflect, inform and explain, evaluate and judge, inquire and explore, analyze and interpret, take a stand/propose a solution). Compare these aims to the NC Writing standards you unpacked last week.

• "A Day in the Life of a Reading/Writing Workshop" (search for secondary ELA workshop classroom videos, ~15 minutes). Watch for how the teacher uses the mini-lesson to set up independent work, how conferring happens during work time, and how the share brings the room back together.

Activity 1: Mini-Lesson Section

You can add a sample mini-lesson section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section shows one focused mini-lesson tied to a standard you unpacked in Week 9. You can choose one reading or writing skill from your unpacked NC standards (Week 9, Activity 2). Include these elements in the section:

• Connection (1-2 minutes): What did we do yesterday that connects to today?
• Teaching Point (1 sentence): Today I want to teach you that...
• Demonstration (5-7 minutes): How will you model the skill using a mentor text or your own writing?
• Active Engagement (3-5 minutes): How will students try the skill with support before you release them to work independently?
• Link (1 minute): How does this skill connect to the ongoing work students are doing?

Keep this section of your draft to one page. The constraint is the point. If your mini-lesson cannot fit on one page, you are teaching more than one thing.

Activity 2: Workshop Week Map Section and Unit Frame

You can add two pieces to your unit plan working draft this week: the workshop week map and the unit frame. The week map shows five days of workshop instruction. The unit frame names your essential question and your anchor text. The two pieces together set the architecture you can fill in across Weeks 11 through 15.

For the workshop week map, you can design a five-day sequence. For each day, you can specify:

• The mini-lesson focus (reading or writing)
• The work time activity (independent reading, independent writing, small group, conferring)
• The share structure (partner share, whole class, written reflection)

Alternate between reading-focused and writing-focused mini-lessons across the week. Include one grammar or language mini-lesson using a mentor sentence from the anchor text. Annotate the map with notes about where you would confer with specific students and why.

For the unit frame, you can draft your unit's essential question and select your anchor text. You can post both to the discussion board for feedback before you fold them into the draft.

By the end of Week 11, you will be able to:

1. Identify the six fiction signposts and five nonfiction signposts from Notice and Note and explain the anchor question for each.
2. Plan a close reading lesson that uses signposts to guide student attention without reducing the text to a scavenger hunt.
3. Compare ELA close reading with historical thinking (RLH) and scientific argumentation (CER) and articulate what each discipline values in a text.
4. Design a text-dependent question sequence that moves students from literal comprehension to interpretation to evaluation.

1. Beers, Kylene and Robert Probst. Notice and Note: Strategies for Close Reading. Read Part I (the framework) and at least two signpost chapters of your choice. Focus on how the authors introduce each signpost through a specific text and how the anchor questions work.
2. Burke, Chapter 5: "Teaching Reading." Read the full chapter. Burke covers the reading process, text complexity, and strategies for both struggling and advanced readers. Pay attention to his discussion of text-dependent questions (pp. 163-176).
3. Cross-Disciplinary Reference: Review the "Reading Like a Historian" overview from the Stanford History Education Group website and one CER (Claim-Evidence-Reasoning) resource from a science education site. You are not reading these in depth. You are reading enough to compare approaches.

• Kylene Beers: "Notice and Note in the Classroom" (Heinemann author video, ~12 minutes). Watch for how Beers models the signpost introduction with a real text.
• "Close Reading vs. Historical Thinking" (search for comparison videos or use a curated playlist). Watch at least one video that shows a history teacher using sourcing and corroboration with a primary document. Notice what the history teacher cares about that the English teacher does not, and vice versa.

Activity 1: Signpost Lesson Section

You can add the signpost close reading lesson section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section shows how close reading will happen with your anchor text or a related short text. You can choose a short text (a poem, a short story excerpt, or a picture book with literary weight) and identify two signposts that appear in the text. Include these elements in the section:

• The signpost you can introduce to students (assume they have not seen it before)
• The anchor question that will guide discussion
• At least three text-dependent questions that move from literal to interpretive
• A written response prompt that asks students to connect the signpost to the text's larger meaning

You can write this section to 1-2 pages. Name the specific text and include page or line references for each signpost you identify.

Activity 2: Text-Dependent Question Sequence Section

You can add the text-dependent question sequence section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section shows how you can use signposts to guide students through your anchor text, and it includes a cross-disciplinary comparison that justifies your approach.

First, you can select a primary source document that could work in an English class, a history class, and a science class (examples: a speech about environmental policy, a narrative account of a scientific discovery, a literary essay about a historical event). You can write three sets of reading questions for the same document:

• English questions using close reading and signpost strategies
• History questions using sourcing, contextualization, and corroboration
• Science questions using claim, evidence, and reasoning

You can then write a short reflection (200-300 words) inside this section of your draft: What does each discipline's questions reveal about what the discipline values? Where do the questions overlap? You can use this reflection later in Week 14 when you build your interdisciplinary connections map.

Second, you can draft a full text-dependent question sequence for one section of your unit using the signpost framework. Mark the places where close reading will happen on the workshop week map you built in Week 10.

By the end of Week 12, you will be able to:

1. Design a literature lesson that uses a specific instructional structure (think-aloud, close reading, literature circle, or Socratic seminar) and anchors discussion in textual evidence.
2. Design a writing workshop lesson that includes teacher modeling, mentor text analysis, and independent writing time with conferring.
3. Select and sequence mentor texts for a writing study that shows students the range of moves available in a genre.
4. Explain the difference between teaching a text and teaching with a text, and articulate when each approach serves students better.

1. Burke, Chapter 4: "Teaching Writing." Focus on the sections about modeling (pp. 76-97), mentor texts, and designing writing assignments (pp. 110-119). Skip the section on digital writing for now; we will return to it in Week 15.
2. Burke, Chapter 5: "Teaching Reading." If you did not finish this chapter last week, complete it now. Focus on the sections about teaching novels (pp. 152-162) and the strategies for advanced readers (pp. 184-192).
3. Gallagher and Kittle. 4 Essential Studies. Read the Essay study and one additional study of your choice (Poetry, Book Clubs, or Digital Composition).

• "Teacher Modeling in a Writing Workshop" (search for Kelly Gallagher classroom video or Heinemann author video, ~10 minutes). Watch for how Gallagher writes in front of students, talks through his decisions, and names the moves he makes.
• "Literature Circle in Action" (search for secondary literature circle classroom video, ~10 minutes). Watch for how the teacher sets up roles, manages group discussion, and holds students accountable to the text.

Activity 1: Literature Lesson Section

You can add the literature lesson section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a 50-minute lesson plan that uses one of these three structures:

• Think-Aloud / Close Reading: Teacher models close reading of a passage, then students apply the same strategies to a new passage.
• Literature Circle: Small groups discuss assigned reading using defined roles (discussion director, passage picker, connector, illustrator, or similar).
• Socratic Seminar: Whole-class discussion driven by an open-ended question, with textual evidence required for every claim.

Include these elements in the section: the text and specific pages/passages, the instructional structure and why you chose it, the sequence of activities with time estimates, at least three text-dependent questions, and the assessment (how will you know students understood?).

Activity 2: Writing Workshop Lesson Section

You can add the writing workshop lesson section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a 50-minute lesson plan for a genre of your choice (personal narrative, argument, literary analysis, poetry, or another genre from Gallagher's discourse aims). Include these elements in the section:

• Mini-lesson (10-15 min): What is the teaching point? What mentor text will you use? How will you model the move?
• Work time (25-30 min): What will students write? How will you confer? What questions will you ask during conferences?
• Share (5-10 min): How will you select students to share? What will the class listen for?

Name your mentor text. Include the specific passage or excerpt you would project during the mini-lesson and explain what it shows students about the genre.

You can map both the literature lesson and the writing workshop lesson onto specific days in the workshop week map you built in Week 10.

By the end of Week 13, you will be able to:

1. Design a contextualized grammar lesson using a mentor sentence from an anchor text.
2. Explain the structure and instructional logic of Precision Grammar (Engelmann/Carnine Direct Instruction model) and identify when systematic grammar instruction serves students better than contextualized approaches.
3. Design a speaking/listening lesson that uses a structured discussion format (Socratic seminar, fishbowl, or structured academic controversy) and holds students accountable for evidence-based talk.
4. Plan instruction that addresses the NC Speaking and Listening standards alongside reading and writing objectives.

1. Burke, Chapter 7: "Language Study: Vocabulary, Grammar, and Style." Read the full chapter. Burke covers vocabulary instruction (pp. 258-270), grammar and style (pp. 271-290), and provides specific teaching strategies for each. Pay attention to the section on how to teach grammar, language, and style (pp. 280-290).
2. Burke, Chapter 6: "Speaking and Listening." Read the full chapter. Focus on the discussion section (pp. 217-235) and the section on presentations (pp. 244-254).
3. Precision Grammar: Teacher Review and Lessons 1-4. Read the Teacher Review document and skim the first four lesson scripts and workbooks. You do not need to memorize the scripts. You need to understand the instructional design: how each lesson reviews previous material, introduces new content through choral response, provides guided practice, and moves to independent workbook exercises.

• "Mentor Sentences in Action" (search for Jeff Anderson or mentor sentence classroom video, ~10 minutes). Watch for how the teacher presents the sentence, guides students through noticing, names the grammatical feature, and asks students to imitate.
• "Fishbowl Discussion" (search for secondary ELA fishbowl discussion video, ~10 minutes). Watch for how the inner circle discusses while the outer circle observes and takes notes. Notice how the teacher manages the transition between circles.

Activity 1: Grammar Lesson Section

You can add the grammar lesson section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section has two parts: a mentor sentence lesson built from your anchor text and a short analysis that justifies your approach.

Part A: Mentor Sentence Lesson. You can select a sentence from your unit's anchor text that demonstrates a grammatical feature worth teaching (examples: an author's use of appositives, a compound-complex sentence that controls pacing, a series of short sentences that create tension). Include these elements in the lesson:

• The sentence and the noticing prompts that guide students to its structure
• The grammatical feature named using correct terminology
• Two additional examples from published texts
• An imitation task tied to students' own writing

Part B: Precision Grammar Analysis. You can read Precision Grammar Lessons 1-3 (verbs: action, state of being, helping). You can then write a short analysis (200-300 words) for the section: How does the lesson sequence build cumulative knowledge? Where do you see Engelmann and Carnine's principles of systematic review and structured practice? For which students and in which contexts would this approach serve better than mentor sentence work? The analysis tells the reader why you chose the mentor sentence path for this unit and when you would switch to direct instruction instead.

Activity 2: Speaking/Listening Lesson Section

You can add the speaking/listening lesson section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a 50-minute lesson plan that puts Speaking and Listening at the center, not as an afterthought tacked onto a reading lesson. You can choose one format:

• Socratic Seminar: Students discuss an open-ended question with textual evidence. You design the question, the preparation protocol, and the assessment rubric.
• Fishbowl Discussion: Inner circle discusses; outer circle observes using a specific observation protocol. You design both the discussion prompt and the observation tool.
• Structured Academic Controversy (SAC): Students argue assigned positions on a debatable question from a text, then switch sides and seek consensus. You design the question, provide the source material, and structure the rounds.

Include these elements in the section: the text or texts students will use, the preparation work they need to complete before the discussion, the discussion structure with time estimates, and the assessment tool (rubric, checklist, or observation protocol).

By the end of Week 14, you will be able to:

1. Design a rubric for a writing assignment that evaluates the quality of thinking, use of evidence, and control of language rather than surface-level correctness alone.
2. Write a rationale for teaching a challenging text that addresses content, instructional purpose, standards alignment, and the four learning pursuits from Muhammad's framework.
3. Identify at least three specific points where ELA instruction connects to instruction in other content areas and explain how those connections benefit students.
4. Evaluate the strengths and limitations of timed writing as an assessment tool and design an alternative assessment that measures the same skills.

1. Burke, Chapter 8: "Assessing and Grading Student Learning and Work." Read the full chapter. Pay attention to Burke's treatment of different assessment types (pp. 296-309), timed writing (pp. 309-322), and his approach to grading (pp. 323-330).
2. NCTE Position Statement: "The Students' Right to Read" (NCTE, free online). This is a short document, and it gives you language for defending text selection decisions. Read it in full.
   • Access: ncte.org/statement/righttoreadguideline
3. Muhammad, Cultivating Genius. Revisit Chapters 4-5 on applying the framework to lesson and unit design. Connect Muhammad's approach to the assessment work this week: how do you assess Identity and Criticality pursuits alongside Skills and Intellectual Development?

• "Text Selection and Rationale Writing" (NCTE or state affiliate webinar, ~15 minutes). Watch for how experienced teachers frame their text selection decisions in standards language and connect them to student learning goals.

Activity 1: Assessment and Rubric Section

You can add the assessment and rubric section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section pairs the culminating writing assignment for your unit with the rubric that evaluates it. You can take the culminating writing assignment you have already named in earlier sections of the draft, then design a rubric that evaluates student work across four dimensions:

• Ideas and Analysis: Quality of the central claim or interpretation, depth of textual evidence, sophistication of reasoning.
• Organization and Structure: Coherence of the overall argument or narrative, effectiveness of transitions, control of pacing.
• Language and Style: Sentence variety, word choice, voice, grammar and mechanics in service of meaning.
• Engagement with the Four Pursuits: Where does the student's work show evidence of Identity, Skills, Intellectual Development, and Criticality?

Each dimension has descriptors at four levels (Exceeds, Meets, Approaching, Beginning). The descriptors name what the student's work does at each level, not what it lacks.

Activity 2: Challenging Text Rationale Section

You can add the challenging text rationale section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section defends your text selection against a potential parent, administrator, or school board challenge. You can select one text you plan to teach that could face a challenge: a novel with mature content, a poem with profanity, an essay with a politically charged argument, or a text by an author whose personal history is controversial.

Include these elements in the section (400-500 words total):

• What the text is and what it contains that might raise concerns
• Why the text is the best choice for this unit's learning objectives
• Which NC ELA standards the text helps you teach
• Which of Muhammad's four pursuits the text supports
• What preparation and context you can provide students before they encounter the difficult content
• What alternative text you would offer a student whose family opts out

Activity 3: Interdisciplinary Connections Section

You can add the interdisciplinary connections section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a visual or written map showing where your unit connects to at least two other content areas. For each connection, you can name the specific skill or concept, the other discipline it connects to, and how you would make the connection visible to students. One sentence per connection is enough if the sentence is specific.

Examples: "The close reading of Lincoln's Second Inaugural in my unit connects to the sourcing and contextualization strategies students use in U.S. History when they examine the same document as a primary source." "The data analysis students do when examining word frequency in a poem connects to the statistical reasoning they practice in math class."

Your draft now includes: essential question, anchor text, supporting texts, lesson sequence, assessment with rubric, challenging-text rationale, and interdisciplinary connections. You can assemble and revise these pieces in Week 15.

By the end of Week 15, you will be able to:

1. Design a media literacy lesson that teaches students to analyze a non-print text using rhetorical strategies (audience, purpose, context, appeals, and design choices).
2. Plan vocabulary instruction that integrates direct teaching, word-learning strategies, and meaningful practice with academic and domain-specific words.
3. Assemble a complete ELA unit plan that includes all required components and demonstrates coherence between learning objectives, instruction, and assessment.
4. Reflect on your growth as an ELA teacher candidate and identify areas for continued development.

1. Burke, Chapter 4: Revisit the section on Digital Writing (pp. 128-133). Connect Burke's discussion to the media literacy work this week.
2. Burke, Chapter 7: Revisit the vocabulary sections (pp. 258-270). Focus on the four principles of effective vocabulary instruction and the specific strategies Burke recommends.
3. NCTE Position Statement: "Media Education in English Language Arts" (NCTE, free online). This is short and provides the professional organization's framework for how media literacy fits into ELA instruction.
   • Access: ncte.org/statement/media_education

• "Lateral Reading: Civic Online Reasoning" (Stanford History Education Group / Civic Online Reasoning project, ~10 minutes). Watch for how the lateral reading strategy differs from the close reading strategies we studied in Week 11. Close reading goes deep into a single text. Lateral reading goes wide, checking the source before reading the content. Both are necessary.

Activity 1: Media Literacy Lesson Section

You can add the media literacy lesson section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a 50-minute lesson that teaches students to analyze a non-print or multimodal text. You can choose one of the following:

• A print or digital advertisement
• A news broadcast segment or podcast episode
• A social media thread or viral post
• A documentary excerpt or video essay

Include these elements in the section: the text (linked or described with enough detail for someone else to find it), the rhetorical analysis framework you can use (Burke's framework, Muhammad's Criticality questions, or another approach you can defend), at least three analysis questions that move from observation to interpretation to evaluation, and a written or multimodal response task.

Activity 2: Vocabulary Lesson Sequence Section

You can add the vocabulary lesson sequence section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a five-day vocabulary routine for one week of your unit. This is a sequence of instructional moves, not a list of words and definitions:

• Day 1: How will you introduce the words? (Context from the text, morphemic analysis, word wall, or another strategy)
• Day 2: How will students practice using the words in speech or writing?
• Day 3: How will you deepen understanding? (Semantic mapping, Frayer models, word sorts, or another strategy)
• Day 4: How will students encounter the words again in a new context?
• Day 5: How will you assess whether students own the words? (Not a matching quiz. Something that shows students can use the words in their own thinking.)

You can choose 8-10 words from your unit's anchor text. At least half should be Tier 2 academic vocabulary (words that appear across disciplines) rather than Tier 3 domain-specific vocabulary.

Activity 3: Unit Plan Assembly and Self-Assessment

You can assemble the complete unit plan this week. The final document should include:

1. Unit Overview: Essential question, grade level, time frame (2-4 weeks), and a one-paragraph rationale that connects the unit to the NC ELA standards and Muhammad's four pursuits.
2. Texts: Anchor text and supporting texts (at least one per type: literature, informational, media/multimodal). Include brief rationale for each text selection.
3. Lesson Sequence: A day-by-day plan showing the mini-lesson focus, the work time activity, and the share structure for each day. Include at least one of each lesson type: literature, writing workshop, grammar/language, and speaking/listening.
4. Assessment Plan: Formative assessments (at least two), summative assessment with rubric (from Week 14), and a description of how you can use formative data to adjust instruction.
5. Differentiation Plan: How will you support struggling readers and writers? How will you challenge advanced students? Be specific: name the strategies, not the intention.
6. Reflection: (300-400 words) What did you learn about teaching ELA through building this unit? Where are you strongest? Where do you need more practice? What question about ELA instruction do you still carry?

Format: Single document (Word or PDF), clearly organized with headings for each component.

Length: 15-25 pages, depending on the detail of your lesson sequence. Quality and coherence matter more than page count.

Grading: The unit plan will be evaluated using the SEC 507 Unit Plan Rubric, which assesses alignment (between standards, objectives, instruction, and assessment), instructional quality (variety and appropriateness of lesson types), equity (evidence of Muhammad's four pursuits throughout the unit), and professional presentation (clarity, organization, and correct use of professional terminology).

Due: End of Week 15, submitted through the course LMS.

By the end of Week 10, you will be able to:

1. Construct supporting questions that break a compelling question into disciplinary components.
2. Select primary and secondary sources that represent multiple perspectives on an inquiry topic.
3. Design formative tasks that assess whether students can answer a supporting question before moving to the summative task.
4. Produce a complete one-page IDM blueprint with all required components.

1. "The Art of the Blueprint: Inquiry in the Classroom" from Social Education (NCSS, 2023). This article walks through blueprint construction with classroom examples and common mistakes.
   • Access: Social Education article (PDF)
2. Browse the C3Teachers.org Blueprint Library. Read at least three completed blueprints at the grade level you plan to teach. Pay attention to how different blueprint authors handle supporting questions and source selection.
   • Browse: C3Teachers.org Blueprint Generator

Activity 1: IDM Blueprint Section

You can add the IDM blueprint section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is the one-page blueprint that organizes the entire unit. You can take the compelling question you drafted in Week 9 (revised, if your peers suggested improvements) and build the blueprint around it. Include these elements in the section:

• Two supporting questions that break the compelling question into disciplinary pieces.
• One primary source and one secondary source for each supporting question. Students would examine these as part of the inquiry.
• A formative task for each supporting question: something students produce to demonstrate they can answer the supporting question. A formative task might be a short written response, an annotated document, a graphic organizer, or a class discussion with an exit ticket. It should be quick enough to fit inside a lesson and informative enough to tell you whether students are ready to move forward.
• A draft summative performance task that asks students to answer the compelling question using evidence from across the unit.

The blueprint fits on one page. The constraint is the point.

Activity 2: Source Selection Section

You can add the source selection section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section justifies the document choices that drive student investigation. You will receive a bank of 8–10 sources on a single topic (a mix of strong and weak options: a political cartoon, a speech excerpt, a census table, a biased newspaper editorial, a photograph, a scholarly summary, a personal letter, a government report).

You can select four sources from the bank. You can then write a justification (200–300 words) inside this section of your draft, explaining your choices: Why these four? What does each one contribute that the others do not? What perspectives are represented in your selection, and which perspectives are missing? If you had to add a fifth source to fill a gap, what type of source would it be?

By the end of Week 11, you will be able to:

1. Apply the four historical thinking strategies (sourcing, contextualization, corroboration, close reading) to a primary source document.
2. Compare disciplinary reading strategies in social studies with close reading strategies in ELA and explain what each approach reveals and misses.
3. Adapt an existing Reading Like a Historian lesson for a different grade level, state standard, or document set.

1. Wineburg, Sam. "Historical Thinking and Other Unnatural Acts" (title chapter, approximately 20 pages). If you cannot access the full book, the Digital Inquiry Group's teacher resources summarize the core argument about sourcing, contextualization, and corroboration.
2. Select one lesson from the Reading Like a Historian curriculum (free, over 150 available). Choose a lesson connected to the era or topic you are exploring in your IDM blueprint. Read both the teacher guide and the student document set.
   • Browse: Digital Inquiry Group: History Lessons

• A Reading Like a Historian classroom video showing students analyzing primary sources using historical thinking strategies. The Digital Inquiry Group site hosts several. Watch one at the secondary level and pay attention to the teacher moves: how does the teacher model sourcing? How do students respond when two documents contradict each other?

Activity 1: Disciplinary Literacy Comparison Section

You can add the disciplinary literacy comparison section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section justifies the historical-thinking lens you can apply to every source in the unit. You will receive a primary source document: a letter, a political cartoon, or a government proclamation. You can analyze it twice.

First pass: ELA close reading. Examine word choice, sentence structure, audience, purpose, and tone. What is the author saying, and how does the language shape meaning?

Second pass: Historical thinking. Apply sourcing (who wrote this, when, and why?), contextualization (what was happening in the world at the time?), and corroboration (if you had access to other sources, what would you check?). What does this document reveal about the moment it was created?

You can write a 400–500 word reflection inside this section of your draft, comparing the two passes. What did each approach reveal? What did each one miss? Where did the two lenses overlap, and where did they diverge? If you could only use one approach in a social studies classroom, which would it be, and what would your students lose? You can draw on this reflection later in Week 14 when you build your interdisciplinary connections map.

Activity 2: Reading Like a Historian Lesson Section

You can add the Reading Like a Historian lesson section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a one-page lesson sketch that adapts an RLH lesson for your unit context. You can take the RLH lesson you read and adapt it for your own teaching context. You might change the grade level, swap in a different state standard, or replace one or two documents with sources that connect to your IDM blueprint topic.

Include these elements in the section:

• Objective: One measurable objective tied to a NC standard.
• Document set: List the documents students will examine (original and/or replacements).
• Guiding questions: Three questions that walk students through the historical thinking strategies.
• Lesson structure: A brief description of how you would organize a 50-minute class period around this lesson (opening, document analysis, discussion, closure).

Based on what you learned about disciplinary literacy this week, revisit the IDM blueprint section. Do your source selections still hold up? Do your formative tasks ask students to use historical thinking strategies, or do they default to content recall? Revise as needed.

By the end of Week 12, you will be able to:

1. Analyze the structure of a DBQ (document selection, scaffolding questions, essay prompt) and evaluate the design decisions behind it.
2. Construct a mini-DBQ with three documents, scaffolding questions, and an essay prompt tied to a compelling question.
3. Design a Socratic seminar for a social studies topic, including source selection, opening question, follow-up questions, and an assessment strategy.
4. Distinguish between how a Socratic seminar functions in social studies versus ELA.

1. One sample DBQ from the DBQ Project (free samples available on their website; select one at the high school level). Read the teacher directions, the entire document set, and the essay prompt. Pay attention to how the documents are sequenced and what each one adds to the argument.
   • Browse: The DBQ Project
2. Copeland, Matt. *Socratic Circles: Fostering Critical and Creative Thinking in Middle and High School* (Chapter 1 or an excerpt on seminar structure and norms, approximately 15–20 pages). Copeland's model gives you the mechanics: inner circle, outer circle, opening question, evidence requirements, and the debrief.

Activity 1: Mini-DBQ Lesson Section

You can add the mini-DBQ lesson section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a complete mini-DBQ tied to one of your supporting questions or a related NC standard. Include these elements in the section:

• Three documents: primary or secondary sources. The documents must represent at least two perspectives on the topic. Vary the types: combine a textual source with a visual source (map, photograph, political cartoon) and a quantitative source (data table, census record, economic chart).
• Two scaffolding questions per document: These questions should guide students to extract specific evidence and think about the source's perspective, reliability, or context. Avoid questions that have one-word answers.
• One essay prompt: The prompt should require students to use evidence from all three documents and integrate outside knowledge. The best essay prompts are arguable, which means the documents should support more than one reasonable answer.
• Design rationale (150–200 words): Explain why you chose these three documents and how the scaffolding questions prepare students for the essay.

Activity 2: Socratic Seminar Lesson Section

You can add the Socratic seminar lesson section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a 30-minute Socratic seminar plan for a specific historical topic in your unit. Include these elements in the section:

• Source set: Two to three documents students will read before the seminar. At least one should be a primary source.
• Opening question: One question that launches the discussion. It should be open enough to sustain 30 minutes of conversation but focused enough to keep students in the content.
• Three follow-up questions: You can use these to redirect if the discussion stalls or drifts. Each one should push students deeper into the evidence.
• Discussion norms: What are the expectations? How will you handle students who dominate? Students who stay silent?
• Evidence requirements: How will you ensure students use disciplinary evidence (sourcing, contextualization) rather than opinion?
• Assessment strategy: You can use an observation checklist, a written reflection, a self-assessment, or a combination. Describe what you can assess and how.
• Rationale (200 words): Explain how this seminar differs from an ELA Socratic seminar on the same texts. What changes when the disciplinary lens shifts?

You can map both the mini-DBQ and the Socratic seminar onto specific days in the daily lesson sequence as you draft it.

By the end of Week 13, you will be able to:

1. Analyze the design elements of a historical simulation (roles, decision points, document packets, debrief questions) and evaluate how well the simulation connects to the historical record.
2. Design a simulation outline for a social studies topic, including roles, source materials, timeline, and debrief.
3. Participate in a Structured Academic Controversy and explain how the protocol builds understanding of multiple perspectives.
4. Design a SAC for a social studies topic, including the debatable question, source packets for each position, and discussion norms.

1. One published simulation lesson. Choose from:
   • iCivics: Constitutional Convention role-play or a Supreme Court simulation (free, available at icivics.org).
   • Choices Program at Brown University: A Cold War crisis simulation or another foreign policy decision-making exercise (free, available at choices.edu).
   • Read the teacher guide, the role cards, and the debrief questions.
2. Structured Academic Controversy protocol overview (available from AVID or the Buck Institute for Education, 2–3 pages). This gives you the step-by-step procedure: present Position A, present Position B, switch, consensus.

Activity 1: Simulation Lesson Section

You can add the simulation lesson section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a design outline for a historical or civic simulation tied to your IDM blueprint or a related NC standard. Include these elements in the section:

• Scenario and decision point: What situation are students dropped into, and what decision must they make? The decision should have been contested in the historical record (meaning reasonable people disagreed at the time).
• Four to six roles: Brief description of each role, including that role's interests, constraints, and goals. Each role should have access to different information, so students must negotiate and share.
• Document packet (described, not created in full): For each role, describe the types of documents students would receive (a speech excerpt, a letter, a data table, a map). You do not need to find the actual sources this week; describe what they would be.
• Timeline: How long does the simulation take? What are the phases (preparation, negotiation, decision, debrief)?
• Five debrief questions: These should connect the simulation to the historical record. What happened in the simulation, and how does it compare to what happened in history? Where did students' decisions diverge from the historical outcome, and why?
• Rationale (200 words): What does this simulation teach that a lecture, a reading, or a DBQ could not?

Activity 2: SAC Lesson Section

You can add the SAC lesson section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section has two parts: a brief reflection on your own SAC experience and the full SAC design for your unit.

Part A: Participate. You can run a Structured Academic Controversy together using materials provided in the module. The question, source packets, and protocol will be posted. You can follow the protocol: argue Position A with evidence, switch to Position B, then draft a consensus statement with your partner or group.

The question for your SAC: "Was dropping the atomic bomb on Japan justified?" (Other options depending on your section: "Should the Electoral College be abolished?" or "Was Reconstruction a success or a failure?")

Part B: Design. After the experience, you can design your own SAC for a topic connected to your unit plan. Include these elements:

• The debatable question: It must be arguable (not settled by scholarly consensus).
• Two positions: State each position in one sentence.
• Three sources per side: List the sources students would use to build their arguments. Each source should provide specific evidence, not general background.
• Discussion norms: How will you set up the protocol? How will you handle students who resist arguing a position they disagree with?

Your unit plan should now include at least two of the four lesson types covered in Weeks 12–13 (DBQ, Socratic seminar, simulation, or SAC). Map them onto specific days in the daily lesson sequence.

By the end of Week 14, you will be able to:

1. Design an analytic rubric for a social studies summative performance task that assesses disciplinary skills (sourcing, argumentation, evidence use) in addition to content knowledge.
2. Classify controversial issues as "open" or "settled" using Hess's framework and design an instructional approach appropriate to each classification.
3. Map interdisciplinary connections between a social studies unit and at least two other content areas.

1. C3 Framework, Dimension 4 (revisit). Focus on the assessment guidance sections: the three pillars of cognition, observation, and interpretation. Read these pages with your summative performance task in mind.
2. Hess, Diana. *Controversy in the Classroom: The Democratic Power of Discussion* (Chapter 1 or selected excerpt, approximately 20 pages). Hess's core argument: avoiding controversial issues does not protect students. It teaches them that some questions are too dangerous to examine, which is the opposite of what social studies education exists to do.

• A case study video or podcast on teaching controversial issues in social studies. The Learning for Justice resource page or the C3Teachers.org professional development section both link to classroom examples. Choose one at the secondary level.

Activity 1: Assessment and Rubric Section

You can add the assessment and rubric section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section pairs the summative performance task from your IDM blueprint with the rubric that evaluates it. Before you build the rubric, you can examine two sample rubrics provided in the module: one strong and one weak. You can write a paragraph (100–150 words) identifying what makes the strong rubric effective and what makes the weak rubric fail. Then you can build your own.

Your rubric must include these elements:

• At least four criteria. At least two should assess disciplinary skills: use of evidence, sourcing, argumentation, or historical thinking. Content knowledge is one criterion, but it should not be the only criterion.
• Three or four performance levels with descriptions specific enough that two teachers using the rubric independently would give the same student similar scores.
• Specific language. "Student demonstrates understanding" is not a rubric criterion. "Student identifies the author, audience, and purpose of at least three sources" is.

If the rubric-building process reveals gaps in the summative performance task, revise the task inside the IDM blueprint section.

Activity 2: Controversial Issues Section

You can add the controversial issues section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section names how you can handle contested content inside the unit. You can classify three current issues as "open" or "settled" using Hess's framework. Choose issues connected to social studies content (examples: climate change policy, Confederate monument removal, immigration enforcement, the death penalty, reparations for slavery, gun regulation). For each issue, you can write a 100-word rationale explaining your classification. What makes it open or settled? If you are unsure, explain the uncertainty.

You can then select one open issue connected to your content area and design a 20-minute instructional sequence inside this section of your draft:

• What sources would students examine?
• What discussion structure would you use (SAC, Socratic seminar, fishbowl, think-pair-share)?
• How would you handle a student who brings misinformation as evidence?
• How would you handle a student who becomes emotionally distressed by the topic?

Activity 3: Interdisciplinary Connections Section

You can add the interdisciplinary connections section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a one-page map (visual or written) showing how your unit topic connects to at least two other disciplines. Be specific. Do not write "connects to ELA." Write "connects to ELA through Frederick Douglass's 'What to the Slave Is the Fourth of July?' speech, which students in English class may read as rhetoric while social studies students examine it as a primary source."

For each connection, you can write one sentence explaining what a cross-curricular collaboration would look like: a shared assignment, a sequenced reading, a guest lesson from the other teacher, or a joint project.

By the end of Week 15, you will be able to:

1. Design a lesson using maps or spatial data as a primary source, connected to a social studies standard.
2. Create a civic action component for a unit plan that connects student action to disciplinary learning and addresses a specific audience.
3. Apply lateral reading techniques to evaluate a contemporary source and design instruction that teaches these techniques to high school students.
4. Assemble a complete social studies unit plan that includes all required components and demonstrates coherence between standards, inquiry, instruction, and assessment.

1. National Geographic Geo-Inquiry Process overview (free, available on the National Geographic Education site). Five steps: Ask, Collect, Visualize, Create, Act. Read the overview and one example lesson.
   • Access: National Geographic Education
2. Select one lesson or resource from the News Literacy Project (checkology.org or the NLP main site). Focus on lateral reading: how to evaluate a source by leaving it and checking what others say about it, rather than by reading it more closely.
   • Access: News Literacy Project

• An ArcGIS StoryMap example (free, available on the Esri Education site). StoryMaps combine maps, text, and images into a narrative. You can watch or explore one that applies spatial thinking to a historical or civic question. Notice how the map functions as evidence, not decoration.

Activity 1: Geographic Inquiry Lesson Section

You can add the geographic inquiry lesson section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a one-page lesson sketch that uses maps or spatial data as a primary source connected to your unit content. Options:

• Historical map comparison: How did boundaries change, and why? What do the changes reveal about power, negotiation, or conflict?
• Demographic data mapping: Where did migration patterns concentrate, and what drove them? Use census data, immigration records, or economic data.
• Environmental or resource mapping: How does geography shape economic and political decisions? Where do resources sit, who controls them, and what conflicts follow?

Include these elements in the section:

• Objective: One measurable objective tied to a NC standard.
• Map or spatial data source: Identify the specific map, data set, or StoryMap students will examine.
• Three analysis questions: Questions that push students beyond "What do you see?" toward "What does this reveal, and why does it matter?"
• Connection to the compelling question: One sentence explaining how this geographic lesson feeds into the larger inquiry of your unit plan.

Activity 2: Civic Action Section

You can add the civic action section to your unit plan working draft this week. Dimension 4 calls for informed action, and this section gives students a way to do something with what they have learned. The action must meet these criteria:

• Connect to the inquiry. Students use evidence from their unit research to support the action. The action grows from the learning; it does not float free of it.
• Address a specific audience. Name the audience: a school board, a city council, a community organization, a local newspaper, a state legislator. "The public" is too vague.
• Go beyond the classroom. A presentation to classmates is practice. A presentation to the school board is civic action. The difference is the audience's ability to act on what students present.

Include these elements in the section (one page):

• The action (what students will do)
• The audience (who will receive the action)
• The evidence (what research from the unit supports the action)
• The connection to the compelling question
• The logistics (how you would organize this in a school setting, including permissions, timelines, and technology needs)

Activity 3: Media Literacy Lesson Section and Final Assembly

You can add the media literacy lesson section to your unit plan working draft this week, and then you can assemble the full unit plan for submission. For the media literacy section, you can select a contemporary news article or social media post related to your unit topic. You can evaluate it using lateral reading techniques from the News Literacy Project:

• What claims does the source make?
• What did you check to verify those claims? (Name the specific sources you consulted.)
• What did you learn about the original source's reliability?
• Did lateral reading change your assessment of the source?

You can document your process in 200–300 words inside this section. Then you can write a 200-word explanation of how you would teach lateral reading to high school students within your unit. Where in the unit would you introduce it? What sources would students evaluate? How would you connect it to the disciplinary literacy skills from Week 11?

The final assembly: you can pull every section of the working draft into one cohesive document. The complete unit plan should include:

1. Revised IDM blueprint (one page): compelling question, three to four supporting questions, formative tasks, sources, summative performance task.
2. Daily lesson plans for five to seven instructional days, with measurable objectives tied to NC social studies standards.
3. At least two lesson types from Weeks 12–13 (DBQ, Socratic seminar, simulation, or SAC) incorporated into the daily plans.
4. Differentiation strategies for at least two student populations (ELL students, students with IEPs, gifted learners, or another population relevant to your expected placement).
5. Assessment rubric for the summative performance task (from Week 14).
6. Civic action component (from this week).
7. Media literacy lesson (from this week).
8. Interdisciplinary connections map (from Week 14).
9. One-page rationale connecting the unit design to the C3 inquiry arc and at least one learning theory from Modules 1–4. Name the theory. Explain how it shaped a specific design decision in your unit. Do not write a generic paragraph about constructivism. Write about how constructivism (or behaviorism, or Vygotsky's ZPD, or whatever theory you choose) shaped the way you sequenced your lessons, designed your formative tasks, or structured your simulation.

Format: Single document (Word or PDF), clearly organized with headings for each component.

Length: 15–25 pages, depending on the detail of your lesson sequence. Quality and coherence matter more than page count.

Grading: The unit plan will be evaluated using the SEC 507 Unit Plan Rubric, which assesses alignment (between standards, inquiry, instruction, and assessment), instructional quality (variety and appropriateness of lesson types), disciplinary integrity (evidence of historical thinking and the C3 inquiry arc throughout), and professional presentation (clarity, organization, and correct use of professional terminology).

Due: End of Week 15, submitted through the course LMS.

By the end of Week 10, you will be able to:

1. Explain the purpose of each phase of the 5E model and why the sequence matters.
2. Design a multi-day 5E lesson sequence anchored by a phenomenon.
3. Identify the three dimensions of NGSS within each phase of a 5E sequence.
4. Evaluate a 5E lesson plan for common design errors (compressed phases, Explain before Explore, assessment only at the end).

1. "The BSCS 5E Instructional Model: Origins and Effectiveness" Executive Summary (BSCS, free PDF, approximately 10 pages). This is the research base. It explains why the model works and what happens when phases are skipped or reordered.
   • Download: BSCS 5E Executive Summary (PDF)
2. "How to Use the 5E Model in Middle and High School Science Classes" (Edutopia). A practical, classroom-level overview with examples of what each phase looks like with real students.
   • Read: Edutopia: 5E Model
3. South Carolina Three-Dimensional Science Instructional Planning Template User's Guide (free PDF). South Carolina built a planning template that maps the 5E model onto three-dimensional learning. Even though you use NC standards, this template is the best free tool available for planning 5E lessons aligned to NGSS-style standards.
   • Download: SC Planning Template Guide

Activity 1: 5E Lesson Sequence Section

You can add the 5E lesson sequence section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is the multi-day skeleton of the unit. You can take the phenomenon you selected in Week 9 and design a three to five day 5E sequence around it. Include these elements in the section:

• Engage (Day 1): How will you present the phenomenon? What prior knowledge will you activate? What questions do you expect students to generate?
• Explore (Days 1–2): What investigation, data collection, or hands-on experience will students do before you explain the science? Be specific: name the materials, the procedure, and the data students will collect.
• Explain (Day 3): How will you formalize the science content? This is where vocabulary, concepts, and models get introduced, but only after students have explored. What will you explain, and how will you connect it to what students discovered during Explore?
• Elaborate (Day 4): How will students apply their understanding to a new situation? A new phenomenon, a related problem, or a design challenge?
• Evaluate (Day 5): How will you assess what students learned? The evaluation should measure three-dimensional understanding, not just content recall.

For each phase, you can identify which SEPs and CCCs are active. Write the section as a planning document of approximately two pages.

Activity 2: 5E Error Analysis Section

You can add the 5E error analysis section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section sharpens your eye for design problems by working through a broken plan. You will receive a "broken" 5E lesson plan (provided in the module). The plan contains three common design errors:

• Explain comes before Explore (the teacher lectures before students investigate).
• The Elaborate phase is just more practice on the same content rather than application to a new context.
• The Evaluate phase tests vocabulary rather than three-dimensional understanding.

You can identify all three errors. For each one, you can write a 100-word revision explaining what you would change and why the revision improves the lesson. The analysis stays in your draft as a reference for the design decisions you make in later weeks.

By the end of Week 11, you will be able to:

1. Identify which Science and Engineering Practices are active in a given science lesson and distinguish between practices that are central to the lesson and practices that are incidental.
2. Design a modeling activity in which students build, test, and revise a scientific model based on new evidence.
3. Apply the CER framework to construct a scientific argument and design instruction that teaches CER to high school students.
4. Compare science argumentation (CER) with argumentation in social studies and ELA and identify what makes each one disciplinary.

1. NGSS Appendix F: Science and Engineering Practices (free PDF from nextgenscience.org). This appendix describes all eight practices with grade-band progressions. Read the descriptions for the high school level.
   • Download: nextgenscience.org
2. "Using the Claim, Evidence, Reasoning (CER) Framework in the Classroom" (Edutopia, by Eric Brunsell). A concise introduction to CER with classroom examples.
   • Read: Edutopia: CER Framework
3. "How to Teach Claim, Evidence, and Reasoning (CER) Like a Pro" (Beakers and Ink). A practical guide with scaffolding strategies for students who struggle with CER.
   • Read: beakersandink.com CER guide

Activity 1: Modeling Activity Section

You can add the modeling activity section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a one-page design tied to your 5E sequence from Week 10. Students should:

• Build an initial model of the phenomenon or system based on their prior knowledge (this could happen during the Engage or early Explore phase).
• Revise the model after new evidence comes in (during or after Explore).
• Present a final model that incorporates the science content from the Explain phase.

Include these elements in the section:

• What students will model (the system, the process, or the phenomenon).
• What form the model will take (a drawing, a physical model, a computer simulation, a diagram with annotations). Be specific.
• What evidence or data will prompt the revision.
• How you can assess the model (what makes a model "good" in your discipline? accuracy? explanatory power? ability to predict?).

Activity 2: CER Lesson Section

You can add the CER lesson section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section has two parts: your own CER response that models the level of thinking you expect, and the lesson design that teaches CER to students.

Part A: Model CER Response. You can write a CER response to a science question provided in the module. The question will include a data set. Your CER should demonstrate the framework at the level you would expect from your students: a clear claim, specific evidence cited from the data, and reasoning that names the scientific principle connecting the evidence to the claim.

Part B: CER Lesson Design. Include these elements:

• The question students will answer.
• The data or evidence students will use (from an investigation, a data table, or a reading).
• A CER scaffold or template for students who need support.
• A model CER response you would share with students (after they have attempted their own).
• A description of how you would introduce CER to students who have never used it.

Activity 3: Cross-Disciplinary Argumentation Section

You can add the cross-disciplinary argumentation section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a 200-word comparison: How does argumentation in science (CER) differ from argumentation in social studies (DBQ or SAC) or ELA (literary analysis essay)? What counts as "evidence" in each discipline? What counts as "reasoning"? Where do the disciplines overlap, and where do they diverge? This piece matters because your students will encounter argumentation in multiple classes, and they need to understand that the rules change depending on the discipline. You can draw on it again in Week 14 when you build interdisciplinary connections.

Decide where in your 5E sequence the modeling activity and the CER writing fit. Revise the 5E lesson sequence section to incorporate both.

By the end of Week 12, you will be able to:

1. Classify a lab investigation by its level of inquiry (confirmation, structured, guided, open) and evaluate which level is appropriate for a given learning objective.
2. Design a guided inquiry lab investigation with a clear question, materials list, safety considerations, data collection plan, and analysis questions.
3. Design a discrepant event demonstration that serves as the Engage phase of a 5E lesson.
4. Distinguish between the instructional purposes of a lab investigation and a demonstration and explain when each one is the better choice.

1. "Promoting Scientific Inquiry Inside and Outside of Middle and High School Classrooms" (Edutopia). A practical overview of inquiry levels with classroom examples.
   • Read: Edutopia: Scientific Inquiry
2. "Say Goodbye to Lab Write-Ups for Better Science Instruction" (Sadler Science). An argument for replacing traditional lab reports with alternatives that better reflect how scientists actually communicate. Read this alongside the traditional lab report format so you can evaluate both.
   • Read: sadlerscience.com
3. Browse the PhET Interactive Simulations library (free, University of Colorado Boulder). You can explore 3–5 simulations in your content area. Consider how a simulation could serve as a virtual lab when equipment or safety constraints limit hands-on investigation.
   • Browse: phet.colorado.edu

Activity 1: Guided Inquiry Lab Section

You can add the guided inquiry lab section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a full lab investigation that fits into the Explore phase of your 5E sequence. Include these elements in the section:

• The question: What are students investigating? The question should be open enough that multiple approaches could work.
• Materials list: Everything students need, including safety equipment.
• Safety considerations: Identify hazards and describe how you can address them. Include appropriate PPE, disposal procedures, and emergency protocols.
• Student instructions: Enough structure to keep the investigation productive and safe, but not so much that the procedure becomes a recipe. Students should make decisions about how to collect and record data.
• Data collection plan: What data will students gather? How will they record it? What format will the data take (table, graph, observations)?
• Analysis questions: Three to four questions that push students to interpret their data, connect it to the phenomenon, and identify patterns or anomalies.
• Level of inquiry justification (100 words): Explain why you chose guided inquiry for this investigation. What would change if you moved to structured inquiry? To open inquiry? What would students gain or lose at each level?

Activity 2: Discrepant Event Demonstration Section

You can add the discrepant event demonstration section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a one-page design that could serve as the Engage phase for a 5E lesson. A discrepant event is something that contradicts students' expectations: a heavy object and a light object falling at the same rate, a liquid that flows uphill, a chemical reaction that absorbs heat instead of releasing it.

Include these elements in the section:

• The phenomenon: What will students see?
• The prediction: What will students expect to happen, and why will they expect it?
• The discrepancy: What actually happens, and why is it surprising?
• Student questions: What questions should the demonstration generate? List three.
• Safety notes: Any hazards or precautions.
• Connection to content: What DCI does this demonstration connect to? How will the surprise motivate students to investigate further?

You can map the lab investigation into your Explore phase and the demonstration into your Engage phase (if it fits) within the 5E lesson sequence section.

By the end of Week 13, you will be able to:

1. Design a simulation-based lesson using PhET or another interactive simulation, with guided exploration questions and data collection tasks.
2. Evaluate when a lecture is the appropriate instructional choice and when a different lesson type would serve students better.
3. Design a 15–20 minute science lecture for the Explain phase of a 5E sequence, including embedded checks for understanding and explicit connections to student investigation data.
4. Distinguish between the instructional purposes of all four lesson types covered in Weeks 12–13 and select the appropriate type for a given learning objective.

1. Browse and interact with two PhET simulations in your content area (free at phet.colorado.edu). Work through them as a learner first: manipulate variables, collect data, look for patterns. Then read the teacher resources provided for each simulation (PhET includes activity guides and learning goals for every simulation).
   • Explore: phet.colorado.edu
2. "How to Provide Students With Alternatives to the Lab Report" (Edutopia). This article describes ways to have students communicate their science learning beyond the traditional lab report: video, podcasting, storyboarding, peer teaching. Read it as a menu of options for the Evaluate phase.
   • Read: Edutopia: Lab Report Alternatives

Activity 1: Simulation Lesson Section

You can add the simulation lesson section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a lesson designed around one PhET simulation (or another free interactive simulation) connected to your unit content. Include these elements in the section:

• Learning objective: One measurable objective tied to a NC science standard.
• Simulation setup: Which simulation, what settings, and what variables will students manipulate?
• Guided exploration questions: Five questions that direct students through the simulation in a sequence. The questions should move from observation ("What happens when you increase X?") to analysis ("What pattern do you see in the relationship between X and Y?") to explanation ("Why does the system behave this way?").
• Data collection: What data will students record from the simulation? Provide a simple data table or recording format.
• Connection to the 5E sequence: Where does this simulation lesson fit in your unit? Is it part of Explore (students discovering relationships), Elaborate (students applying understanding to a new context), or both?
• Limitations discussion (100 words): What does the simulation simplify or leave out? How would you help students understand the gap between the model and the real system?

Activity 2: Science Lecture Section

You can add the science lecture section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a 15–20 minute lecture for the Explain phase of your 5E sequence. The lecture should meet these criteria:

• Open with student data. Start by showing or referencing the data students collected during Explore. What did they find? What patterns emerged? What surprised them?
• Formalize the science content. Introduce vocabulary, concepts, and principles that explain what students observed. Connect every new term to something students already experienced.
• Include three embedded checks for understanding. These should be brief (1–2 minutes each): a think-pair-share, a quick write, a show-of-hands poll, or a turn-and-explain. Space them throughout the lecture so you can catch misunderstandings before they accumulate.
• Close with a question that bridges to Elaborate. The last thing students hear should be a question or a new scenario that requires them to apply what they just learned.

Write the lecture as an outline (not a script): main points, key vocabulary with definitions connected to student experience, the three check points with their questions, and the closing bridge question. Your unit plan should now include at least two of the four lesson types covered in Weeks 12–13 (lab investigation, demonstration, simulation, lecture). Map them onto specific days in the 5E lesson sequence section.

By the end of Week 14, you will be able to:

1. Design a three-dimensional assessment item that targets a DCI, engages a science practice, and connects through a crosscutting concept.
2. Build a rubric for a summative transfer task in which students explain a new phenomenon using evidence and scientific reasoning.
3. Map interdisciplinary connections between a science unit and at least two other content areas with specific examples.
4. Identify common laboratory hazards and design a safety protocol for a lab investigation.

1. "3-Dimensional Assessments in OpenSciEd" (Activate Learning, free). This explains how OpenSciEd designs assessments that measure three-dimensional understanding and how their transfer tasks work.
   • Read: activatelearning.com: 3D Assessments
2. Review the safety resources from your state or district (NC DPI provides laboratory safety guidelines for science classrooms). If you cannot locate state-specific resources, the NSTA (National Science Teaching Association) safety page covers the essentials.

Activity 1: Three-Dimensional Assessment Section

You can add the three-dimensional assessment section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section pairs a formative checkpoint with a summative transfer task and the rubric that evaluates it.

Item 1: A formative checkpoint. This is a brief task students complete during the unit (after Explore or Explain) to show whether they are making progress toward the learning goals. The item should require students to use a science practice, not just recall content. Example: give students a data set and ask them to identify a pattern (Practice 4) and explain what it reveals about the system (Practice 6) using a crosscutting concept (e.g., Cause and Effect).

Item 2: A summative transfer task. This is the assessment at the end of the unit. Present students with a new phenomenon, one they have not seen before but can explain using the DCIs, SEPs, and CCCs from the unit. Students should construct an explanation, build or revise a model, or argue from evidence. The task should be complex enough to reveal depth of understanding and simple enough to complete in one class period.

For each item, identify the DCI, the SEP, and the CCC it targets. Write a brief rubric (three performance levels) for the summative task. Incorporate the formative checkpoint and the summative transfer task into the 5E lesson sequence section (formative checkpoint during the unit, summative transfer task at the end).

Activity 2: Interdisciplinary Connections Section

You can add the interdisciplinary connections section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a one-page map showing how your unit topic connects to at least two other disciplines. Be specific:

• Math: Where does data analysis, graphing, or computation appear in your unit? Name the specific math skills students need.
• ELA: Where does scientific argumentation (CER) parallel argumentative writing? Where does technical reading appear?
• Social Studies: Where does your science content connect to policy, history, or civic issues? If your unit covers genetics, the connection might be bioethics. If it covers climate science, the connection might be environmental policy.

For each connection, you can write one sentence describing what a cross-curricular collaboration could look like.

Activity 3: Lab Safety Protocol Section

You can add the lab safety protocol section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a complete safety protocol for the guided inquiry lab you designed in Week 12. Include these elements:

• Hazard identification: What are the hazards (chemical, physical, biological, electrical)?
• PPE requirements: What safety equipment do students need (goggles, gloves, aprons, closed-toe shoes)?
• Procedures: What safety rules apply during the investigation?
• Disposal: How do students dispose of materials after the lab?
• Emergency procedures: What happens if a spill occurs? An injury? A fire?
• Student safety contract: Write a brief (one-paragraph) safety agreement students would sign before beginning the lab.

By the end of Week 15, you will be able to:

1. Design an alternative science communication assignment that asks students to communicate findings to a specific audience in a specific format.
2. Incorporate an engineering design challenge into a science unit as an Elaborate or Evaluate activity.
3. Identify nature of science concepts within a lesson and explain how you would make them explicit for students.
4. Assemble a complete science unit plan that integrates all components from Weeks 9–15.

1. "How to Provide Students With Alternatives to the Lab Report" and "How to Create Authentic Writing Opportunities in Science Classes" (both from Edutopia). If you read the first one in Week 12, revisit it. Read the second one for the first time. Together, they give you a menu of options for Practice 8.
   • Read: Edutopia: Lab Report Alternatives
   • Read: Edutopia: Authentic Writing in Science
2. NGSS Appendix H: Understanding the Scientific Enterprise: The Nature of Science in the NGSS (free PDF from nextgenscience.org, approximately 5 pages). This appendix lists the nature of science concepts and shows where they connect to the practices and crosscutting concepts.
   • Download: nextgenscience.org

• A short video or example of a PhET simulation used in an engineering design context (the PhET teacher resources include examples). Or explore an engineering design challenge from a source like PBS LearningMedia, TeachEngineering, or the Engineering is Elementary project.

Activity 1: Science Communication Section

You can add the science communication section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is an alternative to the traditional lab report. Students should communicate their findings from the unit investigation (or the summative transfer task) to a specific audience in a specific format. Options:

• A scientific poster (conference style) presented to classmates.
• An explanatory video (3–5 minutes) aimed at a general audience.
• A data-driven infographic for a school or community audience.
• A CER-based letter to a policymaker or community leader about a science-related issue.
• A podcast episode explaining the phenomenon and what students learned.

Include these elements in the section:

• The audience and format.
• The content requirements (what must be included).
• A rubric with at least three criteria, including accuracy of science content, clarity of communication, and appropriate use of evidence.
• A model or exemplar description (what would an excellent product look like?).

Activity 2: Engineering Design Challenge Section

You can add the engineering design challenge section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a one-page student-facing document for a short challenge (one to two class periods) connected to your unit content. The challenge fits into the Elaborate or Evaluate phase of your 5E sequence.

Include these elements in the section:

• The problem: What are students designing, and what need does it address?
• Constraints: What limitations do students work within (materials, budget, time, size, weight)?
• Criteria for success: How will students know if their design works? Name specific, measurable criteria.
• Connection to DCIs: What science content must students apply to design a solution?
• Testing protocol: How will students test their designs? What data will they collect?
• Iteration: How will students revise their designs based on test results?

Activity 3: Nature of Science Audit and Final Assembly

You can add the nature of science section to your unit plan working draft this week, and then you can assemble the full unit plan for submission. For the nature of science section, you can review your unit plan and identify three places where nature of science concepts appear (or should appear). For each one:

• Name the nature of science concept (e.g., "Scientific knowledge is based on empirical evidence" or "Science is a human endeavor").
• Identify where in the unit it appears.
• Write two sentences describing how you would make the concept explicit for students. (This often means pausing during a lesson and naming what students just experienced: "You just revised your model based on new data. That is how science works. Knowledge changes when the evidence changes.")

The final assembly: you can pull every section of the working draft into one cohesive document. The complete unit plan should include:

1. 5E lesson sequence (three to five days minimum): Engage (with phenomenon), Explore (with investigation), Explain (with lecture or direct instruction), Elaborate (with application to new context), Evaluate (with transfer task).
2. Daily lesson plans for each day of the sequence, with measurable objectives tied to NC science standards. Each lesson plan should identify the DCIs, SEPs, and CCCs that are active.
3. At least two lesson types from Weeks 12–13 (lab investigation, demonstration, simulation, lecture) incorporated into the daily plans.
4. Differentiation strategies for at least two student populations (ELL students, students with IEPs, gifted learners, or another population relevant to your expected placement).
5. Assessment items: formative checkpoint and summative transfer task with rubric (from Week 14).
6. Lab safety protocol for any investigation in the unit (from Week 14).
7. Science communication assignment (from this week).
8. Engineering design challenge (from this week).
9. Nature of science audit (from this week).
10. Interdisciplinary connections map (from Week 14).
11. One-page rationale connecting the unit design to three-dimensional learning and at least one learning theory from Modules 1–4. Name the theory. Explain how it shaped a specific design decision, the way you sequenced the Explore before the Explain, the way you scaffolded the modeling activity, the way you structured the engineering design challenge. Write about a decision you made, not a principle you believe in.

Format: Single document (Word or PDF), clearly organized with headings for each component.

Length: 15–25 pages, depending on the detail of your lesson sequence. Quality and coherence matter more than page count.

Grading: The unit plan will be evaluated using the SEC 507 Unit Plan Rubric, which assesses alignment (between standards, phenomena, instruction, and assessment), instructional quality (variety and appropriateness of lesson types), three-dimensional integrity (evidence of DCIs, SEPs, and CCCs throughout the unit), and professional presentation (clarity, organization, and correct use of professional terminology).

Due: End of Week 15, submitted through the course LMS.

By the end of Week 10, you will be able to:

1. Apply the 5 Practices framework to plan a mathematics discussion around a high-cognitive-demand task.
2. Anticipate multiple student solution strategies for a given task, including likely errors and misconceptions.
3. Design a monitoring tool (a table or chart) for tracking student strategies during a task.
4. Plan a sequence for sharing student work that builds toward a mathematical idea.

1. Smith and Stein, "Orchestrating Productive Mathematical Discussions: Five Practices for Helping Teachers Move Beyond Show and Tell" (original article or Chapter 1 of the book, approximately 20 pages). If you have the book (5 Practices for Orchestrating Productive Mathematics Discussions, 2nd edition, NCTM), read Chapters 1–3. If you do not have the book, the free summary from the Mathematics Education Leadership site covers the framework.
   • Free summary: 5 Practices Summary (PDF)
2. Browse the Amplify / Desmos Classroom activity library (free at teacher.desmos.com). You can explore three to four activities at the high school level. Notice how the activities are structured to generate multiple student approaches to the same problem. This is 5 Practices fuel.
   • Browse: Amplify Classroom (Desmos)

Activity 1: Anticipation Map Section

You can add the anticipation map section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is the planning artifact you can use to drive at least one whole-class discussion in your unit. You can select a high-cognitive-demand task for your content area (algebra, geometry, statistics, or precalculus). You can solve the task yourself using at least three different strategies. Include these elements in the section:

• Strategy 1: Describe the approach. Is it concrete, visual, or abstract?
• Strategy 2: Describe a different approach. How does it relate to Strategy 1?
• Strategy 3: Describe a third approach. Is this one more or less efficient?
• Likely errors: Name two mistakes students might make and explain the misconception behind each one.
• Monitoring chart: Create a simple table with columns for student names, strategy used, and notes. This is the tool you can carry on a clipboard during the task.

Activity 2: Discussion Plan Section

You can add the discussion plan section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section uses the anticipation map to design the whole-class discussion that follows the task. Include these elements:

• Select: Which three student approaches will you feature? Why these three?
• Sequence: In what order will students share? Write the order and explain the mathematical logic. What does each approach add to the mathematical story?
• Connect: Write three connecting questions you would ask during the discussion. Each question should help students see a relationship between two strategies or between a strategy and the underlying mathematical concept. "How is Jaylen's table related to Maria's graph?" is a connecting question. "Who got the right answer?" is not.

You can write the discussion plan as a one-page document. The anticipation map and the discussion plan together form the skeleton of your unit plan, and you can revise and expand them every week from here forward.

By the end of Week 11, you will be able to:

1. Design a lesson segment that asks students to connect at least three mathematical representations of the same concept.
2. Use the Desmos / Amplify Classroom platform to build or modify an interactive activity for high school mathematics.
3. Identify equitable and inequitable instructional practices in mathematics and explain how teaching decisions affect student access and identity.
4. Analyze your own task and discussion designs for equity: whose strategies are valued? Whose are missing?

1. NCTM, *Catalyzing Change in High School Mathematics* (Chapter 1 or executive summary, approximately 15 pages). The core argument: math instruction must broaden access, eliminate harmful tracking practices, and connect mathematics to students' identities and communities.
2. "Notice and Wonder" routine (from the Math Forum / NCTM). Read the protocol description. Notice and Wonder asks two questions: "What do you notice?" and "What do you wonder?" It is a low-floor entry point into any mathematical task, and it shifts the authority from the teacher to the students.
   • Access: Resources available through NCTM or Inside Mathematics

Activity 1: Representation Connection Lesson Section

You can add the representation connection lesson section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a 20–30 minute lesson segment in which students work with at least three representations of one mathematical concept from your content area (a function type, a geometric relationship, a statistical measure). Include these elements in the section:

• Name the three representations (e.g., equation, graph, table; or diagram, verbal description, symbolic notation).
• A task that asks students to create connections between the representations. The task should require students to translate from one representation to another and to explain how the representations show the same mathematical idea.
• Two purposeful questions you would ask during the task to push students toward making connections rather than just producing each representation in isolation.

Activity 2: Desmos Activity Section

You can add the Desmos activity section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a four to six screen Desmos / Amplify Classroom activity (custom-built or modified from an existing activity) that fits inside your unit. The activity should meet these criteria:

• Present a mathematical task with multiple entry points.
• Include at least one screen where students interact with a graph or a table.
• Include at least one screen where students explain their thinking in words.
• Include a screen that connects two representations (e.g., "How does the change you made to the equation show up on the graph?").

Include a 200-word description of the activity inside this section: what it teaches, what mathematical connections it asks students to make, and where it fits in your unit.

Activity 3: Equity Audit Section

You can add the equity audit section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section turns a critical eye on the task and discussion plan you designed in Week 10. You can ask yourself:

• Whose mathematical strategies are valued in my discussion sequence? Do the featured strategies represent a range of approaches, including visual and concrete strategies, or do they privilege abstract and symbolic approaches?
• Does my task have multiple entry points, or does it require a specific prior skill that some students may not have?
• How would I respond to a student who uses a strategy I did not anticipate? Would I treat it as an error or as a contribution?

You can write a 300-word reflection. Be specific about what you would change and why. Then revise the anticipation map and discussion plan sections to reflect the equity decisions you made.

By the end of Week 12, you will be able to:

1. Analyze the structure of a three-act task and explain how each act serves a mathematical and pedagogical purpose.
2. Design a three-act task for a high school math topic, including the Act 1 hook, Act 2 information release, and Act 3 reveal and reflection.
3. Facilitate a number talk and record student strategies using accurate mathematical notation.
4. Design a sequence of five number talks for a specific mathematical concept, with increasing complexity across the sequence.

1. Three-Act Task Primer (free PDF, approximately 4 pages). This explains the structure, the rationale, and the teacher's role during each act.
   • Download: Three-Act Task Primer (PDF)
2. Browse 10–15 three-act tasks from the collections below. Focus on high school tasks. For each one, notice how Act 1 creates the question before Act 2 provides the information.
   • tapintoteenminds.com: 3 Act Math
   • SFUSD: 3 Act Tasks
3. Humphreys and Parker, *Making Number Talks Matter* (Chapter 1 or selected vignettes, approximately 15–20 pages). Or read Sara VanDerWerf's blog post on secondary number talks.
   • Blog: saravanderwerf.com: Secondary Number Talks

Activity 1: Three-Act Task Section

You can add the three-act task section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a complete three-act task tied to a NC high school math standard in your unit. Include these elements in the section:

• Act 1: The Hook. Describe or link to the image, video, or scenario students will see. What question does it provoke? (You do not tell students the question. They generate it.) Write three questions you anticipate students asking. Identify the one you can pursue.
• Act 2: The Work. What information will students need? List the data you can provide when students ask for it. Describe the mathematical work students will do: what strategies might they use? What representations might they create? How long should this phase take?
• Act 3: The Reveal. How will you show the answer? (Video, calculation, demonstration?) Write three reflection questions for students: How close was your estimate? What assumptions did you make? What would make your model more accurate?
• Mathematical connections: Name the NC standard this task addresses. Identify which SMPs are active (you should see at least SMP 1 and SMP 4).

Activity 2: Number Talk Sequence Section

You can add the number talk sequence section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a sequence of five number talks for a specific mathematical concept (operations with fractions, proportional reasoning, properties of exponents, percent calculations, or another topic appropriate to your content area). The five talks should increase in complexity across the sequence.

For each number talk, include:

• The problem.
• At least two anticipated student strategies described using mathematical notation.
• One question you would ask to push a student who has the correct answer toward a deeper understanding of why their strategy works.

Then include a 200-word rationale: What concept does this sequence build? How does the progression from Talk 1 to Talk 5 develop number sense or structural thinking? Decide where in your unit a three-act task or number talk fits. A number talk works as a daily warm-up. A three-act task can anchor an entire lesson or serve as the introduction to a new concept. Map both onto specific days in the daily lesson sequence as you draft it.

By the end of Week 13, you will be able to:

1. Design a problem-based lesson using a rich task, small-group work, and a 5 Practices discussion.
2. Design a procedural fluency lesson that builds on conceptual understanding and includes spaced practice, varied problem types, and self-monitoring strategies.
3. Sequence a problem-based lesson and a procedural fluency lesson within a unit so that conceptual understanding precedes procedural practice.
4. Evaluate the balance of problem-based and procedural lessons in a unit plan and adjust the balance based on the learning objectives.

1. Inside Mathematics: Mathematical Practice Standards (free). Browse the video library for examples of problem-based lessons at the high school level. Pay attention to how teachers launch tasks, facilitate group work, and orchestrate discussions.
   • Browse: insidemathematics.org
2. "Building Procedural Fluency from Conceptual Understanding" (NCTM position statement or the relevant section of Principles to Actions). Read the description of productive and unproductive actions for Teaching Practice 6. The unproductive actions are telling: drill without understanding, procedure before concept, speed over sense.

Activity 1: Problem-Based Lesson Section

You can add the problem-based lesson section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a full lesson built around a rich mathematical task (high cognitive demand, multiple entry points, multiple solution strategies). Include these elements in the section:

• Launch (5–8 minutes): How will you introduce the task without reducing its cognitive demand? You can clarify the context and ensure students understand what the task is asking, but you should not demonstrate a solution strategy or hint at the procedure.
• Explore (15–20 minutes): Students work in small groups. Describe the group structure (pairs? groups of three?), the materials available, and your monitoring plan. What strategies will you watch for? What errors? Use your 5 Practices Anticipation Map format from Week 10.
• Discuss (15–20 minutes): Plan the whole-class discussion using Select, Sequence, and Connect. Which strategies will you feature? In what order? What connecting questions will you ask?
• Closure (5 minutes): How will you name the mathematical idea the discussion built toward? What will students take away?

You can write the lesson plan as approximately one and a half pages inside this section of your draft.

Activity 2: Procedural Fluency Lesson Section

You can add the procedural fluency lesson section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a lesson that builds on the conceptual understanding from the problem-based lesson. Choose a procedure connected to the same concept as your problem-based lesson, then design the fluency lesson with these elements:

• Connection to concept (5 minutes): A brief activity that reminds students of the conceptual understanding they built. This could be a visual, a quick question, or a reference to the problem-based lesson.
• Explicit instruction (10 minutes): Model the procedure with two examples. For each example, narrate the reasoning (the "why") alongside the steps (the "how"). Name common errors and explain why they happen.
• Guided practice (10 minutes): Students work on three to four problems with decreasing support. Problem 1 might include prompts or scaffolding. Problem 4 is independent.
• Independent practice (15 minutes): A set of problems that varies in type and context. Include at least one problem that requires students to explain their reasoning or identify an error in someone else's work.
• Exit ticket (5 minutes): One problem and one explanation question ("Solve this, and then explain why the procedure works in one sentence").

You can write the lesson plan as approximately one page inside this section.

Activity 3: Sequencing Reflection Section

You can add the sequencing reflection section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a 200-word reflection: In your unit, which comes first, the problem-based lesson or the procedural fluency lesson? Why? What would happen if you reversed the order? Would students learn the same thing, or something different? Your unit plan should now include at least two of the four lesson types covered in Weeks 12–13 (three-act task, number talk, problem-based lesson, procedural fluency lesson). Map them onto specific days in the daily lesson sequence.

By the end of Week 14, you will be able to:

1. Design formative assessment tasks (exit tickets, journal prompts, error analysis) that elicit evidence of mathematical thinking rather than just correct answers.
2. Build a rubric for a mathematical modeling task that assesses the modeling process (assumptions, variables, model creation, testing, revision) in addition to the mathematical content.
3. Design a mathematical modeling task connected to a real-world context and a NC math standard.
4. Evaluate technology tools (Desmos, GeoGebra, graphing calculators, spreadsheets) for their appropriateness to a specific mathematical learning objective.

1. Common Core State Standards: High School Modeling (free). This section describes what mathematical modeling means at the high school level and provides examples of modeling situations.
   • Access: CCSS High School Modeling
2. Browse the Desmos / Amplify Classroom activity library for modeling activities (free). Search for activities tagged "modeling" or "real world" at the high school level.
   • Browse: teacher.desmos.com

Activity 1: Formative Assessment Section

You can add the formative assessment section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is three formative assessment tools that fit inside the daily lessons.

Tool 1: An exit ticket. The exit ticket has one problem and one explanation question. The problem should reveal whether students have the conceptual understanding needed for the next lesson. The explanation question should require students to justify their reasoning, not just show their work.

Tool 2: An error analysis task. Present students with a worked example that contains a specific mathematical error. Students identify the error, explain the misconception behind it, and correct the work. Choose an error you anticipate from your Week 10 Anticipation Map.

Tool 3: A journal prompt. The prompt is one question that asks students to reflect on their learning. Examples: "Explain in your own words why [procedure] works." "Draw two different representations of [concept] and explain how they connect." "Describe a mistake you made this week and what it taught you."

For each tool, include the assessment item and a 50-word note on what student responses would tell you and how you would adjust instruction based on the evidence.

Activity 2: Mathematical Modeling Task Section

You can add the mathematical modeling task section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a complete modeling task plus a teacher guide. The task should meet these criteria:

• Present a real-world situation with an open question (not a dressed-up computation).
• Require students to identify variables, make assumptions, and choose a mathematical approach.
• Result in a model (a function, an equation, a graph, or a set of calculations) that can be tested against data.
• Include a revision step: after testing, students evaluate whether their model is good enough and suggest improvements.

Include in this section a one-page student-facing task and a one-page teacher guide. The teacher guide should name the NC standard addressed, the SMPs engaged, anticipated student approaches, and a rubric with three criteria (modeling process, mathematical content, communication of reasoning).

Activity 3: Technology Evaluation Section

You can add the technology evaluation section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a 200-word evaluation of one technology tool (Desmos, GeoGebra, a graphing calculator, or a spreadsheet application) applied to one mathematical concept from your unit. How does the tool make mathematical thinking visible for this concept? What can students explore with the tool that they could not explore with pencil and paper? What are the limitations? When would you choose not to use the tool? You can incorporate the formative assessments into the daily lesson plans and add the modeling task as a lesson or as a summative component within the daily lesson sequence.

By the end of Week 15, you will be able to:

1. Map interdisciplinary connections between a mathematics unit and at least two other content areas with specific examples.
2. Identify instructional practices that build or damage mathematical identity and design intentional moves to support positive identity development.
3. Assemble a complete multi-day unit plan integrating all components from Weeks 9–15.

1. Boaler, Jo. *Mathematical Mindsets* (Chapter 1 or selected excerpt, approximately 15–20 pages). Boaler's argument: the way mathematics is taught shapes what students believe about themselves as thinkers. Fixed-mindset teaching (speed tests, ability grouping, one-right-way instruction) produces fixed-mindset learners.
2. NCTM, *Catalyzing Change in High School Mathematics* (revisit the equity sections from Week 11 with fresh eyes). Focus on the recommendations for broadening the purposes of learning mathematics. What does mathematics education owe every student, not just the ones headed for STEM careers?

Activity 1: Interdisciplinary Connections Section

You can add the interdisciplinary connections section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section is a one-page map showing how your unit topic connects to at least two other disciplines. Be specific:

• Science: Where does your mathematical content appear in a science context? If your unit covers functions, the connection might be modeling velocity, population growth, or chemical reaction rates. Name the specific science concept.
• Social Studies: Where does data analysis, quantitative reasoning, or mathematical modeling appear in a social studies context? If your unit covers statistics, the connection might be census data analysis, polling and election prediction, or economic indicators.
• ELA: Where do communication skills overlap? Where do students need to explain, justify, or argue mathematically in ways that parallel argumentative writing?

For each connection, you can write one sentence describing what a cross-curricular collaboration could look like.

Activity 2: Math Identity Section

You can add the math identity section to your unit plan working draft this week. The section has two parts.

Part A (200 words): Reflect on your own math identity. What messages did you receive about mathematics and about yourself as a mathematical thinker? Were those messages accurate? How do they shape the teacher you are becoming?

Part B (300 words): Design three intentional moves you can make in your classroom to support positive mathematical identity. Each move should be specific and connected to a teaching practice. Examples: "During number talks, I will record every strategy on the board with the student's name, including strategies that are less efficient, because efficiency is not the only thing worth valuing." "When a student says 'I'm not a math person,' I will respond by asking them to tell me about a time they figured something out, in math or outside of it, and I will connect that experience to mathematical thinking."

Activity 3: Unit Plan Assembly and Rationale

You can assemble the complete unit plan this week and add the one-page rationale that ties it together. Review every component you have built across Weeks 9–15. The complete unit plan should include:

1. Multi-day lesson sequence (five to seven instructional days) organized around a central mathematical concept, with measurable objectives tied to NC math standards and identified SMPs.
2. 5 Practices discussion plan (from Week 10): Anticipation Map, monitoring chart, Select/Sequence/Connect plan for at least one lesson.
3. Daily lesson plans for each day of the unit. Each plan should identify the NCTM teaching practices in use and the lesson type (three-act task, number talk, problem-based lesson, procedural fluency lesson, or another type).
4. At least two lesson types from Weeks 12–13 incorporated into the daily plans.
5. Differentiation strategies for at least two student populations (ELL students, students with IEPs, gifted learners, or another population relevant to your expected placement).
6. Assessment plan: formative tools (exit ticket, error analysis, journal prompt from Week 14) embedded in daily plans, plus one summative assessment (modeling task or comprehensive problem set with rubric).
7. One technology-integrated lesson using Desmos, GeoGebra, or another tool (from Weeks 11 and 14).
8. Interdisciplinary connections map (from this week).
9. Math identity classroom plan (from this week).
10. One-page rationale connecting the unit design to NCTM's teaching practices and at least one learning theory from Modules 1–4. Name the theory. Name the practices. Explain how they shaped specific decisions. Write about what you built, not what you believe.

Format: Single document (Word or PDF), clearly organized with headings for each component.

Length: 15–25 pages, depending on the detail of your lesson sequence. Quality and coherence matter more than page count.

Grading: The unit plan will be evaluated using the SEC 507 Unit Plan Rubric, which assesses alignment (between standards, tasks, instruction, and assessment), instructional quality (variety and appropriateness of lesson types), disciplinary integrity (evidence of NCTM's eight teaching practices throughout the unit), and professional presentation (clarity, organization, and correct use of professional terminology).

Due: End of Week 15, submitted through the course LMS.