Overview

Lesson Procedure

65-75 minutes of class time across 5 phases.

1. Warm-Up5-10 minutes
2. Direct Instruction20 minutes
3. Guided Practice15 minutes
4. Independent Practice20 minutes
5. Closure5-10 minutes

1. Warm-Up5-10 minutes

   Warm-Up Prompt

   "A classmate says, 'The Great Smog of 1952 happened because of bad weather, and that is all.' What would you need to read, and what kind of detail would you need to find, to decide whether your classmate is right?"

   Take four or five answers. Students will say they need facts, dates or numbers, and some will say they need to know what people did. Write on the board: A claim is only as strong as its evidence. Tell students that today they will draw evidence from informational texts in history and science and use it three ways: to analyze, to reflect and to research.

2. Direct Instruction20 minutes

   Define the words. An informational text explains or reports facts, such as an article, a report or a scientist's account of an experiment. Evidence is a specific detail from a text, quoted in the author's exact words or paraphrased in your own, that supports a point. A claim is a statement you want the reader to accept. Reasoning is the explanation of how the evidence supports the claim. Use Diagram 1 to show the three purposes the standard names. Read Text 2 aloud with its paragraphs numbered, then work through the examples.

   1At first, the government was slow to act. Leaders worried that limits on coal would hurt the economy, and they tried to play down how bad the smog had been. A preliminary report even blamed many of the later deaths on an influenza (flu) epidemic, although evidence soon showed that only a small share could have come from the flu.

   2Experts built the case for action. Measurements by E. T. Wilkins, the government scientist in charge of studying air pollution, made clear the connection between smoke, sulfur dioxide and the rising number of deaths. Later, he charted death rates from December 1952 to March 1953 and found about 8,000 more deaths than first counted, for a total of about 12,000. The government also appointed a Committee on Air Pollution, led by Sir Hugh Beaver, a civil engineer and businessman. Its report, in 1954, said that clean air was now as important as clean water had been in the mid-1800s, and it recommended that homes switch from coal to "smokeless" fuels such as coke, gas and electricity.

   3Members of Parliament pushed for a law. Backbench members, including Gerald Nabarro, put forward a bill of their own to limit the coal burned in homes, and their pressure persuaded the government to support a change in the law. The Clean Air Act became law on July 5, 1956.

   4The Clean Air Act allowed towns and cities to create "smoke control areas," where only smokeless fuels could be burned. It banned dark smoke from chimneys, required new furnaces to be smokeless and let local planners require taller chimneys. Families were offered money to help them replace their open coal fires with gas fires, or to switch to fuels such as coke, which gives off little smoke.

   5The law did not clean the air overnight. In December 1962, another smog killed about 750 people in London. But over the following years, the Clean Air Acts of 1956 and 1968 reduced London's air pollution. The smog also changed how many people thought about the air: like water, it was something a nation had to protect.

   • Choosing relevant evidence (analysis)

     Claim: Leaders relied on scientific evidence to understand the smog. Which detail from Text 2 fits: the date the Clean Air Act became law, or E. T. Wilkins's measurements?

     Result: Wilkins's measurements fit: he was "the government scientist in charge of studying air pollution," and his measurements "made clear the connection between smoke, sulfur dioxide and the rising number of deaths" (paragraph 2). The date of the law is accurate but says nothing about evidence, so it is not relevant to this claim.

   • Explaining the evidence (reasoning)

     A student writes: Families were offered money to help them replace their open coal fires (paragraph 4). The sentence sits alone, and the reader must guess why it matters.

     Result: Add reasoning: Paying families shows that the law needed people's help inside their own homes, so it offered a reason to change instead of only giving orders.

   • Using evidence for reflection

     An unsupported reflection: The smog makes me sad.

     Result: A reflection with evidence: "I was struck that the committee called clean air as important as 'clean water had been in the mid-1800s' (paragraph 2). Until now, I had never thought of air as something that needs protecting the way drinking water does."

   • Using evidence for research

     Research question: How many people did the smog kill?

     Result: Research note: Wilkins charted death rates from December 1952 to March 1953 and "found about 8,000 more deaths than first counted, for a total of about 12,000" (Text 2, paragraph 2). The note answers the question with numbers and records exactly where they came from.

   • Claiming no more than the evidence shows

     Overstated: Text 2 proves that the Clean Air Act ended London's smogs.

     Result: Accurate: Text 2 shows that the law created smoke control areas and banned dark smoke, but it says another smog killed about 750 people in 1962 (paragraphs 4-5), so it does not show that the law ended smogs at once.

   Point out the pattern in every revision: introduce the evidence, quote or paraphrase it accurately, say where it is (the text and paragraph), then explain it. Diagram 2 shows the dates from Texts 1 and 2 on one scaled timeline, which helps students check the order of events before they use them as evidence.

3. Guided Practice15 minutes

   Pairs read Mariana's analysis paragraph (Text 3) and her reflection (Text 4). In one color they highlight every piece of evidence; in another, every sentence that explains evidence. Then they fill in the chart below for Text 3 and check each quotation against Text 2 word for word.

   Evidence chart for Text 3 (students fill in the empty cells)

   Sentence	Evidence (quoted or paraphrased)	Where in Text 2?	How the next sentence explains it
   [2]
   [5]
   [7]
   [9]

   [1] Britain's response to the 1952 smog treated dirty air as a problem that evidence and law could help solve. [2] The case for action rested on measurements: the work of E. T. Wilkins, "the government scientist in charge of studying air pollution," showed the connection between smoke, sulfur dioxide and the rising number of deaths (Text 2, paragraph 2). [3] Relying on a scientist's data shows that leaders came to see the deaths as the result of something people could measure and change, not just bad luck with the weather. [4] The Clean Air Act points the same way. [5] It let towns and cities create "smoke control areas," where "only smokeless fuels could be burned," and it "banned dark smoke from chimneys" (Text 2, paragraph 4). [6] Rules like these go after the one cause people could control, the smoke, because no law can make the wind blow. [7] The law also reached into ordinary homes: families were offered money to replace their open coal fires (Text 2, paragraph 4). [8] Still, the evidence has a limit. [9] In 1962, another smog "killed about 750 people in London" (Text 2, paragraph 5), so the text shows that the law helped reduce the danger over time, not that it ended smog at once.

   1What surprised me most in Text 2 is that a report first blamed many of the later deaths on the flu. The smog lasted five days (Text 1, paragraph 1), but Wilkins found about 8,000 more deaths than first counted (Text 2, paragraph 2). It makes me wonder how many disasters look smaller than they really are at first, simply because nobody has finished counting.

   2I also noticed that the fix took years. The smog came in December 1952, and the Clean Air Act did not become law until July 5, 1956 (Text 2, paragraph 3). When classmates complain that our school's new recycling program has not made the cafeteria any cleaner yet, I will remember that London's air took years to clear, not weeks.

4. Independent Practice20 minutes

   Students read Text 1 and Kenji's first draft (Text 5), which tries to answer the question What caused the Great Smog? For each of Kenji's seven sentences, they write whether the evidence is missing, misreported, not relevant, stretched beyond what it shows, or fine, and they point to the paragraph of Text 1 that shows the problem. They do not rewrite the draft yet.

   1In December 1952, a thick, greenish-yellow smog settled over London, England, and stayed for five days, from Friday, December 5, to Tuesday, December 9. Londoners were used to fog; they called their thickest fogs "pea-soupers." But this one was denser and lasted longer than any before it. On Sunday, December 7, people in some places could see only about a foot (30 centimeters) in front of them. Buses and other public transport stopped, except the Underground, the city's subway.

   2The smoke came mostly from coal. Most London homes were heated by open coal fires, and the weather that week was unusually cold, so families burned more coal than usual. After World War II, Britain sold much of its best, cleaner-burning coal abroad to help pay its war debts. The coal left for homes was often a cheap, low-grade kind called "nutty slack," which gave off more sulfur-rich smoke. Coal-burning power stations in and around the city, such as Battersea and Bankside, added more smoke. So did steam trains and the diesel buses that had recently replaced London's electric trams.

   3Smoke usually rises and blows away. That week it could not. On December 4, a high-pressure system settled over London and the wind died. The calm, cold air near the ground was trapped under a layer of warmer air, an effect called a temperature inversion, which works like a lid on a pot. Fog formed in the cold air, and smoke from chimneys all over the city mixed with it and could not escape.

   4The Met Office, Britain's weather service, later estimated how much pollution poured into the air on each day of the smog: about 1,000 tonnes of smoke particles and 370 tonnes of sulfur dioxide, a gas that can turn into sulfuric acid. (A tonne is a metric ton, 1,000 kilograms.)

   5The smog even seeped indoors, and concerts and film showings were canceled because audiences could not see the stage or the screen. It was hardest on babies, older people and people who already had lung or heart problems. In the weeks afterward, government medical reports estimated that up to 4,000 people had died because of the smog and that 100,000 more had been made ill. Later research that also counted the extra deaths in the months after the smog puts the total at 10,000 to 12,000.

   [1] The Great Smog was caused by Londoners who were careless and did not care about the air. [2] Text 1 says that "a high-pressure system settled over London and the wind died." [3] This proves that Londoners burned too much coal. [4] The smog lasted for five weeks in December 1952. [5] Every single person in London got sick from the smog. [6] Also power stations. [7] So the Great Smog was completely the fault of Londoners.

   In the last ten minutes, introduce the science texts for the homework and several quiz questions. In 1880, Charles Darwin and his son Francis wanted to know which part of a young grass seedling senses light when the seedling bends toward a window. They grew canary grass (Phalaris canariensis) and covered the tips of the shoots. Before reading, teach these words: a cotyledon here is the first sheath-like shoot of the grass seedling; its summit or apex is its tip; lateral light comes from one side; impermeable to light means that no light can pass through; a paraffin lamp is an oil lamp; Indian ink is a thick black ink; bowed and curved mean bent. Read Text 6 aloud and let students read Text 7 in pairs.

   We next tried the effects of covering the upper part of the cotyledons of Phalaris with little caps which were impermeable to light; the whole lower part being left fully exposed before a south-west window or a bright paraffin lamp. Some of the caps were made of extremely thin tin-foil blackened within; these had the disadvantage of occasionally, though rarely, being too heavy, especially when twice folded. The basal edges could be pressed into close contact with the cotyledons; though this again required care to prevent injuring them. Nevertheless, any injury thus caused could be detected by removing the caps, and trying whether the cotyledons were then sensitive to light. Other caps were made of tubes of the thinnest glass, which when painted black served well, with the one great disadvantage that the lower ends could not be closed. But tubes were used which fitted the cotyledons almost closely, and black paper was placed on the soil round each, to check the upward reflection of light from the soil. Such tubes were in one respect far better than caps of tin-foil, as it was possible to cover at the same time some cotyledons with transparent and others with opaque tubes; and thus our experiments could be controlled. It should be kept in mind that young cotyledons were selected for trial, and that these when not interfered with become bowed down to the ground towards the light.

   We will begin with the glass-tubes. The summits of nine cotyledons, differing somewhat in height, were enclosed for rather less than half their lengths in uncoloured or transparent tubes; and these were then exposed before a south-west window on a bright day for 8 h. All of them became strongly curved towards the light, in the same degree as the many other free seedlings in the same pots; so that the glass-tubes certainly did not prevent the cotyledons from bending towards the light. Nineteen other cotyledons were, at the same time, similarly enclosed in tubes thickly painted with Indian ink. On five of them, the paint, to our surprise, contracted after exposure to the sunlight, and very narrow cracks were formed, through which a little light entered; and these five cases were rejected. Of the remaining 14 cotyledons, the lower halves of which had been fully exposed to the light for the whole time, 7 continued quite straight and upright; 1 was considerably bowed to the light, and 6 were slightly bowed, but with the exposed bases of most of them almost or quite straight. It is possible that some light may have been reflected upwards from the soil and entered the bases of these 7 tubes, as the sun shone brightly, though bits of blackened paper had been placed on the soil round them. Nevertheless, the 7 cotyledons which were slightly bowed, together with the 7 upright ones, presented a most remarkable contrast in appearance with the many other seedlings in the same pots to which nothing had been done. The blackened tubes were then removed from 10 of these seedlings, and they were now exposed before a lamp for 8 h.; 9 of them became greatly, and 1 moderately, curved towards the light, proving that the previous absence of any curvature in the basal part, or the presence of only a slight degree of curvature there, was due to the exclusion of light from the upper part.

5. Closure5-10 minutes

   Exit ticket: (1) Copy one piece of evidence from Text 1 with its paragraph number. (2) Write one sentence of analysis that the evidence supports. (3) Write one question the evidence makes you want to research.

   Teacher notes: Texts 1 and 2 were written for this page; their facts come from published histories of the 1952 London smog, the Committee on Air Pollution chaired by Sir Hugh Beaver and the Clean Air Act 1956. The article uses U.S. spelling (sulfur) where British sources write sulphur. Mariana, Kenji and Mariana's school are invented. Texts 6 and 7 are Darwin's exact words from the 1880 book, printed as two complete, consecutive paragraphs with nothing left out. His sentences are long and his vocabulary is Victorian; the glossary in Independent Practice covers the words students need, and reading Text 6 aloud before students tackle Text 7 helps. The seedling experiment is safe to repeat with oat or grass seeds, a sunny window and paper tubes if you want students to collect their own evidence.

Differentiation Strategies

Assessment Guidance

1. Question 1 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   Which detail from Text 1 best supports the claim that burning coal helped cause the smog?

   A"Londoners were used to fog; they called their thickest fogs 'pea-soupers'" (paragraph 1) B"the weather that week was unusually cold, so families burned more coal than usual" (paragraph 2) C"Buses and other public transport stopped, except the Underground, the city's subway" (paragraph 1) D"On December 4, a high-pressure system settled over London and the wind died" (paragraph 3)

2. Question 2 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   Which detail from Text 1 supports the claim that the weather kept the smoke from blowing away?

   A"After World War II, Britain sold much of its best, cleaner-burning coal abroad" (paragraph 2) B"Coal-burning power stations in and around the city, such as Battersea and Bankside, added more smoke" (paragraph 2) C"The calm, cold air near the ground was trapped under a layer of warmer air" (paragraph 3) D"It was hardest on babies, older people and people who already had lung or heart problems" (paragraph 5)

3. Question 3 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   Which piece of evidence from Text 1 best supports the claim that the smog put huge amounts of pollution into London's air every day?

   A"about 1,000 tonnes of smoke particles and 370 tonnes of sulfur dioxide" B"After World War II, Britain sold much of its best, cleaner-burning coal abroad to help pay its war debts" C"On December 4, a high-pressure system settled over London and the wind died" D"The smog even seeped indoors, and concerts and film showings were canceled because audiences could not see the stage or the screen"

4. Question 4 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   In Mariana's analysis paragraph (Text 3), what does sentence [6] do?

   AIt adds a new piece of evidence from paragraph 4 of Text 2. BIt quotes the exact words of Text 2 again. CIt states a limit of the evidence in Text 2. DIt explains how the evidence in [5] supports her claim.

5. Question 5 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   Which sentence in Mariana's reflection (Text 4) rests most directly on evidence from the texts?

   A"It makes me wonder how many disasters look smaller than they really are at first, simply because nobody has finished counting." B"The smog lasted five days (Text 1, paragraph 1), but Wilkins found about 8,000 more deaths than first counted (Text 2, paragraph 2)." C"What surprised me most in Text 2 is that a report first blamed many of the later deaths on the flu." D"When classmates complain that our school's new recycling program has not made the cafeteria any cleaner yet, I will remember ..."

6. Question 6 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   Which research question does Text 2 raise but not answer?

   AWho led the Committee on Air Pollution after the smog? BHow many London homes gave up their coal fires after 1956? COn what exact date did the Clean Air Act become law? DWhat is a smoke control area, and what may be burned there?

7. Question 7 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   Sentence [3] of Kenji's draft (Text 5) says, "This proves that Londoners burned too much coal." What is wrong with it?

   AThe fact in [2] is about the wind, not about how much coal people burned. BIt should be written in the present tense because the smog is still famous today. CIt uses a quotation from Text 1 that does not appear anywhere in the article. DIt repeats the same evidence that Kenji already quoted in sentence [1].

8. Question 8 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   Sentence [4] of Kenji's draft (Text 5) says, "The smog lasted for five weeks in December 1952." How does it misreport Text 1?

   AText 1 says the smog lasted five months, from December to April. BText 1 says the smog began in December 1956, not in 1952. CText 1 says the smog lasted five days, from December 5 to 9. DText 1 says the smog lasted only one day, Sunday, December 7.

9. Question 9 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   Which revision of Kenji's sentence [7], "So the Great Smog was completely the fault of Londoners," claims no more than Text 1 shows?

   ASo Londoners alone caused the smog, and the weather had nothing at all to do with it. BSo the smog was caused only by the weather, and the coal smoke did nothing. CSo nobody will ever know what caused the smog, because the texts disagree. DSo coal smoke and the weather worked together: still air trapped the smoke.

10. Question 10 of 20 · Multiple Choice

    According to Text 6, why did Darwin place black paper on the soil around each glass tube?

    ATo keep the cotyledons warm in front of the south-west window BTo check the upward reflection of light from the soil CTo mark which cotyledons had been given blackened tubes DTo stop the soil from drying out in the bright sunshine

11. Question 11 of 20 · Multiple Choice

    Text 6 says that "young cotyledons were selected for trial." Why does Darwin want the reader to remember this?

    AYoung cotyledons are strong enough to carry the heavy caps without bending over. BYoung cotyledons have no tips yet, so they cannot be covered by caps. CYoung cotyledons grow only in darkness, so they never bend at all. DLeft alone, they bend right down to the ground, so a straight one stands out.

12. Question 12 of 20 · Multiple Choice

    According to Text 6, how could Darwin tell whether a cap had injured a cotyledon?

    AHe measured each cotyledon before and after the trial with a ruler. BHe compared its color with that of seedlings grown in darkness. CHe took the cap off and tested whether it still bent toward light. DHe painted the cap black so that any damage would show through.

13. Question 13 of 20 · Multiple Choice

    Text 6 says the glass tubes were "in one respect far better than caps of tin-foil." In what respect?

    AGlass tubes were lighter than tin-foil, so they never bent the cotyledons over. BGlass tubes could be closed tightly at the lower end, unlike tin-foil caps. CGlass tubes let Darwin see the tips growing inside them during the trials. DSome cotyledons could get clear tubes and others black ones at the same time.

14. Question 14 of 20 · Multiple Choice

    Which reflection is supported by evidence from both Text 1 and Text 2?

    AIt is striking that the coal fires heating most homes were what families were paid to replace. BLondoners in 1952 did not care at all about the smoky air that they and their families breathed. CThe 1952 smog was worse than any air pollution that has happened anywhere in the world since. DThe Clean Air Act cleaned London's air completely within a year of becoming law.

15. Question 15 of 20 · Short Answer

    Using Text 1, write two or three sentences that support the claim Both weather and people's choices helped cause the Great Smog. Include one piece of evidence about each cause, with paragraph numbers, and explain how they worked together.

    Show model answer

16. Question 16 of 20 · Short Answer

    Write a reflection of two or three sentences on one detail in Text 1 that surprised you or made you think. Quote or paraphrase the detail and give its paragraph number.

    Show model answer

17. Question 17 of 20 · Short Answer

    Write one research question that Text 1 raises but does not answer. Then name the detail in Text 1 that led to your question, with its paragraph number.

    Show model answer

18. Question 18 of 20 · Short Answer

    Text 6 names a problem with the tin-foil caps. Quote the words that describe the problem and explain in one or two sentences why it could have affected Darwin's results.

    Show model answer

19. Question 19 of 20 · Short Answer

    Kenji's sentence [6] says only, "Also power stations." Rewrite it as one or two complete sentences that draw evidence from Text 1 and explain how the evidence helps answer his question, What caused the Great Smog?

    Show model answer

20. Question 20 of 20 · Short Answer

    A classmate's research question is Why did the smog harm some people much more than others? Explain which evidence in Text 1 helps answer it, and what the classmate would still need to find in other sources.

    Show model answer

These standards connect to WHST.6-8.9: prerequisites to review first, parallel standards at the same level, and next steps that build on it.

Standard text: Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts & Literacy. © Copyright 2010. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School Officers. All rights reserved.