WHST.9-10.5Common CoreELAWriting in History, Science and Technical SubjectsGrades 9-10
WHST.9-10.5: Revising History and Lab Writing for What Matters Most
In plain English: WHST.9-10.5 is the Common Core literacy standard that asks students in grades 9 and 10 to strengthen their writing in history, science and technical subjects by planning, revising, editing, rewriting or trying a new approach. Each change is chosen by what matters most to a specific reader and purpose, such as a history teacher reading for a claim or a science teacher reading for evidence.
Develop and strengthen writing as needed by planning, revising, editing, rewriting, or trying a new approach, focusing on addressing what is most significant for a specific purpose and audience.
Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts & Literacy · Domain: Writing Standards for Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects 6-12 · Cluster: Production and Distribution of Writing · Official standard
Students follow two pieces of subject-area writing from a first draft toward a stronger one. In the history context, Elena, an invented ninth grader, answers a U.S. History prompt about why the Central Pacific Railroad could not have been finished without Chinese workers. Her first draft opens with the golden spike ceremony, lists facts without explaining them and states a debated story as fact. A writing conference with her teacher and a classmate helps her plan again, and her second draft leads with a claim and explains three reasons. In the science context, Jonah, an invented biology student, drafts the Discussion section of a lab report on temperature and the enzyme catalase. His teacher's numbered comments and a classmate's note show him what to fix first and what advice to decline. The lab data are invented and labeled; the railroad facts are real.
WHST.9-10.5 names five ways to strengthen writing: planning, revising, editing, rewriting and trying a new approach. The words "as needed" make them a menu, not a checklist. The second half of the standard decides the order: a writer fixes what is most significant for the purpose and audience first, such as a missing claim or missing evidence, and leaves spelling and commas for last.
Learning Objectives
By the end of this lesson, students will be able to:
Reread a history or science writing task and name its purpose, its reader and what that reader most needs
Sort feedback into changes that matter most, edits to make last, and advice to decline, and explain each choice
Revise and rewrite a draft by moving, adding, cutting or replacing content so the claim and evidence serve the purpose
Try a new approach to an opening or a structure and judge which version serves the reader
Edit a revised draft for spelling, punctuation, usage and units after the content is settled
Prior Knowledge Required
Students should already be comfortable with:
Revising writing in history and science with guidance from peers and adults, in grades 6-8 WHST.6-8.5
Writing arguments focused on discipline-specific content WHST.6-8.1
Writing a claim supported by evidence and reasoning in a lab report
Knowing that the first transcontinental railroad was completed in 1869
"You have ten minutes to improve a lab report before you hand it in. It has no data in the conclusion and three spelling mistakes. Which do you fix first, and why?"
Take a few answers, then name the idea the lesson builds on: a writer fixes what the reader needs most before fixing what the reader notices least. That is the second half of WHST.9-10.5.
Introduce the history task. Elena's U.S. History teacher, Ms. Ferro, gave this prompt: "In one paragraph of no more than 200 words, explain why the Central Pacific could not have finished its part of the railroad without Chinese workers. Use at least three specific facts, and explain how each one supports your claim." Ms. Ferro reads for a clear claim, accurate evidence and explanation that links the two. Elena, Kofi and Ms. Ferro are invented; every fact about the railroad comes from the Chinese Railroad Workers in North America Project at Stanford University. Read Draft 1 aloud. Students write one sentence: what would Ms. Ferro know about the question after reading only the first three sentences?
1On May 10, 1869, a crowd gathered at Promontory Summit in Utah Territory to watch Leland Stanford tap the last spike with a silver hammer. The Central Pacific, building east from Sacramento, had finally met the Union Pacific, building west from Omaha. It was a proud day for the whole country. The Central Pacific first hired Chinese workers in 1864, and by 1867 they made up about 90 percent of it's workforce. Chinese workers were lowered down cliffs in baskets to set explosives, this was very dangerous. They were paid less than white workers and had to buy there own food. In June 1867 about 3,000 of them went on strike. I think the railroad could not have been finished without them because they did alot of the work. In 1882 Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act, which was very unfair and hurt many Chinese families.
SVHS lesson authors, How Chinese Workers Built the Central Pacific, Draft 1 (Text 1: Elena's history paragraph; Elena and her class are invented, and the facts are real). Original passage written for this page.
Direct Instruction20 minutes
Show Diagram 1. The five moves in the standard are not steps to follow every time: a writer uses the ones a draft needs. Planning can happen after a draft exists, when a writer rereads the task. Revising changes content and order. Rewriting drafts a passage again from the start. Trying a new approach changes the plan itself, for example the structure or the opening. Editing fixes spelling, punctuation, usage and units. The guiding question at the top of the diagram decides which move comes first.
Read Text 2, the writing conference, and then Draft 2. Students mark each change in Draft 2 with the comment in Text 2 that prompted it. Then work through the five examples.
1Ms. Ferro: Before we talk about spelling, read me the question you are answering.
2Elena: "Explain why the Central Pacific could not have finished its part of the railroad without Chinese workers."
3Ms. Ferro: Where does your paragraph answer it?
4Elena: Near the end. "I think the railroad could not have been finished without them."
5Kofi: I liked the opening, though. The silver hammer made me picture the day.
6Ms. Ferro: It is vivid. Is it about the question?
7Kofi: Not really. It's about the ending of the job, and the Chinese workers aren't in it.
8Ms. Ferro: Try this test. If I read only your first three sentences, what would I learn about why the Chinese workers mattered?
9Elena: Nothing yet.
10Kofi: Your best fact is the 90 percent. If nine out of ten workers are Chinese, there is no railroad without them.
11Ms. Ferro: Good. What else in your notes shows they were necessary, not just numerous?
12Elena: The tunnels. Chinese crews started the 15 tunnels through the Sierra Nevada in the fall of 1865 and kept digging through the winter. And I found a quotation from an 1865 report by Leland Stanford, the company's president. He wrote that without them it would be impossible to finish the western part in the time Congress required.
13Ms. Ferro: A railroad president saying it himself is strong evidence for a history reader. What about the strike?
14Elena: I just listed it.
15Kofi: But it kind of proves your point. If the company could replace them easily, why would a strike matter so much?
16Ms. Ferro: Then explain that link, or leave the strike out. Now, the baskets. Where did that come from?
17Elena: A video I watched.
18Ms. Ferro: Historians still debate the basket stories. Either tell your reader the story is debated, or use a fact you can back up.
19Elena: And the Chinese Exclusion Act?
20Ms. Ferro: It is true, and it matters. Does it answer this question?
21Elena: No. It's about what happened later. Maybe it belongs in my next paragraph, about how the country treated the workers afterward.
22Ms. Ferro: Then your plan is claim first, three reasons, and one sentence of explanation for each. Fix spelling and commas last.
SVHS lesson authors, Writing Conference on Draft 1 (Text 2: transcript; Elena, Kofi and Ms. Ferro are invented). Original passage written for this page.
1The Central Pacific could not have finished its part of the transcontinental railroad without Chinese workers, because they made up most of its workforce, did its hardest work, and were described by the company itself as necessary. By February 1867, about 11,000 Chinese workers, roughly 8,000 building tunnels and 3,000 laying track, made up about 90 percent of the railroad's labor force. Few other workers had answered the company's call for laborers, so there was no one to replace them. Chinese crews also did the work that set the pace of the whole project. Beginning in the fall of 1865, they cut 15 tunnels through the Sierra Nevada, and they kept digging through the winter of 1866-1867, when 44 storms struck the mountains. Leland Stanford, the Central Pacific's president, admitted this dependence in an 1865 report: "Without them it would be impossible to complete the western portion of this great national enterprise, within the time required by the Acts of Congress." The strike of June 1867 showed the same dependence from the other side. When about 3,000 Chinese workers stopped work, the job stopped along almost 30 miles of the line, and the strike ended only after eight days, when the workers' food supplies had been cut off and company leaders had threatened them. The last spike at Promontory Summit on May 10, 1869, finished a line that Chinese workers had carried over the mountains.
SVHS lesson authors, How Chinese Workers Built the Central Pacific, Draft 2 (Text 3: Elena's revised paragraph; the facts and the Stanford quotation are real). Original passage written for this page.
Planning: rereading the task after a first draft
The prompt asks Elena to explain why the railroad could not have been finished without Chinese workers. Draft 1 spends its first three sentences on the ceremony of May 10, 1869, when the work was already done.
Result: Elena's new plan: one claim that answers the prompt, three reasons (share of the workforce, the hardest work, the company's own words), and one sentence of explanation for each. The plan comes from the task and the reader, not from the order of her notes.
Revising: putting the most significant sentence first
Ms. Ferro reads for a claim. Draft 1 reaches its only claim near the end, and it rests on a vague reason: the workers "did a lot of the work."
Result: Draft 2, paragraph 1, opens with the claim and previews all three reasons: "because they made up most of its workforce, did its hardest work, and were described by the company itself as necessary." The reader now knows the answer and the plan in one sentence.
Rewriting: turning a listed fact into evidence
Draft 1: "In June 1867 about 3,000 of them went on strike." The fact is accurate, but it sits alone, and the reader has to guess why it is there.
Result: Draft 2 explains the link: the strike "showed the same dependence from the other side," because work stopped along almost 30 miles of the line. Kofi's question in Text 2 prompted the change: if the workers were easy to replace, a strike would not matter.
Trying a new approach: giving a vivid detail a new job
Kofi liked the silver hammer, and Ms. Ferro did not ask Elena to cut the ceremony. As an opening, though, it delays the answer.
Result: Elena moves the last spike to the final sentence, where it closes the argument instead of opening a story: the ceremony "finished a line that Chinese workers had carried over the mountains." The detail stays, but its purpose changes.
Editing: units and symbols in a science draft
Jonah's lab Discussion (Text 4) writes "The disks at 37 floated the fastest," with no unit, and later "65 degrees." A science reader cannot tell which scale he means.
Result: Edited: "The disks at 37 °C floated fastest." Every temperature in a lab report takes its unit, written the same way each time. This is editing: it changes the form of the sentence, not its content, so it waits until the content is final.
Guided Practice15 minutes
Move to the science context. Jonah, an invented student, and his lab partner Sana tested how temperature affects catalase, an enzyme in potato cells that breaks hydrogen peroxide down into water and oxygen gas. A paper disk soaked in potato extract sinks in 3% hydrogen peroxide and floats up as oxygen bubbles form on it, so a shorter time to float means a faster reaction. Show Table 1 and Diagram 2, then read Jonah's first draft of his Discussion section and the comments he received.
Table 1. Time for a potato-extract paper disk to float in 3% hydrogen peroxide at five temperatures (invented data; three trials each)
Water bath (°C)
Trial 1 (s)
Trial 2 (s)
Trial 3 (s)
Mean (s)
4
23.9
25.8
24.1
24.6
22
12.0
12.9
12.0
12.3
37
7.5
8.2
7.7
7.8
50
10.1
11.8
10.8
10.9
65
38.5
45.0
40.1
41.2
1Our experiment proved that our hypothesis was right. Catalase works best at 37 degrees because that is the temperature of the human body. The disks at 37 floated the fastest, and the disks at 4 and 65 were slow. At 65 degrees the enzyme died.
2Enzymes are proteins that speed up reactions in living things, and our bodies have thousands of them. There was probably some error in our lab, we might of started the timer late sometimes. Also one disk stuck to the side of the cup. In the future we could do more temperatures. Overall this lab was really interesting and I learned alot about enzymes.
SVHS lesson authors, Temperature and Catalase Lab Report, Discussion, Draft 1 (Text 4: Jonah's draft; Jonah and his data are invented). Original passage written for this page.
1Dr. Morrow's comments on Draft 1
2Jonah, the research question is "How does temperature affect the rate at which catalase from potato breaks down hydrogen peroxide?" Fix these first, in this order.
31. Your first sentence should answer the research question. What does the whole pattern show, from 4 °C to 65 °C?
42. I need numbers from Table 1. Which ones show the pattern most clearly?
53. Why would a potato's enzyme work best at human body temperature? Your fastest time was at 37 °C, but you tested only five temperatures. Can you say exactly where the fastest rate is?
64. Enzymes are not alive, so they cannot die. What does heat do to an enzyme's shape?
75. If you mention an error, tell me how it would change the results. If you cannot, leave it out.
8Spelling and commas come last. You have 120-160 words.
9Sana's peer review note
10I think you should add a paragraph about what enzymes do in the body, like digestion, so it's longer and shows we know a lot. Also, the disk that stuck was in our 50 °C trial 2. We threw that one out and ran it again, so the 11.8 s in the table is the new run.
SVHS lesson authors, Comments on the Catalase Discussion (Text 5: teacher and peer feedback; Dr. Morrow and Sana are invented). Original passage written for this page.
Revision plan for Jonah's Discussion (pairs fill in the right-hand column)
Question
Jonah's decision
What Dr. Morrow most needs
Keep
Add
Cut
Decline, and why
Leave for last
Pairs complete the plan, then begin Activity 3. Discuss: Sana's two comments are very different. One gives Jonah a fact he needs; the other asks for more words. How can a writer tell the difference?
Independent Practice15 minutes
Each student takes a draft of their own from a current history, science or technical class (a paragraph of 100-200 words is enough). (1) Plan: write the task, the reader and the one thing that reader most needs. (2) Triage: list three problems and label each R (revise now), E (edit last) or D (decline, with a reason). (3) Change: make the most significant revision first, then one edit. (4) Explain: write two sentences on how the revision serves the reader. A student without a current draft first writes a 100-word paragraph for a named reader on a topic from a current history or science unit.
The quiz uses Texts 1-5 and Table 1 (Warm-Up, Direct Instruction and Guided Practice); point students back to those phases when they take it.
Closure5-10 minutes
Exit ticket: (1) Name the comment in Text 2 that changed Draft 2 the most, and say why. (2) Name one comment Jonah should decline, and why. Then hand out the homework: Malia's first draft of a lab Conclusion from the same biology class, and her data. Malia, her lab partner Dev and the data are invented.
Safety note for teachers who run the catalase lab: use 3% hydrogen peroxide (the drugstore strength) and splash goggles, and have students wash any spill off skin with water. Prepare the water baths yourself; water at 50-65 °C can scald, so students move cups with tongs. Buffers of pH 3 and pH 11 also call for goggles.
Teacher note on sources: the railroad facts and the Leland Stanford quotation come from the Chinese Railroad Workers in North America Project at Stanford University. Its research also explains why the stories of workers lowered in baskets are debated, which is the reason Ms. Ferro questions that sentence. The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 is real and appears in Draft 1 only to show a true fact that does not answer this prompt.
Table 2. Mean time for a potato-extract paper disk to float in 3% hydrogen peroxide at five pH values, room temperature (invented data; three trials each)
Buffer pH
Mean time to float (s)
3
61.4
5
14.9
7
8.1
9
12.6
11
47.3
1In this lab we tested pH. We used five buffer solutions. The pH 7 disks floated in 8.1 seconds. Catalase is found in almost every living thing that uses oxygen, including potatoes, liver and yeast. The acid and the base were both bad for the enzyme. Our results were good and matched what we expected. pH is a scale from 0 to 14 that tells how acidic or basic a solution is. Next time we should be more careful with the timer, one time Dev pressed it twice. In conclusion catalase works best at pH 7 and it's shape changes in strong acids and bases.
SVHS lesson authors, pH and Catalase Lab Report, Conclusion, Draft 1 (Text 6: homework draft; Malia, Dev and their data are invented). Original passage written for this page.
Differentiation Strategies
For Struggling Students
Give a triage card with three boxes, Revise now, Edit last and Decline, and one sentence starter for each ("This matters most because the reader needs...")
Provide Elena's plan as a frame (claim, reason 1, reason 2, reason 3, closing) and let students check off where each part appears in Draft 2
Limit the lab revision to the first two of Dr. Morrow's comments, then add the rest
For Advanced Students
Rewrite Elena's paragraph for a different reader, a sign at Golden Spike National Historical Park read by visitors, and explain which reasons and which evidence change
Write a note to Sana that declines her first suggestion politely and explains the purpose of a Discussion section
Design one more trial for Jonah's lab that would narrow down where the fastest rate is, and write the sentence the new data would let him add
Assessment Guidance
What to Look For
Look for writers who can name the purpose and the reader before they change anything, and whose first changes are the ones that reader needs most: a claim that answers the task, evidence that is accurate and explained, and structure that puts the point first. Revisions should be visible at the level of content (sentences moved, added, cut or replaced), not only words swapped. Students should be able to explain why they declined a piece of advice, and they should edit last, after cutting. In science writing, check that claims are no stronger than the data ("support," not "prove") and that every number has its unit.
02
Classroom Activities
3 Activities
1
Feedback Triage
15 minPairs
Pairs sort eight feedback comments on Elena's Draft 1 into three piles and defend each choice by naming the prompt or the reader. The activity practices deciding what is most significant before revising.
Comment Cards
1. "Your claim is almost at the end. Put it first."
2. "The 90 percent fact is your strongest reason. Explain why it matters."
3. "'There own food' should be 'their own food.'"
4. "Add more about the ceremony. The silver hammer is the coolest part."
5. "Historians debate the basket story. Qualify it or cut it."
6. "Use more exciting words, like 'heroic' and 'legendary.'"
7. "'Alot' is two words."
8. "Why is the strike there? Connect it to your claim."
Procedure
Pairs place each card in one pile: Revise now, Edit last or Decline
For each card, pairs write one reason that names the prompt or Ms. Ferro
Teacher key, one defensible sort: Revise now, cards 1, 2, 5 and 8; Edit last, cards 3 and 7; Decline, cards 4 and 6
Pairs rank the Revise now cards from most to least significant and compare with another pair
Discussion Questions
Card 4 is declined as written, yet Draft 2 keeps the silver hammer idea in its last sentence. Is that accepting the card or declining it?
Card 6 asks for a style change. Why does a history teacher reading for evidence gain nothing from "heroic"?
Both edit cards point to words that Elena later cut or rewrote. What does that say about fixing spelling first?
2
Three Openings, One Reader
15 minGroups of 3
Each group member writes a different opening sentence for Elena's paragraph, and the group chooses the one that best serves Ms. Ferro. The activity practices trying a new approach and judging it by purpose and audience.
Three Approaches
Writer A: open with the claim and its three reasons, as Draft 2 does
Writer B: open with the most striking number from Text 3, then state the claim
Writer C: open with Leland Stanford's words from the 1865 report, then state the claim
Procedure
Each writer drafts one opening of 25-45 words, using only facts from Texts 2 and 3
The group reads all three aloud and asks of each: after this sentence, does Ms. Ferro know the answer to the prompt?
The group chooses one opening for Ms. Ferro and writes two sentences explaining the choice
The group then chooses a different opening for a second reader, a visitor reading a sign at Golden Spike National Historical Park, and explains the change
Discussion Questions
Which approach made the claim easiest to find, and which made the reader most curious?
Did any group choose the same opening for both readers? What would make that a good choice?
When is trying a new approach worth the time, and when is revising the old one enough?
Modification for Distance Learning
Each writer posts an opening in a shared document without a name. Classmates vote in a poll for the opening that best answers the prompt, and the writer of the winning opening explains the approach in a short recorded message.
3
Discussion Section Rebuild
15 minPairs
Pairs write Draft 2 of Jonah's Discussion (Text 4) in 120-160 words, following Dr. Morrow's comments in order and deciding what to do with each of Sana's comments. The activity brings planning, revising, rewriting and editing together in a science context.
Revision Checklist
The first sentence answers the research question for the whole temperature range
At least three means from Table 1 appear, each with its unit
The reasoning explains the slow times at the highest temperature with the idea of shape, not with "died"
The claim about the fastest rate is no stronger than five temperatures allow
Any error named is tied to its effect on the times, and the re-run trial is reported accurately
Nothing is included only to add length
Procedure
Write a new first sentence before anything else, then build the rest around it
Cut every sentence that does not serve Dr. Morrow's five comments
Count words, then edit spelling, punctuation and units
Trade with another pair, which checks each checklist line against Table 1 and marks it yes or no
Teacher key, what a strong draft contains: the pattern stated as "faster, then slower" across the range; means with units; the word "denatured" or "changed shape"; a claim about the fastest rate that five temperatures can support (Dr. Morrow's comment 3); the re-run of trial 2 at 50 °C; no digestion paragraph
Lab Report Format Variation
Pairs rewrite the Discussion under four headings, Claim, Evidence, Reasoning and Limitations, with one to three sentences under each. They compare it with their paragraph version and decide which one a reader who is grading for evidence would find faster to check.
03
Diagrams & Visual Aids
2 diagrams
Diagram 1: The Revision Cycle and the Question That Orders It
The five moves named in WHST.9-10.5 are used as needed, not in a fixed order. Revising and planning are shaded because they carry the most significant changes, and the dashed arrow shows a writer returning to the plan when a new approach is needed, as Elena did. Editing comes last because any sentence that revision cuts no longer needs fixing.
Diagram 2: Mean Time for a Disk to Float at Five Temperatures (invented data)
Each dot is the mean of three trials from Table 1. Because a disk floats when enough oxygen has formed, a shorter time means a faster reaction. The graph shows five tested temperatures only, which is why Dr. Morrow's third comment asks Jonah to be careful about where the fastest rate is.
04
Homework Assignment
~30 min
WHST.9-10.5 Homework: Revising Malia's Conclusion
Directions: Use Malia's draft (Text 6) and Table 2 in Closure. Malia's research question is "How does pH affect the rate at which catalase from potato breaks down hydrogen peroxide?" Her reader is Dr. Morrow, who wants a Conclusion of 120-160 words with a claim, evidence, reasoning and one limitation. Cite sentences of the draft by number, counting from the first sentence (sentence 1 to sentence 9).
Part 1: Plan Before You Change Anything (Problems 1-2)
In three sentences, state the purpose of Malia's Conclusion, who will read it, and the one thing that reader most needs from it that the draft does not yet give.
Sort all nine sentences of Text 6 into keep, revise or cut. Give a one-line reason for each that names the research question or the reader.
Part 2: Revise, Rewrite and Try a New Approach (Problems 3-4)
Write Draft 2 of the Conclusion, 120-160 words. Open with a claim that answers the research question for the whole pH range, use at least three means from Table 2 with units, explain the slow times at pH 3 and pH 11, and name one limitation with its effect on the results.
Write two different first sentences for your Draft 2: one that states the claim directly, and one that opens with a comparison of two numbers from Table 2. Choose one for Dr. Morrow and explain your choice in two sentences.
Part 3: Edit Last, Then Reflect (Problems 5-6)
Edit your Draft 2 only after it is finished. Then find and correct three errors in the original Text 6: the comma splice in sentence 8, the misused word in sentence 9, and the missing comma after an introductory phrase in sentence 9. Name the rule behind each correction.
In 80-120 words, explain which one of your changes did the most for Dr. Morrow and why. Compare it with one change Jonah needed (Text 5) or one change Elena made (Text 3).
Rubric
Criterion
Full Credit (2 pts)
Partial Credit (1 pt)
No Credit (0 pts)
Planning for the Reader
Purpose, reader and most significant need stated clearly; every sort decision names the question or the reader
Plan given but vague, or some decisions without reasons
No plan, or decisions do not refer to the reader
Revision of Content
Claim answers the question for the whole range; accurate means with units; reasoning about shape; a limitation with its effect
One or two of these missing or inaccurate
Content not revised, or inaccurate throughout
New Approach
Two different openings that each work, and a choice justified by the reader
Two openings that differ only in wording, or a choice without a reason
Missing
Editing and Reflection
All three errors corrected with the rule named; reflection explains the most significant change
Some errors corrected or rules missing; reflection general
Errors not corrected and no reflection
05
Quiz: 20 Questions
Interactive, with answers
Instructions
The questions use Elena's Draft 1 (Text 1) in Warm-Up, the writing conference and Draft 2 (Texts 2 and 3) in Direct Instruction, and Table 1, Jonah's draft (Text 4) and the comments on it (Text 5) in Guided Practice. Your score updates as you answer, and Reset quiz clears everything so you or your students can try again.
Multiple choice: pick an option to check it. Short answer: write your answer, then reveal the model answer.
0 of 20 answered · 0 correct
Question 1 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Which sentence of Draft 1 (Text 1) states an opinion that Elena gives no evidence for and that does not answer the prompt?
Answer: A
A is a sweeping judgment about the whole country with no evidence, and it says nothing about why Chinese workers were necessary, so it serves neither the prompt nor Ms. Ferro. B, C and D state accurate facts. B is off the question but checkable; C and D are relevant facts that need explaining, and Draft 2 turns the strike in D into evidence.
Question 2 of 20 · Multiple Choice
In Text 2, Ms. Ferro says, "If I read only your first three sentences, what would I learn about why the Chinese workers mattered?" What is this test checking?
Answer: C
C: the test asks whether the start of the paragraph does the job the prompt sets. Elena's answer, "Nothing yet," shows that it does not. A confuses the test with a word count, B with editing, which Ms. Ferro puts last, and D with checking accuracy: the ceremony facts are accurate, and the problem is that they do not answer the question.
Question 3 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Which change from Draft 1 (Text 1) to Draft 2 (Text 3) is editing rather than revising?
Answer: D
D corrects a usage error: "its" is the possessive, and "it's" means "it is." The change fixes the form of the words without changing what the paragraph says. A adds content, B changes order and C cuts content, so all three are revising.
Question 4 of 20 · Multiple Choice
What does Ms. Ferro advise Elena to do about the story that workers were lowered down cliffs in baskets?
Answer: B
B: Ms. Ferro says, "Historians still debate the basket stories. Either tell your reader the story is debated, or use a fact you can back up" (Text 2, paragraph 18). A and C treat interest as more important than accuracy, and D keeps the unsupported claim and only makes it longer.
Question 5 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Why does Elena leave the Chinese Exclusion Act out of Draft 2?
Answer: A
A: Ms. Ferro calls it true and important and asks whether it answers the question; Elena answers, "No. It's about what happened later" (Text 2, paragraph 21). B is wrong: the act was passed in 1882. C invents a rule, and D invents a comment Kofi never makes.
Question 6 of 20 · Multiple Choice
In Draft 2 (Text 3), why does Elena add the sentence "Few other workers had answered the company's call for laborers, so there was no one to replace them"?
Answer: C
C: the sentence turns a number into a reason. A large share of the workforce shows dependence only if the workers could not be replaced, and this sentence says they could not. This is the kind of explanation the prompt asks for. A turns a statement about who answered the call into an insult Draft 2 never makes. B mistakes explanation for a new topic, and D names a date the sentence does not give.
Question 7 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Draft 2 (Text 3) supports its third reason with a quotation from the Central Pacific's president. Which replacement would be the weakest evidence for a history teacher?
Answer: B
B is weakest: it names no author and no date, and it comes from the same kind of source as the basket story that Ms. Ferro questioned (Text 2, paragraphs 16-18). A, C and D are records from the time, created by the company or its leaders, which a history reader can check and weigh.
Question 8 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Draft 2 (Text 3) is 235 words, and the prompt allows no more than 200. Which plan for cutting it serves Ms. Ferro best?
Answer: D
D keeps every reason and its evidence and removes only detail and length. A removes the strongest evidence for the third reason. B breaks the promise of the claim, which previews three reasons, and the prompt asks for three facts. C removes the most significant sentence in the paragraph.
Question 9 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Jonah has ten minutes before class to work on Draft 1 (Text 4). Following Dr. Morrow's comments (Text 5), which task should he do first?
Answer: C
C is Dr. Morrow's comment 1, and her note "Fix these first, in this order" puts it ahead of everything else, because a Discussion that does not answer the research question fails its purpose. A, B and D are edits, which she says come last; the timer sentence in D may also be cut or rewritten under comment 5, so fixing its comma first could be wasted work.
Question 10 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Sana suggests adding a paragraph about what enzymes do in the body, "so it's longer" (Text 5). What is the best response for Jonah?
Answer: C
C weighs the advice against the purpose and the limit that Dr. Morrow sets: "You have 120-160 words." A and B follow the advice without asking what the reader needs, and B confuses length with quality. D throws out Sana's second comment, which gives Jonah an accurate fact he needs for his limitations.
Question 11 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Which sentence would best replace Jonah's opening, "Our experiment proved that our hypothesis was right" (Text 4)?
Answer: A
A answers the research question with the whole pattern, uses "support" instead of "prove," and gives numbers with units from Table 1. B keeps "proved" and adds a claim the lab never tested. C replaces evidence with feelings. D is background that does not answer the question, the kind of sentence Sana's first comment would add.
Question 12 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Which revision of "At 65 degrees the enzyme died" (Text 4) answers Dr. Morrow's fourth comment?
Answer: B
B replaces "died" with the idea Dr. Morrow asks for, a change in shape (denaturing), and it fits the data: the disks still floated, only more slowly. A and D keep the idea that an enzyme is alive, and D contradicts Table 1, where the disks at 65 °C floated after about 41 s. C is wrong: 65 °C is well below the boiling point of water.
Question 13 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Using Table 1, what is the most accurate claim Jonah can make about where catalase works fastest?
Answer: D
D: the shortest mean, 7.8 s, is at 37 °C, and its neighbors are 22 °C (12.3 s) and 50 °C (10.9 s), so the fastest rate lies in that range; five temperatures cannot pin it down further. A is the reasoning Dr. Morrow questions in comment 3. B and C misread the table: a longer time means a slower reaction, and 4 °C and 65 °C gave the two longest times.
Question 14 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Which is the correct edit of this sentence from Text 4? There was probably some error in our lab, we might of started the timer late sometimes.
Answer: C
C fixes both errors: a semicolon joins the two independent clauses, and "might have" replaces "might of," which is a mishearing of "might've." A fixes "of" but keeps the comma splice, B fixes the comma splice but keeps "might of," and D moves the commas without fixing either error.
Question 15 of 20 · Short Answer
Choose one comment from Text 2 that Elena used in Draft 2 (Text 3). Quote the comment, quote the change it led to, and explain how the change serves Ms. Ferro.
Model answer: Ms. Ferro asks, "What else in your notes shows they were necessary, not just numerous?" (Text 2, paragraph 11). In Draft 2, Elena adds a second reason with its evidence: "Beginning in the fall of 1865, they cut 15 tunnels through the Sierra Nevada, and they kept digging through the winter of 1866-1867, when 44 storms struck the mountains" (Text 3). The change serves Ms. Ferro because her prompt asks for three facts that each support the claim, and the tunnels show that the workers did the work the whole project depended on, not only that there were many of them. Rubric line: 2 points for an accurate quotation of a comment, an accurate quotation of the change, and an explanation tied to the prompt or the reader; 1 point if one quotation is missing or the explanation does not name the reader's need.
Question 16 of 20 · Short Answer
Rewrite the basket sentence from Draft 1 (Text 1) so that a history teacher could accept it, following Ms. Ferro's advice in Text 2. Then name the editing error in the original sentence.
Model answer: "Some accounts say that Chinese workers were lowered down cliffs in baskets to set explosives, but historians still debate those stories." The revision presents the claim as debated instead of as fact, which is the first choice Ms. Ferro offers (Text 2, paragraph 18). The original sentence is also a comma splice: "to set explosives, this was very dangerous" joins two independent clauses with only a comma. Rubric line: 2 points for a sentence that clearly marks the story as debated, or replaces it with a supported fact, and for naming the comma splice; 1 point for only one of the two.
Question 17 of 20 · Short Answer
Draft 2 (Text 3) is 235 words, and the limit is 200. List cuts that remove at least 35 words without losing any of the three reasons or the evidence for them, and give the new word count.
Model answer: (1) Cut ", roughly 8,000 building tunnels and 3,000 laying track," (8 words). (2) Cut the sentence "Chinese crews also did the work that set the pace of the whole project." (14 words), and change "they cut 15 tunnels" to "Chinese crews cut 15 tunnels" so the next sentence stays clear (1 word added). (3) Shorten the closing to "The last spike, on May 10, 1869, finished their line." (from 21 words to 10). (4) Cut "of the transcontinental railroad" from the first sentence (4 words). Net cut: 8 + 14 - 1 + 11 + 4 = 36 words; new count: 235 - 36 = 199. All three reasons, the numbers, the tunnels, the quotation and the strike remain. Rubric line: 2 points for cuts of at least 35 words that keep all three reasons and their evidence, with an accurate count; 1 point for cuts that reach the limit but remove evidence, or a miscounted total.
Question 18 of 20 · Short Answer
Dr. Morrow writes, "If you mention an error, tell me how it would change the results" (Text 5). Write one or two sentences for Jonah's Discussion about starting the timer late that do this.
Model answer: "If we started the timer late, the measured times would be shorter than the true times, so some reactions would look faster than they were. Because the three trials at each temperature were close to one another, this error is unlikely to change the overall pattern." The sentences tie the error to its direction and size, which is what comment 5 asks for; the second sentence uses Table 1, where the three trials at each temperature are within 7 s of one another, while the means range from 7.8 s to 41.2 s. Rubric line: 2 points for the correct direction of the error (shorter times, reactions looking faster) and a judgment of its effect on the pattern; 1 point for a correct direction without a judgment of effect.
Question 19 of 20 · Short Answer
Using Sana's second comment in Text 5, decide whether Jonah should mention the disk that stuck to the side of the cup. If yes, write the sentence; if no, explain why.
Model answer: Yes, briefly: "In one 50 °C trial, a disk stuck to the side of the cup; we discarded that trial and ran it again, and the table reports the new run." Draft 1 says only that "one disk stuck," which leaves Dr. Morrow wondering whether the data are trustworthy. Sana's note (Text 5) gives the fact that answers that worry: the trial was re-run, so the result in Table 1 is not affected. A writer could also argue for leaving it out, since it did not affect the data, as long as the vague Draft 1 sentence is cut. Rubric line: 2 points for a decision tied to what Dr. Morrow needs to trust the data, with an accurate sentence or reason; 1 point for a decision without a reason, or a sentence that misreports the re-run.
Question 20 of 20 · Short Answer
Suggest one new approach to organizing Jonah's whole Discussion (not just one sentence), other than the four-heading format in Activity 3, and explain in two or three sentences why it would serve Dr. Morrow better than Draft 1's structure.
Model answer: Organize the Discussion around the two halves of the pattern in Table 1. First, the rise: times fell from 4 °C to the fastest mean, and the reasoning is that enzyme and hydrogen peroxide molecules move faster and meet more often as temperature rises. Second, the fall: times rose again above the fastest mean, and the reasoning is that heat changes the enzyme's shape. Draft 1 moves from a claim to background about enzymes and then to errors and feelings (Text 4), so the reader has to hunt for evidence; the new plan pairs each part of the pattern with its own evidence and reasoning, so Dr. Morrow can check them one at a time. Rubric line: 2 points for a structure that changes the whole plan (not only wording) and an explanation tied to the reader's purpose; 1 point for a structure without a reason, or a change to one sentence only.
0 of 20 answered · 0 correct
06
Frequently Asked Questions
10 Questions
What does WHST.9-10.5 mean?
WHST.9-10.5 means that students in grades 9 and 10 strengthen their writing in history, science and technical subjects by planning, revising, editing, rewriting or trying a new approach, as each draft needs, and that they decide what to fix first by asking what matters most to the reader and the purpose.
A history teacher reading for a claim and a science teacher reading for evidence need different things, so the same process leads to different first changes.
What is the difference between WHST.9-10.5 and W.9-10.5?
The main sentence is the same, but W.9-10.5 is taught in English class, while WHST.9-10.5 applies to writing in history, science and technical subjects.
W.9-10.5 also carries a note that editing should show command of the grade 9-10 Language standards. WHST.9-10.5 has no such note: its focus is the purpose and reader of discipline writing, such as a history explanation or a lab report, though editing is still one of the moves it names.
What is the difference between revising and editing?
Revising changes what the writing says and how it is built; editing changes how the sentences follow the conventions of spelling, punctuation, usage and, in science, units.
Moving a claim to the first sentence or cutting an off-topic fact is revising. Changing "there" to "their" or adding "°C" is editing. Revising usually comes first, because a sentence that is cut no longer needs editing.
What does "trying a new approach" mean in history or science writing?
It means changing the plan of a piece, not just its sentences, for example a new structure, a new opening or a new way to present evidence.
In this lesson, Elena changes her paragraph from a story that begins with the golden spike to an argument that begins with a claim, and she gives the ceremony a new job as her closing sentence. A writer of a technical procedure might try a new approach by turning a paragraph into numbered steps with a warning placed before the step it concerns.
How do students decide what is "most significant" to fix?
They reread the task and ask what the reader needs in order to do their job with the writing.
A history teacher who asks "why" needs a claim and explained evidence first. A science teacher grading a lab needs the research question answered with data. Spelling, commas and style come after those, because they do not change whether the writing does its job.
Should students follow every piece of feedback they get?
No: students should weigh each comment against the purpose and the reader, and they may decline advice that does not serve them.
In the lesson, Jonah declines a suggestion to add a paragraph about digestion to make his report longer, but he uses the same classmate's accurate fact about a re-run trial. Explaining why a comment was declined is part of the skill.
Is WHST.9-10.5 taught in history and science classes or in English class?
It belongs to the Common Core literacy standards for history, science and technical subjects, so it is meant to be taught in those classes.
English teachers often teach the same revision moves, and schools usually coordinate the two. In a science class, it fits naturally into lab report drafts; in a history class, into document-based paragraphs and essays.
How is WHST.9-10.5 assessed?
It is usually assessed by comparing drafts and asking students to explain their changes.
Teachers look for revisions that a reader would notice, reasons that name the purpose or the audience, and edits made after the content is settled. Quiz items like the ones on this page check whether students can classify changes, weigh feedback and choose the revision that best serves a reader.
Why does the lab report in this lesson say "support" instead of "prove"?
Because one experiment with a few trials can support a hypothesis but cannot prove it.
Science readers expect claims that are no stronger than the evidence. Revising "proved" to "support" and claiming no more about the fastest rate than five temperatures can show are revisions for purpose and audience, not just word choice.
How can parents help with revision at home?
Ask your student two questions about any draft: who will read it, and what does that reader need most from it?
Then ask them to show you where the draft gives the reader that thing. If they cannot point to it quickly, that is usually the first revision to make, before checking spelling.
07
Related Standards
5 standards
These standards connect to WHST.9-10.5: prerequisites to review first, parallel standards at the same level, and next steps that build on it.
Before this lesson
WHST.6-8.5Prerequisite
With guidance, plan, revise and edit history and science writing for purpose and audience
Lesson coming soon
Alongside
W.9-10.5Parallel
Plan, revise, edit, rewrite or try a new approach in English class writing
