Goal: Synthesise competing textual perspectives into a coherent own public argument with a developed concession.
Prepare: Make P/Q and the complete W01–W06 worked address available. Choose one manageable section to model; no assumption that the learner has a prior paragraph.
- Make a start · 5 min. Invite: “Choose the next move your argument needs: a reason, an objection, a reply, or an ending.” Start that actual component now. New work is welcome if earlier work is absent; there is no invented before-and-after draft.
- Read/encounter · 8 min. Read W01–W06 as a complete possible address. Locate how W02 concedes time pressure and W03 offers a modified proposal. Compare W05’s objection about individual choice with its reply. Ask where the address connects P/Q rather than copying one position.
- Model or independent fresh start · 12 min. Model a concrete revision: “The reply is wrong because information is good” becomes “Q01’s time pressure matters; a choice sheet could begin the inquiry without promising that it solves access.” The second version names the objection, concedes a valid limit and offers a reasoned response. It remains a proposal, not a tested solution.
- Develop · 15 min. Build a connected argument of chosen scope: opening, developed reason with two source connections, concession/reply and a possible ending. These are options for structure, not mandatory boxes or a word quota. The learner may start one sustained section now and continue later. Encourage a different valid contention, including no forum intervention.
- Review or retain first · 6 min. Follow the actual sequence by reading or exact read-back. Replace one abrupt jump with a meaningful cohesive connection: “however”, “because”, or a repeated key idea where it fits. Evaluate its function, not the number of connectives. Do not mark rhetorical smoothness as proof the facts are correct.
- Keep/next move · 4 min. Keep the available text/plan and one next move. Identify learner wording versus teacher examples, and whether a synthesis actually exists. Source analysis and written organisation do not establish live spoken persuasion or actual forum approval.
Actual evidence: Selected synthesis/genre/sequence/cohesion demonstrated through actual learner work; no complete address or audience outcome required.
Selected unit-objective opportunities: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10; conditional/partial as crosswalk explains.