Shaping Worldviews

Overview

Today students plan and begin drafting an extended response to: “How do multimodal texts use modern technologies to influence our understanding about the world as we know it?” They will use two class texts and practise writing a clear thesis using a PETAL structure scaffold, then strengthen arguments through peer feedback.

Learning intentions

Students will:

• evaluate how multimodal texts use technology-related forms and features to shape meaning
• craft a thesis statement that clearly answers the question and previews key ideas
• plan an extended response using PETAL (Point, Evidence, Technique, Analysis, Link)
• draft a body paragraph and refine their argument after peer feedback

Success criteria

Students can:

• write a thesis that is specific, arguable, and directly addresses the question
• select evidence from two studied texts and explain how it supports the claim
• analyse how technological choices (e.g. sound, image, interface, pacing, editing, typography, camera work) influence understanding
• use PETAL to maintain clear structure and a strong link back to the question

Curriculum links

• EEA-12-01: evaluate how an author’s choice of textual form and features shapes meaning across modes and mediums
• EEA-12-05: compose critical and creative texts using textual form and language features to shape meaning for a range of purposes and audiences
• EST-12-01 (or EAV-12-01 where applicable): critically analyse how language, form, and structure shape meaning in complex texts of different modes and mediums
• EE1-12-05 (if Extension pathway): experiment with textual form and language features to craft an extended response

Lesson structure (60 minutes)

1. 0–8 min · Launch: question unpacking. Teacher writes the question and asks: “What does ‘modern technologies’ include in multimodal texts?” Students brainstorm a quick list (e.g. filters, CGI, interactive design, streaming-style pacing, voiceover + soundtrack, algorithms/feeds implied through formatting, AR-style overlays).

2. 8–18 min · Model: thesis + evidence alignment. Teacher models a thesis using placeholders and a two-text approach:

• Example thesis scaffold: “Multimodal texts show how modern technologies shape our understanding of the world by (claim 1)… and (claim 2)… In Text A, … while in Text B, ….” Students underline the “answer” and circle the two “preview ideas,” ensuring each preview idea will become a PETAL paragraph.

3. 18–28 min · Direct teach: PETAL plan structure. Teacher demonstrates one PETAL paragraph using a short, invented mini-example, then maps it to the two texts. Students complete a PETAL planning sheet with two paragraphs planned: one for Text A, one for Text B (or one for shared claim with both texts—teacher choice based on class needs).

4. 28–40 min · Checklist-guided drafting (body paragraph 1). Students draft their first PETAL paragraph (Point + Evidence + Technique + Analysis + Link). Teacher circulates, prompting students to name the specific technology-linked feature and explain its effect on meaning (not just what it shows).

5. 40–52 min · Peer exchange: thesis swap + feedback. Students swap thesis statements in pairs. They use the peer checklist to give feedback focused on clarity, relevance, and alignment to the question. Each partner must:

• confirm whether the thesis answers the question directly
• check the thesis previews key ideas that can be proven with evidence from the two texts
• suggest one improvement for specificity (which technologies/features?) or argument clarity (more “how/why,” less “what”) Students revise their thesis in the draft plan using the feedback.

6. 52–60 min · Quick conference + next-step set. Teacher selects 3–4 students (or groups) to share one revised thesis feature (e.g. improved preview ideas). Students then write a 2-sentence “next step” goal for their remaining paragraphs.

Resources

• Teacher-made PETAL scaffold sheet (Point/Evidence/Technique/Analysis/Link prompts)
• Thesis scaffold strip and sentence starters
• Drafting checklist handout (see below)
• Peer thesis feedback checklist (clarity, relevance, alignment)
• Students’ notes and printed extracts or images from two studied multimodal texts
• Timer and projector/board for modelling
• Highlighters (for thesis underlining/circling)

Assessment

• Formative: teacher checks during drafting for correct PETAL logic (claim → evidence → technique → analysis → link)
• Formative: peer feedback on thesis using the checklist (teacher listens to common issues and addresses them)
• Exit ticket (last 3 minutes): students submit one revised thesis sentence and label: “Answer / Preview idea 1 / Preview idea 2”

Thesis and draft checklists (for students)

Thesis checklist (peer feedback)

• My thesis answers the question “How do multimodal texts… influence our understanding…?”
• It names the role of modern technologies (not just general persuasion).
• It previews two clear lines of argument I can support with evidence from both texts.
• It includes “Text A” and “Text B” (or clear references) so the reader knows where ideas will be proven.
• It is specific enough that someone could locate my evidence.

Draft paragraph checklist

• Point: I make a clear claim connected to the question.
• Evidence: I quote/summarise a specific moment or feature from Text A or Text B.
• Technique: I identify the technology-related form/feature (e.g. editing, soundtrack, interface, camera angle, font/animation).
• Analysis: I explain how the technique shapes meaning and the reader’s understanding (cause-effect).
• Link: I connect back to the question and/or my thesis preview idea.
• Coherence: topic sentences and transitions guide the reader to the next idea.

Differentiation

• Provide sentence starters for thesis and PETAL sections (e.g. “This influences understanding by…”, “In Text A, the technology of … encourages …”).
• Offer an “evidence bank” on the board: students can choose from pre-taught moments/features from the two texts.
• For students needing support: require one paragraph that uses only one text first, then add the second-text comparison later.
• For advanced writers: add a “contrast” prompt in Analysis (e.g. “How does the technology differ between texts, and why does that matter?”).
• Encourage EAL/D and SEN supports through structured templates, model paragraphs, and minimal required writing per section.