Author Choices in Action

Overview

Across five 50-minute classes, students will study an excerpt from “from Brown Girl Dreaming” in HMH’s Into Literature as a mentor text. They will analyze the narrator’s point of view, the author’s purpose, anecdotes, word choice, figurative language, and technical or connotative meanings, then use those choices to write and revise a basic analytical paragraph.

Learning intentions

Students will be able to:

• Identify and explain the narrator’s point of view.
• Determine the author’s purpose and explain how it is conveyed.
• Analyze anecdotes, figurative language, and connotative word meanings.
• Cite relevant textual evidence and explain its significance.
• Write a clear paragraph analyzing one authorial choice.

Success criteria

• I can name the narrator’s point of view and support my answer with evidence.
• I can explain how a specific word, phrase, anecdote, or image affects meaning or tone.
• I can identify the author’s purpose and connect it to details in the text.
• I can write a paragraph with a claim, evidence, explanation, and concluding sentence.

Curriculum links

• Reading Literature — explain how an author develops the narrator’s or speaker’s point of view.
• Reading Literature — cite textual evidence to support explicit analysis and inferences.
• Reading Literature — determine word and phrase meanings, including figurative and connotative meanings, and analyze their effect on tone.
• Reading Literature — determine a theme or central idea and summarize without personal judgment.

Lesson structure (250 minutes total)

Monday — Vocabulary and morphology

1. 0–5 min · Retrieval and purpose. Display the week’s learning intentions using the opening and learning-intention slides. Students write one thing they remember about point of view or author’s purpose.
2. 5–15 min · Morphology mini-lesson. Teacher introduces several vocabulary words from the selected excerpt and models separating roots, prefixes, and suffixes where applicable. Students record a likely meaning and explain which word part helped.
3. 15–30 min · Context investigation. Distribute the vocabulary and morphology analysis worksheet. Teacher models using surrounding sentences, word parts, and a dictionary-style definition without interrupting reading flow. Students complete vocabulary items independently, then compare reasoning with a partner.
4. 30–43 min · First reading. Teacher provides the selected excerpt in print or digital form and reads aloud while students follow; students mark unfamiliar words, striking images, and clues about the narrator.
5. 43–50 min · Formative check. Students define one word in context and explain how its connotation contributes to the excerpt’s tone. Teacher collects responses to group students for Tuesday support.

Tuesday — Point of view and purpose

1. 0–5 min · Revisit. Open the retrieval and vocabulary review slides. Students correct Monday’s response and share one useful word-solving strategy.
2. 5–15 min · Direct instruction. Teacher distinguishes first-person point of view from author’s purpose and models a think-aloud using one short passage from the excerpt.
3. 15–30 min · Evidence hunt. Students reread the excerpt in pairs, using the point-of-view evidence chart to record quotations or precise details and explain what each reveals about the narrator.
4. 30–42 min · Purpose discussion. Teacher poses: “What might the author want readers to understand, feel, or consider?” Students discuss possible purposes, then connect one purpose to two details from the text.
5. 42–50 min · Progress monitoring. Students submit a quick response: “The narrator’s point of view is ___ because ___. The author’s purpose may be ___ because ___.” Teacher sorts responses into reteach, developing, and secure groups.

Wednesday — Paragraph writing

1. 0–5 min · Analyze a model. Display the paragraph-model slides. Students identify the claim, evidence, explanation, and concluding sentence.
2. 5–15 min · Explicit writing instruction. Teacher models turning an evidence chart into a basic analytical paragraph using the frame: “The author develops ___ through . For example, ‘.’ This shows ___ because ___. Therefore, readers understand ___.”
3. 15–25 min · Shared planning. Students select one authorial choice—point of view, anecdote, figurative language, or connotative word—and complete the analytical paragraph planner with a claim, evidence, explanation, and conclusion.
4. 25–43 min · Independent writing. Students draft one paragraph. Teacher conferences with targeted students, checking that evidence is relevant and explanation does more than repeat the quotation.
5. 43–50 min · Peer feedback. Students exchange drafts and use the displayed criteria to identify one strength and one specific revision. Teacher collects drafts for formative scoring.

Thursday — Rhetorical choices and revision

1. 0–7 min · Retrieval warm-up. Use the rhetorical-choices review slides. Students match each choice—anecdote, figurative language, connotation, or technical meaning—to its likely effect.
2. 7–18 min · Close reading. Teacher models how a particular word or image shapes tone and supports a central idea. Students annotate a second passage, noting choice, effect, and connection to meaning.
3. 18–33 min · Collaborative analysis. In groups of three, students complete the rhetorical-choice analysis section. Each student must contribute a detail and explain its effect; groups prepare one evidence-based claim.
4. 33–45 min · Revise writing. Students revise Wednesday’s paragraph by strengthening the explanation, replacing vague words, and checking quotation accuracy. Teacher conducts a small-group reteach using sentence starters.
5. 45–50 min · Self-assessment. Students rate confidence from 1–4 and identify the skill they need to demonstrate on Friday’s assessment.

Friday — Summative assessment

1. 0–5 min · Assessment directions. Display the assessment directions and criteria slides. Teacher reviews expectations: answer independently, cite evidence, and explain the author’s choice.
2. 5–10 min · Quiet reread. Students reread the selected excerpt and may use their annotated text; dyslexia-friendly copies use a clear sans-serif font, increased spacing, and a cream or soft-color background.
3. 10–38 min · Written assessment. Students complete the final reading and writing assessment: identify the narrator’s point of view, state the author’s purpose, analyze one word or phrase/anecdote, cite two details, and write one organized analytical paragraph.
4. 38–45 min · Reflection. Students identify which response best demonstrates their learning and explain one revision they would make with more time.
5. 45–50 min · Exit ticket. Finish with the retrieval practice exit ticket slips. Students state one authorial choice, its effect, and their confidence level. Teacher uses results to plan reteaching.

Resources

• HMH Into Literature, “from Brown Girl Dreaming” excerpt
• the five-day authorial-choices slide deck
• the vocabulary, reading-analysis, paragraph-planning, and final-assessment worksheet
• Student annotation tools or digital annotation access
• Highlighters in two or three colors
• Dyslexia-friendly printed text copies
• Timer and document camera
• Retrieval Practice Exit Ticket Slips

Assessment

• Formative checks include vocabulary responses, evidence charts, discussion claims, paragraph drafts, and Thursday confidence ratings.
• Teacher uses a four-point progress-monitoring rubric: accurate identification, relevant evidence, explanation of effect, and clarity of writing.
• Friday’s written assessment is summative; score the paragraph for claim, evidence, reasoning, organization, and conventions, while tracking each reading skill separately.

Differentiation

• Support developing readers with an excerpt broken into short sections, audio/read-aloud access, vocabulary glosses, color-coded evidence examples, and sentence starters.
• Provide dyslexia-friendly formatting, enlarged print, extra processing time, speech-to-text, and the option to respond orally before writing.
• Pair students strategically and assign clear roles such as reader, evidence finder, and explainer; allow independent work when collaboration increases distraction.
• Extend advanced learners by requiring analysis of two authorial choices and explaining how they work together to develop a central idea or shift the tone.