Two Readings of One Paragraph
A literacy coach gives two students the same four-sentence paragraph, written for this exercise: "The mill closed in March. By June the parking lot had grown a fringe of chicory, and the loading dock held a puddle the color of weak tea. My father still walked to the gate each morning at 6:40, stood a minute, and walked home. In August the town council voted 5-2 to fund a mural of the old smokestack." Student A calls the paragraph nostalgic and warm. Student B calls it critical of the town. The coach asks each student to underline the words that support their reading, then to decide which reading the paragraph actually earns. Neither student may use outside knowledge about mills or about the town.
1. Which student's reading does the paragraph better support, and which details carry the most weight in your judgment?
Read the worked answer
Neither reading is fully earned, but A's has more textual support.
- The father material is the strongest evidence for A: "still walked" implies persistence after the mill is gone, the oddly exact "6:40" signals ritual rather than errand, and "stood a minute" shows a small, wordless attachment. None of that is stated as nostalgia, but it is the kind of detail a writer includes to make a reader feel it.
- B's reading needs evaluative language the paragraph never supplies. There is no "sadly," no blame, no mention of who closed the mill or why. "Weak tea" is faintly deflating, but it is an image, not an argument.
- The council vote is reported flatly, including the 5-2 split, with no commentary.
Best answer: A is closer, but the paragraph is more restrained than "warm" -- it records rather than mourns. A strong response notes that the evidence supports attachment and loss, not a verdict about the town.
2. Student B argues that the phrase "the color of weak tea" proves the author dislikes the town. What is wrong with using that phrase as the backbone of the argument?
Read the worked answer
Three problems:
- One image cannot carry a whole-paragraph claim. B must account for every detail, including the father, the chicory, and the vote. A reading that explains one phrase and ignores three sentences is not a reading of the paragraph.
- Connotation is not statement. "Weak tea" makes the puddle look thin and unglamorous. That could signal decay, or it could signal the ordinary, unromantic honesty of the description. The image is ambiguous on purpose.
- It sits beside a counterweight. Chicory growing in a parking lot is a standard image of neglect and of resilience. B has to explain why the flower and the puddle point the same direction, and the text does not force that.
A defensible version of B's point would be narrower: "The description avoids sentimentality, which keeps the paragraph from becoming pure nostalgia."
3. A third student claims the final sentence proves the town feels guilty about the mill closing. What two questions should the coach ask before accepting that claim?
Read the worked answer
Question 1: Where in the text is guilt? A 5-2 vote to fund a mural is compatible with guilt, but also with civic pride, tourism promotion, historical preservation, or a compromise reached for unrelated reasons. A divided vote shows disagreement, not a shared emotion. The claim imports a motive the paragraph never names.
Question 2: What evidence would separate the possibilities? The student would need something outside these four sentences -- what council members said, how the mural was designed, whether the mill's owners were blamed publicly. That is legitimate inference-building, but it must be labeled as a hypothesis to check, not a conclusion drawn from the text.
Rule being taught: an inference must be forced or at least supported by details on the page. "Could be true" is not the same as "the paragraph says so."