NBPTS AYA English study plan

Map the Domain 2 and Domain 3 score descriptors into a two-column checklist of observable teacher behaviors, then rank each item by how heavily it weights literary analysis versus composition and rhetoric

Draft a one-page literary-analysis protocol that names the moves you expect students to make with text evidence, structure, figurative language, and competing interpretations

Write three original analytical prompts on unfamiliar short texts and annotate each with the reasoning demand it targets (inference, synthesis of evidence, evaluation of interpretive claim)

Build a rhetoric vocabulary inventory covering appeals, arrangement, style, and argument warrants, and mark which terms you can already teach fluently versus which need study

Compose two full analytical response exemplars at different score levels and write the commentary that justifies each score against the descriptors

Design a short composition sequence that moves students from claim generation through evidence selection to revision of a draft

Analyze how a single text can be taught for both literary interpretation and rhetorical analysis, and document the distinct questions each lens requires

Draft a scoring guide for written argument that separates claim, evidence, commentary, and control of language

Build a formative assessment cycle for analytical writing: pre-assessment, mid-draft feedback, and post-assessment, each with a stated decision rule

Practice scoring three anchor responses against your rubric and calculate your agreement with your own prior scoring

Identify two patterns of student error in literary analysis and two in argumentation, and specify an instructional response for each

Write feedback comments on a sample student essay that name a strength, cite evidence, and give one actionable next step

Profile three representative adolescent learners across reading identity, prior knowledge, language background, and motivation, and connect each profile to an instructional implication

Design a three-lesson sequence that differentiates process, product, and text complexity for the profiled learners

Sequence the lessons using an explicit gradual-release structure and justify each transition in a planning rationale

Select texts and tasks that build on students' out-of-school literacy practices without diluting analytical rigor

Audit your three-lesson sequence for barriers to access: text readability, task language load, cultural assumption, and participation structure

Revise the sequence to embed two scaffolds that support multilingual learners and two that support students with reading difficulties, without lowering the analytical demand

Draft a classroom norm statement and two discussion routines that invite diverse interpretive perspectives while holding students to evidence

Evaluate your text selections for range of authorship and experience, and replace one selection that narrows the curriculum

Design a culturally responsive discussion protocol and rehearse it aloud, recording what you would say to redirect a discussion that silences a perspective

Plan a family or community communication that explains your literacy goals and invites input on students' reading lives

Identify two personal assumptions about language or literature that could bias your assessment of student work, and write the counter-practice for each

Build a plan for gathering student voice data on belonging and challenge in your classroom

Synthesize assessment data from your unit into a one-page analysis that names patterns, hypotheses, and one instructional adjustment

Draft a professional learning contribution, such as a session outline or a written summary of your assessment findings, aimed at English department colleagues

Plan a collaborative inquiry cycle with a colleague focused on one shared literacy problem of practice

Write a structured reflection on your own practice using evidence from your unit artifacts rather than impressions

Assemble your portfolio artifacts and map each one to a domain, verifying that every domain is represented by concrete evidence

Write reflective commentary for each artifact that explains the decision, the evidence of student learning, and what you would change

Rehearse a timed written response to an unfamiliar analytical prompt to test your fluency under exam conditions

Conduct a final gap analysis and schedule targeted review for any domain lacking evidence