The PLT ends with two case histories, each followed by two constructed-response questions (25% of the test). Read this case, write your answers, then compare them with the model answers. ETS scorers rate each response from 0 to 2.
Dr. Patel teaches ninth-grade history at a comprehensive high school. Students are beginning an investigation of how a fictional town responded to a change in transportation. The unit uses original classroom documents representing several historical perspectives. Students must develop an argument that explains why residents responded differently and support it with contextualized evidence. Many students are adjusting to the independent workload of high school. Their prior experience with research ranges from copying facts from a supplied page to comparing multiple accounts. Dr. Patel is working with the school librarian to introduce responsible source use. A family information evening is scheduled during the unit, but several caregivers have indicated that evening attendance is difficult.
Document 1: Assignment and lesson sequence
The assignment directs students to collect sources at home, decide which are reliable, and produce an argument. The rubric rewards contextual explanation and the connection between claims and evidence. The introductory lesson demonstrates how to create a source list and format a title. Students then receive a packet containing a town notice, an unsigned diary excerpt, and a later retrospective account. Dr. Patel asks students to determine which document is best and tells them to use complete sentences. The class has not yet examined how authorship, audience, purpose, or historical context can affect a source’s usefulness. The librarian has offered to co-plan a source evaluation lesson, but that meeting has not occurred.
Document 2: Classroom work and observation notes
Mina gathers many quotations but selects the shortest one because it is easiest to copy. Terrence dismisses the diary as useless because its author expresses an opinion. Another student assumes that the retrospective account must be most reliable because it is neatly printed. During discussion, Dr. Patel asks which source students selected and moves on after each answer. Few students explain their selection criteria. Some completed drafts summarize the documents separately without connecting them to different residents’ experiences. When asked privately, students say that they understand the assignment’s topic but are unsure what it means to contextualize evidence. Several ask whether using more quotations automatically produces a stronger argument.
Document 3: Family messages and planning notes
A caregiver writes that Terrence spends considerable time on the assignment but cannot explain how to judge a source. Mina’s caregiver says that home internet access is intermittent and asks whether research can be completed at school. Another caregiver requests a translated explanation of the project and cannot attend the scheduled evening event. Dr. Patel’s draft family message states that students who struggle should show greater independence, but it does not explain the reasoning skills or school supports. After reviewing the work, Dr. Patel recognizes that the initial demonstration emphasized appearance rather than the rubric’s intellectual demands. The librarian proposes shared school research time and a small set of accessible sources. Dr. Patel wants a revised instructional sequence and a family partnership that helps students participate without transferring the teaching of source evaluation to caregivers.
Question 1. Identify TWO changes Dr. Patel should make to instruction so students can move from collecting information to constructing the required historical argument. For each change, explain how it addresses a specific difficulty in the case.
Show the model answer
First, Dr. Patel should model source evaluation through a think-aloud that considers authorship, audience, purpose, and context in relation to a specific historical question. Comparing the diary and retrospective account would show that expressed opinion does not make a source useless and polished appearance does not establish credibility. Students should then practice the same questions with guided feedback before independent evaluation.
Second, Dr. Patel should model how evidence supports an explanatory claim, then have students compare contrasting residents’ perspectives in a short argument. A planning tool can connect each claim to a source detail and an explanation of its relevance. During discussion, the teacher should probe why a quotation supports the claim rather than merely ask which source was chosen. This addresses Mina’s quotation collecting and the drafts that summarize documents without explaining different responses.
A strong response covers
- Model contextual source evaluation
- Use guided practice before independent judgment
- Connect claims, evidence, and reasoning explicitly
- Probe students’ reasons rather than source choices alone
Question 2. Identify TWO collaborative actions Dr. Patel should take with families or school colleagues to improve access to the project. For each action, explain how it responds to evidence in the case and supports the teacher’s instructional responsibility.
Show the model answer
First, Dr. Patel should co-plan with the librarian to provide accessible sources and scheduled research time at school. This responds to Mina’s intermittent home internet and uses the librarian’s expertise in information literacy. The teachers should coordinate source evaluation instruction with the argument rubric, so the partnership addresses learning rather than simply increasing the number of available documents.
Second, Dr. Patel should replace the independence-focused family message with a clear, accessible explanation of the project’s goals and available supports. The school should arrange appropriate translation and offer a way to participate that does not require attendance at the evening event. Families can share barriers and help students plan use of school resources. The message should explain that the teacher will teach source evaluation; caregivers are partners in access and planning rather than substitutes for the missing instruction.
A strong response covers
- Co-plan with the librarian around learning goals
- Provide school access to research resources
- Use translated and flexible family communication
- Retain teacher responsibility for teaching source evaluation
