Ninety Seconds
The same vending-machine proposal twice: the hallway pitch ('come vote for it or whatever') and the podium version — evidence tightened, register raised, one honest slide. Students map exactly what changed and why both versions are RIGHT for their rooms, then build and deliver their own ninety-second talk with one visual.
Common Core standards covered
- SL.8.4Present claims and findings, emphasizing salient points in a focused, coherent manner with relevant evidence, sound valid reasoning, and well-chosen details; use appropriate eye contact, adequate volume, and clear pronunciation.
- SL.8.5Integrate multimedia and visual displays into presentations to clarify information, strengthen claims and evidence, and add interest.
- SL.8.6Adapt speech to a variety of contexts and tasks, demonstrating command of formal English when indicated or appropriate.
© Copyright 2010. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School Officers. All rights reserved.
Teacher-facing overview
Big idea: Present claims and findings with relevant evidence, sound reasoning, and well-chosen details, using appropriate eye contact, volume, and clear pronunciation; integrate visual displays to clarify information; adapt speech to context, demonstrating command of formal English when appropriate.
Student target: “I can build and deliver a short formal talk — claim, checked evidence, mechanism, honest visual, ask — and adapt my register to the room on purpose, keeping my own voice underneath.”
Success criteria: I can name what the hallway version does well IN ITS ROOM. · I can ledger the podium upgrades: evidence checked, mechanism added, register raised, ask sharpened. · I can design a slide that clarifies one thing instead of scripting me. · I can deliver ninety seconds with eyes up, back-row volume, and the time kept.
Essential question
The hallway version and the podium version make the same request — and neither would work in the other's room. What actually changes when speech goes formal, and what must never change?
Learning target: I can build and deliver a short formal talk — claim, checked evidence, mechanism, honest visual, ask — and adapt my register to the room on purpose, keeping my own voice underneath.
Success criteria
- I can name what the hallway version does well IN ITS ROOM.
- I can ledger the podium upgrades: evidence checked, mechanism added, register raised, ask sharpened.
- I can design a slide that clarifies one thing instead of scripting me.
- I can deliver ninety seconds with eyes up, back-row volume, and the time kept.
Why this matters
SL.8.6 asks for command of formal English 'when indicated or appropriate' — which means the skill is the SWITCH, not the register. Students who think formal speech is a personality transplant either refuse it or disappear inside it. The pair proves it's a tool: same speaker, same idea, same underlying wit, retuned for the room — evidence checked because rooms check, mechanisms added because councils ask why, the ask sharpened because formal rooms vote. SL.8.4's delivery craft and SL.8.5's visual-integration get taught on the way, with a slide small enough to be judged in one glance.
Students should already be able to
- Claim + evidence + mechanism (from the argument unit).
- The register concept (from Two Drafts of Goodbye, ideally).
- A proposal or finding each student cares about (brainstormed).
Where this shows up outside the classroom
Assessment plan
Formative — for feedback during the lesson
- Warm-up — the native register switch, made audible.
- Ledger circulation — buys named, survivors found.
- Build checks — cards, slides, and offramps inspected before delivery.
Summative — the graded evidence: The delivered talk on the four-line rubric plus the exit ticket; the audience flip and slide surgery rank as extension evidence.
The passage: “The Hallway Version”
An original register pair written for this lesson — the informal half.
¶1 THE HALLWAY VERSION — how Maya actually pitched her idea to two friends by the lockers, recorded (with permission) for this lesson.
¶2 Okay so you know how the vending machine line is insane after seventh period? I timed it — like eleven minutes on Tuesday. Eleven! You basically have to choose between a granola bar and being late.
🔒 The full text — 4 numbered paragraphs, plus the photocopy-ready handout — ships in the kit. See plans →
The passage: “The Podium Version — with one slide”
The formal half — same speaker, same proposal, rebuilt for the room.
🔒 This companion text — 4 numbered paragraphs — ships in the kit. See plans →
The task students work on
The class reads both versions, credits the hallway version's craft in its own room, then ledgers the podium upgrades: what got CHECKED (one Tuesday → four timed days), what got ADDED (the mechanism, the offramp), what got RAISED (register), what got KEPT (the granola bar, the voice), and what the slide does that the voice can't. Then every student builds a ninety-second talk of their own — claim, checked evidence, mechanism, one honest slide (sketched on paper), exact ask with offramp — and delivers it, timer visible, cards not scripts.
The register ledger — what changed between the rooms, and why.
| Element | Hallway version (HV ¶) | Podium version (PV ¶) | What the change buys |
|---|---|---|---|
| The evidence | eleven minutes, one Tuesday (¶2) | ||
| The precedent | 'my cousin's school… it worked' (¶3) | ||
| The why | (absent) | ||
| The ask | 'come vote for it or whatever' (¶4) | ||
| The visual | (none) |
Anticipated student strategies
Fair-first sets the frame (fit, not rank). Survivor tracking disarms the register fear. Objection pre-hearing converts analysis into the builder's checklist for their own talks.
- Fair-first reading. The student lists what the hallway version does WELL before touching the upgrades.
The stance that saves the lesson: register is fit, not rank. Share first, enforce kindly.
🔒 2 more anticipated strategies with select-and-sequence guidance are in the full lesson. See plans →
Lesson script
Collect the shifts: vocabulary, completeness, tone, evidence appearing ('because two group members were out'). The kicker: nobody taught them — register-switching is native. Name the lesson: today we do it ON PURPOSE, at podium scale, and learn what formal rooms actually buy with the formality.
Listen for: No — differently dressed, equally true. Register changes the packaging of honesty, not the honesty. Hold this; it kills the 'formal is fake' objection early.
Both versions are in the workbook and the handout. Establish fit-not-rank fast: the hallway pitch works in its room (shared grievance, vivid number, easy ask) and would be BIZARRE at the podium — just as PV ¶2 delivered by the lockers would get eye-rolls. Then the ledger, as teams: evidence (one Tuesday → four days + fluke-check), precedent (cousin → Ridgefield's printed minutes), the added mechanism, the sharpened ask with its offramp, the slide. Close with the survivor hunt: the granola bar appears in BOTH versions; the clipboard line has hallway-Maya's exact energy. Formal kept her voice.
- Fit, not rank — each version wins its own room.
- Every upgrade answers an objection the formal room would've raised.
Listen for: The room would think it anyway; saying it first converts an objection into credibility. Formal speech is doubt-management in advance.
Listen for: Laughter — over-formality is also a register error. SL.8.6 says 'when appropriate'; the skill is the dial, not the setting.
🔒 The remaining 4 steps — fully scripted with teacher-says lines, discourse questions, look-fors, and interventions — are in the full lesson. See plans →
Misconceptions and how to respond
- “Formal speech means big words.” The podium version's biggest word is 'bottlenecks.' Formality here is checked evidence, a mechanism, an exact ask — structure, not vocabulary. Big words without those are a costume on a wish.
- “The hallway version is the 'bad' example.” — the teacher response is in the full lesson.
- “More slides, more professional.” — the teacher response is in the full lesson.
- “Admitting doubt weakens a talk.” — the teacher response is in the full lesson.
🔒 Every misconception ships with a tested classroom response. See plans →
Scaffolded practice
The workbook follows gradual release rather than a page of blank prompts: 2 fully worked, 2 partially completed, then 4 independent.
- I doLiteral first — the ledger. For the evidence row and the ask row: both versions, cited, and what each upgrade buys.
🔒 7 more prompts across all three release tiers are in the full lesson. See plans →
Worked solutions and scaffolds for every prompt are in the downloadable kit, included with membership. See plans and pricing.
Exit ticket
- One ledger row from memory: element, both versions, what the upgrade buys.
🔒 2 more exit-ticket questions are in the full lesson. See plans →
Worked answers, the completed answer tables, and the scoring rubric are in the downloadable kit, included with membership. See plans and pricing.
Printable handouts in the kit
All handouts are in Printable_Handouts.pdf inside the kit download.
Materials and classroom resources
Student experience
Students enter through a low-floor prompt, build or sketch a model, test a strategy, revise their thinking, collaborate, and present a final solution. The task remains accessible while allowing for sophisticated reasoning.
Detailed facilitation notes
- Step 1: Read the hallway version — it's good! Name what makes it work by the lockers. Ask: “What do you notice?”, “What could you try next?”, and “How can you prove that?”
- Step 2: Read the podium version; ledger every upgrade: evidence, register, structure, the slide. Ask: “What do you notice?”, “What could you try next?”, and “How can you prove that?”
- Step 3: Build your own ninety-second talk: claim, evidence, one honest visual, the ask. Ask: “What do you notice?”, “What could you try next?”, and “How can you prove that?”
- Step 4: Deliver — timer running, eyes up, cards not scripts. Ask: “What do you notice?”, “What could you try next?”, and “How can you prove that?”
Differentiation and inclusion
Support: The register pair proves formal speech is a tool, not a personality; extend with the audience-flip redelivery and the slide-surgery challenge.
Language support: “I started by…”, “My model shows…”, and “I know my answer is reasonable because…”.
Extension: Require a second solution, alter a condition, or have students write a challenge for another group.
Accessibility: Manipulatives, enlarged visuals, oral response choices, partner reading, and reduced-copy student pages.
Assessment plan
Formative checks: Strategy choice, accuracy, representation, collaboration, and explanation.
End evidence: One ledger row (hallway → podium upgrade named) and the delivered talk, scored on the four-line rubric card.
Mastery: The student completes the task accurately and explains the strategy with limited prompting.