CUMULATIVE PORTFOLIO A public argument in two media Develop an argument about the supplied study-room pilot or a bounded issue you can investigate responsibly. Create a written proposal and a poster storyboard or speech script. Both must preserve the same evidence and uncertainty. Private submission is sufficient; publication and personal disclosure are optional.
Loading saved English work…
Portfolio workspace Choose your briefHigh-school scaffold College extension Write a 500–750-word proposal and a poster storyboard with a complete text equivalent. Use at least two accountable sources, address one strong objection and explain three revisions.
Build it in stages Collect the six lesson drafts and first transfer responses; retain source provenance and limitations. Frame a decision for a named audience. Separate what is known, assumed and valued. Draft the proposal and adaptation, preserving a baseline. Include a strong objection and an explicit tradeoff. Use a reader’s feedback or a documented self-review to test clarity, source fidelity and accessible presentation. Revise both media consistently. Submit the final pair, source dossier, revision explanation and independent transfer response. Do not claim human review merely because the presence checklist passes. Your lesson evidence These links open your original saved investigations. The portfolio download includes their passages, annotations, source cards, performance cues, drafts and first/latest transfer responses.
Draft and revise Portfolio draft 0 / 16,000 characters · length is a storage limit, not a quality score Preserve this draft before revision Revision commentary — explain one substantive change and one choice you retained 0 / 16,000 characters · length is a storage limit, not a quality score Companion artifact or manuscript continuation Use this space for the adaptation, second medium, exhibit captions or a continuation of a longer manuscript requested by your brief. Label the material clearly. It is saved and exported with the portfolio; this field has its own 16,000-character allowance. Keep an earlier companion version below before revising it.
Companion artifact / manuscript continuation 0 / 16,000 characters · length is a storage limit, not a quality score Preserve companion before revision Portfolio sources and references Keep new project sources here; your lesson source cards also remain in the downloadable portfolio. Record a source once where it belongs. Use the notes for a reference list, synthesis matrix and research-route declaration. A filled card does not verify a source or count as independent research.
Your source dossier Keep source wording, your paraphrase and your reasoning in separate fields. Locators are stored as plain text; the site does not fetch or verify them. Label fictional teaching sources as fictional.
Add source card (0/8) References, synthesis notes and research route 0 / 16,000 characters · length is a storage limit, not a quality score Review criteria Use these descriptions to seek feedback or conduct a labeled self-review. The site records your account; it cannot verify a reviewer’s identity or certify quality.
Evidence and scope Still developing: Counts, quotations or status claims exceed what the sources show.
Convincing evidence: Claims can be traced to sources; qualifications and missing evidence affect the recommendation.
Audience and argument Still developing: The requested action is unclear or objections are caricatured.
Convincing evidence: The audience can identify a feasible decision; a serious objection changes or tests the proposal.
Media and accessibility Still developing: Visual or verbal emphasis distorts the evidence or essential content lacks a text equivalent.
Convincing evidence: Both media preserve the core evidence, limits and action; presentation choices are explained and inspectable.
Revision and accountability Still developing: Changes are cosmetic or source errors remain unexplained.
Convincing evidence: The revision record identifies substantive changes, feedback and a credible correction process.
Review record — self-review or reader feedback, evidence from your draft, and next steps 0 / 16,000 characters · length is a storage limit, not a quality score Unfamiliar transfer task A campus publication wants to say a new refill station reduced bottle waste by half. Volunteers counted 40 bottles in one bin before installation and 20 afterward; collection intervals and event attendance differed. Write an alternative announcement and a reply to an editor who wants the stronger headline. Explain what further evidence would be necessary and how the claim should appear in a visual adaptation.
Your independent response 0 / 16,000 characters · length is a storage limit, not a quality score Save project transfer response Apply the same rubric to this new case. There is no automatic correctness verdict.
Assemble for review ○ Still needed — An artifact and saved transfer response for each of the 6 investigations ○ Still needed — At least 3 explained annotations drawn from 1 investigations ○ Still needed — At least 2 source cards with creator, locator, quotation, paraphrase, relevance and limitation across lessons and portfolio ○ Still needed — At least 2 lesson revisions with different baseline/current drafts and commentary ○ Still needed — A portfolio draft and preserved comparison draft ○ Still needed — A revision commentary and rubric-based review ○ Still needed — A saved response to the unfamiliar project passage These checks establish that evidence is present. They do not assess its accuracy, originality or quality. Skipping alone does not satisfy evidence requirements; saved artifacts and transfer responses are checked independently.
Mark portfolio submitted for review Download readable portfolio
Not submitted for review.
Return to the course · All saved English work
