Grade 12 · unit review

Review: Revise a Portfolio for Purpose and Reader

Apply identify a portfolio piece’s purpose, choose a revision priority, design an accessible publication element, write a revision reflection using supplied texts and original responses.

Bring the unit skills together

Use these 4 new cases to check your reasoning. Choices are temporary and are not saved to an account, sent to staff or recorded as school grades. Download your current review choices before leaving or reloading.

Unit review questions
1. Original excerpt A: Piece: This passage explains how the crease lets the joined panels change angle. Use excerpt A only. Which purpose is supported by the excerpt?
Need a hint?
  • One strong genre does not demonstrate every writing purpose.
  • A portfolio label is not a claim of accreditation.
2. Original excerpt B: A proposal demands longer testing but gives no current observation or example to motivate it. Use excerpt B only. Which priority addresses the stated problem?
Need a hint?
  • Fix missing reasoning before only polishing spelling.
  • A long revision is not always a better revision.
3. Original excerpt C: The diagram’s text description names panels and hinge and explains their connection. Use excerpt C only. Which element fits the stated reader need?
Need a hint?
  • A visual description should convey relevant information.
  • More headings do not fix an unexplained term.
4. Original excerpt D: Reflection: This draft is improved, with no named change or expected benefit. Use excerpt D only. Which reflection is supported by the excerpt?
Need a hint?
  • I defined hinge names a concrete revision.
  • A revision rationale is not a measured learning result.

The download contains your current choices and any checked feedback. Keep the separate transfer-task work in your own document; downloading its instructions does not mark it complete.

Use the skills in a new task

Make a short complete response demonstrating the four skills in this unit. Build a short paper portfolio with an original fictional experience narrative, mechanism explanation and supported trial proposal. Supplied fictional Trial Card P, section 1: a folded paper strip joins two cardboard panels; one hinge bent five times in one test; later durability was not tested. New story details may be invented and labeled fictional. Revise one passage in each piece for a different reader need. Include genre headings, a text description of the connection, a source note to P section 1 and a reflection naming each change and its expected benefit. Do not claim a tested reader outcome. Longer writing targets in optional extensions can be completed in a later session.

Work on paper or in your own document. Explain the choices you made.

  • State the supplied purpose and identify what readers should be able to understand or assess from the piece.
  • Identify the actual problem and make a targeted change. Compare versions to show what improves.
  • Use the reader’s stated need and provide a concrete text solution. Keep the content as accurate as the original.
  • Explain the change using an actual passage or structural choice. State expected reader benefit modestly, without claiming tested outcomes.
Compare with a model response

Narrative—A pause at the display: Jo arrived with the model. Earlier that morning she had hidden its tear; now she uncovered it. "I need to show the limit," she said. Later she understood that a clear limit was easier to defend than an invented promise. Revision: added Earlier that morning so the flashback is findable. Explanation—How the hinge moves: A hinge is a movable connection. This paper fold joins two panels and guides their changing angle. Text description: panel, folded strip, panel. Revision: defined hinge before the mechanism for beginners. Argument—Test longer: We should run a longer trial because the supplied Trial Card records only five bends; that count leaves later wear unknown. Revision: connected the count to the reason for testing. Source note: supplied fictional Trial Card P, section 1: five bends in one trial. The headings and descriptions support access. These expected benefits have not been tested with every reader.

A different response can also meet the criteria. Compare the evidence and reasoning, rather than copying the wording.