② Deep · Connect & organize

Phase 2 — Connect & organize

Now students take the facts from Phase 1 and relate them: mapping the competing interests, questioning real founding documents, and building an argument from evidence. Deep learning is where knowledge becomes usable — the bridge to the problem.

🎯 By the end of Phase 2 students can organize the Convention's competing interests, read a primary source for its point of view, and defend a claim with evidence — the exact moves the problem will demand.

Concept mapping · d 0.64§113.20(c)(3), (c)(15)(A)

1 · Concept map of competing interests

Build a class concept map with “Who gets power — and how do we keep it fair?” in the center. Cluster the three tensions the delegates actually faced, then draw arrows to the principle each tension pulls on (federalism, representation, separation of powers).

Tension	One side wants…	The other side wants…
Large vs. small states	votes by population (Virginia Plan)	one vote per state (New Jersey Plan)
North vs. South	count enslaved people for taxes, not representation	count enslaved people for representation
Strong vs. limited national government	a national government able to tax and defend the union	guardrails so no government or leader grows too powerful

Talk move: draw an arrow from any tension to the principle it tests (federalism, checks & balances, representation) and say the sentence aloud. This rehearses §113.20(c)(15)(A).

Elaboration & organization · d 0.72§113.20(c)(15)(B), (c)(29)(A,B,E)

2 · Primary-source analysis — read for point of view

Give pairs one or two short, district-approved excerpts — for example the Preamble to the Constitution (“We the People… in Order to form a more perfect Union”) and a short passage from the Federalist essays arguing for the new framework. Use a four-question source routine:

Source: Who wrote this, when, and why?
Observe: What does it actually say? (facts only)
Point of view: What framework does the writer want — and whose interests does it serve?
Question: What does it make you want to find out?

Credibility & frame check (c)(29)(B): is this the official document, an argument for it, or a later opinion about it? How can we tell?

📚 Primary sources & analysis tools: National Constitution Center · Preamble ↗ · National Archives · Constitution transcript ↗ · National Constitution Center · Historic Document Library (Federalist & more) ↗ · LoC · Getting Started with Primary Sources ↗ · DocsTeach · The Constitution documents ↗

Argumentation · d 0.86§113.20(c)(21), (c)(29)(G,H)

3 · Structured argument — a warm-up claim

A low-stakes rehearsal of the reasoning the problem needs. Pose one contested question and have students take a side with evidence, using a claim–evidence–reasoning frame. Then have them steelman the other side — state its strongest point fairly (civil discourse, §113.20(c)(21)).

Warm-up question: How should states be represented in the new government — by population, or equally? Give your claim, one piece of evidence from Phase 1 or the sources, and your reasoning.

Sentence stems (ELPS support): “My claim is ______.” · “My evidence is ______.” · “This matters because ______.” · “The strongest point on the other side is ______, and here is why it deserves an answer: ______.”

Note: keep this a practice argument about the general question. Building an actual framework the states could accept belongs in Phase 3, where students hold delegate roles.

✅ Deep check before the problem: can students name the three competing tensions, read one founding source for its point of view, and state a claim with evidence and fairly state the other side? Those abilities are exactly what Phase 3 will ask them to transfer.

‹ Phase 1 — Surface Phase 3 — Transfer ›

Aligned to (not reproduced from) 19 TAC Ch.113 §113.20; effect sizes from Visible Learning MetaX. This scenario dramatizes the real debates of the 1787 Constitutional Convention.