Many works of literature depict a conflict between the old and the new: Old worlds, old ways, or old values clash with newer ones… Choose a work of fiction in which there is marked tension between the old and the new. Then, in a well-written essay, analyze how the tension between the old and the new contributes to an interpretation of the work as a whole. Do not merely summarize the plot.

The open-ended FRQ3 is, admittedly, my favorite FRQ to grade because, despite the frequency of several titles (the big ones this year were The Great Gatsby, Fences, Their Eyes Were Watching God, Frankenstein, and Romeo and Juliet), this question allows students the freedom to choose a title about which they feel confident. While it offers common (and maybe some not-so-common) suggestions, students do not have to write within the confines of those suggestions, and some of the best essays I read over the course of seven days were essays on titles that did not make the cut. 

Addressing the Prompt

This year’s prompt asks students to analyze how the tension between the old and the new contributes to an interpretation of the work as a whole. The prompt itself is wide open to interpretation. Students could, and did, address a wide variety of old versus new: old generation versus new generation; old self versus new self; old social expectations versus new social expectations; even old editions versus new editions (looking at you, Mary Shelley). Most students found an outlet to explore that worked for the work of fiction they chose, and while some essays stretched the old-versus-new trope to the very extent of its possibilities, most students who put forth a genuine effort were able to score at least two points on Row B. According to the rubric, students needed to address the prompt with a defensible thesis, and support that thesis with multiple claims that include evidence and commentary. Higher-scoring essays had a clear, defensible thesis in their introduction that was specific as to the tension between what old and what new they were analyzing, and what their interpretation of the work as a whole was. These essays had at least two clear claims that were fully developed individually. Perhaps the trickiest part of a Q3 is that when students answer the prompt they need to clearly address BOTH things: (1) the prompt itself – old vs. new and (2) the “meaning of the work as a whole,” or an overall THEME of the text.  Students who did this successfully, both in their thesis, as well as throughout their body paragraphs, yielded the highest scores. 

Row B – Evidence, Commentary and Line of Reasoning

One of the most difficult things for students (and teachers) to understand in a Q3 is how to include analysis without “merely summarizing the plot,” as the prompt states, and how to develop the line of reasoning. While attempting to give evidence and commentary and NOT summarize the plot, some essays talk in circles and never fully make a point. What students should remember is they need to give specific details that relate directly to the prompt and then explain those details. Summarizing is when an essay vaguely refers to the whole novel. On the other hand, evidence is when an essay gives specific examples, and analysis is when the student explains these examples and relates them back to the prompt. 

For the other part of Row B, those who discussed the “meaning of the work as a whole,” otherwise known as theme, within their thesis statements did MUCH better overall at developing a clear line of reasoning, and therefore, a better essay as a whole. By stating the theme in the thesis and then naturally developing a progression of it throughout the paragraphs, this allows students to sharpen their line of reasoning, and hopefully their score in Row B. Essays that discussed the theme throughout almost always scored higher than those simply trying to make it all come together at the end. 

The Takeaway

For Q3 specifically, students need to focus more on using analysis to support their interpretation of the work as a whole and less on literary devices. Unlike Q1 and Q2, Q3 does not require the use of literary devices in student analysis, and more often than not, students attempting to do so lacked depth; however, sometimes, students who successfully integrated an elemental analysis, such as symbolism or allusion, as a part of their analysis scored higher when that connection was articulated with clear and meaningful analysis. While some students scored well by incorporating one device, the majority of students who scored all four points on Row B did not mention devices at all. They had multiple clear lines of reasoning that supported a defensible thesis, their evidence was specific and clearly supported the line of reasoning without being vague or having lengthy summaries, and their commentary fleshed out the analysis without necessitating implications on the part of the reader. Shorter essays that relied mostly on commentary, as insightful as it may have been, often provided little or no specific evidence to corroborate their analysis. 

The Unicorn: So Sophisticated

To earn the sophistication point, the essay needs to address the prompt with a defensible thesis, have specific evidence with analysis that supports a line of reasoning, and it must do so within a broader context, while exploring other tensions or complexities, accounting for an alternate interpretation, or while employing a style that is consistently vivid and persuasive. Students only need to accomplish one of those sophisticated qualities, and this prompt seemed really accessible to that possibility. As a reader, I awarded more sophistication points this year than I have since the adoption of this rubric. Most students who earned this point were able to successfully place their analysis into a broader context by analyzing the old and the new in the context of past and/or current social expectations. This particular prompt was quite amenable to Row C, and students earning this point wrote confidently within the scope of this. Other students who earned this point employed a style that was consistently vivid and persuasive, and some students earned this point even if they only earned three points on Row B. 

The Takeaway

The Unicorn this year was not as elusive as it has been in years past. Students who are natural writers found themselves opening to this prompt like a flower whose bloom was long-awaited. Students who may not be natural writers were still able to earn the point in the broader context category by incorporating that perspective into their essay. While a mere mention of this context is not enough to earn the point, you do not have to be a natural to expostulate effectively on this. Of course, not all prompts are created equally, and this one just happened to offer the Unicorn on a platter, but it still takes an intuitive student to fully integrate the broader context into the essay as a whole, and students who did this were aptly rewarded. 

Classroom Connections

Each year, the most important thing I take away from the Reading (besides the amazing connections I make with some of the best educators around) is how this will better inform my classroom instruction. In addition to my own thoughts as Table Leader, I also asked my table of teachers (shoutout to table 54!) to their thoughts. Here’s what we came up with for this year’s Q3:

* Old versus new texts – encourage a variety

The old can be great, and so can the new. What we noticed the most was students who REALLY knew the work the best were the most successful. We read some amazing essays on more traditional, canonical works, but we also read some excellent ones on newer works and even occasionally some YA titles. 

* Make sure students understand the prompt

As Jill mentioned, some students got a bit tripped up by trying to include literary devices in Q3, and while this can occasionally work, most students who went this route usually ended up with weak evidence due to lack of specific details. In addition, students should focus on 1 work, rather than multiple texts, in order to have enough analysis to score well. 

* Help students understand evidence versus summarizing

Students want to do well with this but often don’t know how.  Fellow AP teacher and friend, Roy Smith, shared with me how his students come up with 3-4 scenes they could write about in detail in order to avoid plot summary. Here is a document I created and use in my classroom with Lit. Circles to help them focus on specific scenes. Feel free to use or adapt to your needs!

* Row B is more bang for your buck than trying for Row C

Jill discussed how we are seeing more sophistication points awarded, which is great. But while this is true, there were also quite a few essays focused  more on trying to get a point in Row C than they were on having good quality evidence and analysis, resulting in lower scores in Row B.  In my classroom, the sophistication point is treated as extra credit. Once we get to the latter half of the year, I work with individual students on ideas of how to achieve this point in their writing, but I never make it something that all students need to achieve to be successful. I find it takes the pressure off and helps them be more successful writers overall.

* And finally, these students are amazing and so are their teachers!

Obviously, we see a large variety of writing over the thousands of essays we grade over the week, but to me, what stood out time and time again was that students were stepping up to the challenge and doing the work. I read through some outstanding essays that were smart, analytical, and eloquent–and were written in a timed, high pressure situation, no less! I can honestly say I came away from this year so proud of our students and this AP Lit. community, and I hope you feel the same. 

Final Thoughts

As readers, we always look to reward students for what they do well, and this year was no different. Whether they were writing on Crime and Punishment, Green Eggs and Ham, or House MD, students offered new and exciting insights that often earned a surprising reward on the rubric. Here’s to another year of preparing students to read, defend, analyze, and Unicorn hunt; there are more Unicorns out there than we once thought.

Photo by Glenn Carstens-Peters on Unsplash

Jill Massey, who began teaching in 2000, teaches senior English and AP Literature and Composition at East Wake Academy in Zebulon, NC, reading for all three prompts over the last nine years. She lives with Steve, her husband of 20 years, and her French bulldog, Dolly (@dollymaediva).

Sarah Soper has been teaching High School English in Michigan since 2005, with 17 years in AP Lit.  When she’s not grading essays or writing curriculum, you can find her cheering on her teenagers on a field or court somewhere or on Instagram @Mrs_Sarah_Soper