After School: CASE 3

“Test optional” does not mean the same thing everywhere

Admissions policy verification

1: STORY

What happened?

A student labels colleges with short phrases in a notes app. Test optional seems to settle testing in two words. Then a scholarship page adds a score deadline, and a checklist says official results come later. The list mixes three questions: whether to submit, for what purpose and through which process.

Source A lets applicants to College A choose whether SAT or ACT scores are considered. It does not say that submitted scores are ignored, nor does it describe scholarship requirements. A careful comparison needs a separate field for each purpose. Leaving a field marked unknown is more useful than silently importing a rule from a different college.

Source B says College B's admission process is test optional, but some merit scholarships require scores by December 1. Both statements can be true. The exception concerns a specific use of scores. The page excerpt does not identify the scholarships, application year or time zone, so the student still needs the full current instructions before making an actual submission plan.

Source C describes self-reporting by a deadline and official scores after enrollment if scores are submitted. It does not show whether a particular score would help. Record separate rules and research dates. Also identify whose checklist C is: the excerpt does not safely attach its instructions to both colleges.

2: EVIDENCE

Open the receipts.

These are NPW practice documents. Real-world sources are credited separately below.

SOURCE A — College A policy

NPW practice document. “Applicants may choose whether SAT/ACT scores are considered.”

What it establishes: Establishes optional consideration.

Question while reading: Does optional mean scores never matter?

SOURCE B — College B scholarship page

NPW practice document. “Admission is test optional; some merit scholarships require scores by Dec. 1.”

What it establishes: Shows different policy by purpose.

Question while reading: Which deadline/purpose changes the decision?

SOURCE C — Application checklist

NPW practice document. “If submitting scores, self-report by deadline; official score required after enrollment.”

What it establishes: Shows process, not whether submitting is strategically beneficial.

Question while reading: What decision remains the applicant’s?

A answers whether College A considers an applicant's submitted scores. B separates admission from certain scholarships at College B. Their similar admission labels do not establish identical rules for every purpose. Neither receipt supplies test-free or test-required policies, so those labels from the opening scenario cannot be assigned to a named college here.

C supplies a submission sequence but leaves the applicable institution and exact deadline unspecified. A table should show that limit instead of inventing a date. The date checked records the student's research activity; it is different from the application deadline. Admissions and scholarship offices can clarify their respective rules and application cycles.

3: PRACTICE

Try your read.

What is the most defensible reading of College B's policy?Scores may be unnecessary for admission but required for certain scholarships.An optional admission policy cancels all score deadlines on other pages.The December 1 scholarship deadline establishes the admission deadline too.

Check the reasoning

B distinguishes two purposes. The scholarship exception does not establish the admission deadline or identify every scholarship that requires scores.

FIRST READ: What did you think was happening before you opened the sources?LUPA FOUND THE ORIGINAL: Which source is closest to the event or rule? Why?ONDA CHECK: Who could experience the situation differently, and through what mechanism?WHAT ARE WE MISSING? Name one fact you cannot establish.

Responses stay in this browser. Use “Download my notes” to keep a copy.

4: TASK

Create a comparison table with date checked.

Create a comparison table with date checked. Include one clear claim or question, at least two source references, one statement of uncertainty/scope, the person or office with relevant authority, and one realistic next step.

Compare with a worked response

Practice sources checked: September 29, 2026.

Source	Admission	Other requirements	Verify next
A: College A	Score consideration optional	Scholarship rules unknown	Current cycle and deadlines
B: College B	Test optional	Some merit awards require scores by Dec. 1	Which awards and cycle
C: unidentified checklist	Not established	Self-report by deadline; official scores after enrollment	Institution and exact deadline

I would confirm the current rules with each admissions or scholarship office. This table does not predict whether submitting a score helps; C cannot yet be assigned to either college.

Before you close the case

What is one thing the strongest source establishes?
What can it not establish?
Who can decide or clarify the issue?
What changed between your first read and your read now?

One step further

Where else might an optional admission requirement become required for a separate benefit, placement process or program?

Take it into the real world.

article , English

Blurred ads and kids and teens: What to know

Federal Trade Commission , 2023-09

The FTC explains how advertising can blend into unboxings, influencer posts and games. Useful as evidence behind a classroom examination of creator recommendations.

Watch or read for this

What changes when a product appears in an ordinary-looking post instead of in a clearly marked ad?

Use it in a case

Students annotate three clearly fictional creator cards for product, sponsor, intended audience and evidence. Redesign one card so its advertising relationship is clear.

Make: An annotated ad card and a revised disclosure.

Public readable article; no video is claimed for this item.

Behind the Case: educator notes

45–55 min core, 80–100 min full

Teaching moves

Build the comparison with separate admission and scholarship columns. Require unknown in any cell that the receipts cannot support instead of rewarding a fully filled table.
Ask groups to locate every date and explain its function. Distinguish the research date, scholarship deadline and later score-verification step.
Have a partner audit whether checklist C was wrongly assigned to both colleges. Students should identify the missing source ownership before recommending a process.

Supports and response choices

Preview the three most important terms with examples.
Allow oral, typed, handwritten, or visual-map response when format is not the learning goal.
Keep the original source excerpt beside a plain-language annotation.
Keep formal English institutional terms visible beside translated explanation.
Advanced extension: compare the practice document with a real current local source.

Criterion	Beginning	Developing	Strong	Advanced
Accuracy & scope	Repeats claim.	Mostly accurate; scope incomplete.	Accurate and properly scoped.	Accurate, scoped, and explicit about uncertainty.
Evidence	Little or unrelated.	Relevant source, sometimes overstated.	Explains what sources establish.	Compares sources and limits.
Authority	Names actor without role.	Plausible authority.	Explains who decides and why.	Maps proposal, approval, implementation, review.
Communication	Vague or audience-mismatched.	Main point understandable.	Clear, specific, audience-aware.	Clear, accessible, precise, well-qualified.