Vermont standards alignment

• CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.11-12.6

  Covered

  Evaluate authors' differing points of view on the same historical event or issue by assessing the authors' claims, reasoning, and evidence.

  Covered by

  • Sugar — The Sweet Revolution
  • Chocolate — Food of the Gods
  • Guayusa & Kola Nut — Forest Wisdom

  • · Ep 4 · Whose Voice Tells the Story, Beckford (1790) against Equiano (1789) and Mary Prince (1831) on the same plantation world
  • · Ep 3 · Two Ways of Seeing a Bean
  • · Ep 5 · Two Ways of Knowing
  • · Ep 18 · Whose Voice

  Note: The strongest single alignment on this page. Ep 4 puts a planter's euphemism and passive voice directly against two first-person accounts by formerly enslaved writers, and teaches the student to assess each author's claims and evidence.

• CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RI.11-12.6

  Covered

  Determine an author's point of view or purpose in a text in which the rhetoric is particularly effective, analyzing how style and content contribute to the power, persuasiveness or beauty of the text.

  Covered by

  • Sugar — The Sweet Revolution

  • · Ep 4 · Blood-Sweetened Luxury
  • · Ep 15 · Torches of Freedom
  • · Ep 17 · Lin Zexu's Letter
  • · Ep 16 · Three Sentences, Three Policies

• CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.11-12.9

  Partially covered

  Integrate information from diverse sources, both primary and secondary, into a coherent understanding of an idea or event, noting discrepancies among sources.

  Covered by

  • Sugar — The Sweet Revolution

  • · Ep 10 · The Oral History That Survived (recovering Nathan “Nearest” Green's erased role)
  • · Ep 4 · Whose Voice Tells the Story
  • · 2 · How we know: reading a record the enslavers wrote
  • · 2 · The center of gravity: the claim, its sources, and its caveats
  • · 9 · Reading density: what a thick section and a thin one mean
  • · 8 · The Lula record, stated as dated fact
  • · Africa Before Colonization: The Documented Record

  What we do and don't cover: Full in the BVC Nathan Green lesson, where the documentary and oral records openly disagree. Partial across the catalog-wide claim: every one of those courses integrates cited primary and secondary sources into a coherent account (the standard's first clause), and the route, labor, and contested-scholarship courses also foreground where the sources disagree, but the narrative histories (bathing, hoodoo) integrate sources without making discrepancy-resolution a systematic exercise.

What we don't claim

A standards page is only worth reading if the omissions are honest too. We looked at these and left them out:

• Vermont has NO state-specific social-studies code — it adopted the national C3 Framework. This is the honest heart of Vermont's page. Vermont does not publish its own detailed social-studies standards or codes; in 2017 the Vermont State Board of Education adopted the national College, Career, and Civic Life (C3) Framework (NCSS, 2013) as Vermont's social-studies standards. So — unlike Rhode Island (whose SSHS.CVC.4.5 names Rhode Island and the Narragansett) or Michigan (whose C3.2 names state, local, and tribal governments) — there is NO Vermont-specific standard that names Vermont's own government. The C3 civics indicators we cite (D2.Civ.1, D2.Civ.5, D2.Civ.11) are GENERAL and reach “local” and “state” institutions, which is where the flagship's Vermont-structure lessons map; the depth on Vermont's 2-year terms, its majority-vote-or-the-Legislature-decides rule, its legislative judicial retention, Town Meeting Day, and its lack of a statewide initiative is in the course, not in any Vermont code. We do not invent Vermont codes to fill the gap.
• Mathematics — nothing. This catalog does no mathematics instruction, so it meets no Vermont Common Core mathematics standard.
• Science — one partial claim, via the shared NGSS file. Vermont was an NGSS Lead State and adopted the NGSS in 2013, so our one honest science claim — HS-ESS3-1, partial — comes through the shared NGSS mapping with the limit stated on the entry. There is no laboratory work, investigation, or modelling in this catalog, and we will not claim more.
• Tribal, national, and international levels named in the C3 civics indicators. D2.Civ.1, D2.Civ.5, D2.Civ.11, and D2.Civ.12 each name tribal, national, and/or international institutions and laws alongside local and state ones. Vermont Civics teaches Vermont's own state and local government (and the BVC/federal courses teach the national level), but the courses do not teach tribal governments or international institutions, so each of those indicators is claimed as PARTIAL with the gap called out on the entry, never stretched to full.
• The C3 Framework's Dimensions 1, 3, and 4 — deferred, not denied. This pass maps the C3 Framework's Dimension 2 disciplinary indicators (Civics, Economics, Geography, History), which decoded cleanly and were verified verbatim. Dimension 1 (Developing Questions and Planning Inquiries), Dimension 3 (Evaluating Sources and Using Evidence), and Dimension 4 (Communicating Conclusions and Taking Informed Action) — the inquiry arc the catalog's source-literacy and Coffee-project research would also map to — were not separately retrieved verbatim this pass. Our rule is fetch-and-verify-or-don't-cite, so they are deferred rather than mapped from memory.
• C3 Dimension 2 indicators we checked and did not claim. Within the disciplines we did map, the indicators the courses do not genuinely teach are not claimed: in Civics, D2.Civ.3 (constitutions, laws, and treaties on maintaining national/international order), D2.Civ.6 (relationships among governments, civil societies, and markets), D2.Civ.7-D2.Civ.10 (civic virtues, deliberative processes, and democratic principles as dispositions), and D2.Civ.13 (public policy in terms of intended/unintended outcomes) beyond the economic-policy angle already claimed under D2.Eco.7; in Economics, the personal-finance, national-economy, and monetary/fiscal-policy indicators (D2.Eco.1-2, D2.Eco.5-6, D2.Eco.8-13, D2.Eco.15) and comparative advantage by name (D2.Eco.14); in Geography, the geospatial-technology, settlement, and globalization indicators (D2.Geo.1-2, D2.Geo.5-8, D2.Geo.10-12); and in History, the historiography, sourcing, and argument indicators the courses touch but do not systematically teach (e.g., D2.His.1-5, D2.His.7-10, D2.His.12-13, D2.His.15, D2.His.17). The gap is in the catalog, not the framework.
• The AI-literacy ladder, the language courses, and Learning How to Learn — deferred, not denied. Vermont's closest frameworks for these (its educational-technology / computer-science and world-languages guidance) have not been fetched and verified yet. Our rule is fetch-or-don't-cite, so these courses carry no Vermont claims this pass.