Arizona standards alignment

• 9-10.RI.6

  Covered

  Determine an author's point of view or purpose in a text and analyze how an author uses rhetoric to advance that point of view or purpose.

  Covered by

  • Sugar — The Sweet Revolution

  • · Ep 4 · Blood-Sweetened Luxury (the abolitionist sugar boycott)
  • · Ep 8 · Selling Prohibition
  • · Ep 15 · Torches of Freedom
  • · Ep 17 · Lin Zexu's Letter (using Britain's own values against its opium policy)

• 9-10.RI.7

  Partially covered

  Analyze various accounts of a subject told in different mediums (e.g., a person's life story in both print and multimedia), determining which details are emphasized in each account.

  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
  • · Ep 10 · The Oral History That Survived (recovering Nathan “Nearest” Green's erased role)

  What we do and don't cover: Partial: the accounts-against-accounts work is strong (Beckford against Equiano and Prince; the written record against the oral record on Nathan Green — genuinely different mediums). Multimedia accounts in the standard's modern sense are not analyzed.

• 11-12.RI.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 effectiveness 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

• 11-12.RI.8

  Covered

  Delineate and evaluate the rhetorical effectiveness of the authors' reasoning, premises, purpose, and argument in seminal U.S. and world texts.

  Covered by

  • Sugar — The Sweet Revolution

  • · Ep 4 · Blood-Sweetened Luxury (the abolitionist sugar boycott)
  • · Ep 8 · Selling Prohibition
  • · Ep 15 · Torches of Freedom
  • · Ep 17 · Lin Zexu's Letter (using Britain's own values against its opium policy)
  • · Ep 15 · Doubt Is Our Product
  • · Ep 19 · Peer Review Versus Press Release
  • · Ep 20 · The Ban Against the Evidence (the UK banning khat against its own scientific advice)

  Note: The primary texts worked are seminal and rhetorical by design: the abolitionist sugar-boycott pamphlets, Lin Zexu's letter to Queen Victoria, Torches of Freedom, Selling Prohibition.

• 11-12.RI.7

  Partially covered

  Integrate and evaluate multiple sources of information presented in different media or formats (e.g., visually, quantitatively) as well as in print in order to address a question or solve a problem.

  Covered by

  • Coffee — The Daily Global Connection

  • · Ep 19 · Peer Review Versus Press Release
  • · Every course's Sources bibliography, with per-claim verification
  • · Ep 1 · Assignment, all four options are 2-3 week research projects requiring synthesis across sources

  What we do and don't cover: Partial: the curriculum models multi-source evaluation constantly and publishes a checkable bibliography, but the student is required to perform it only in the Coffee episode's project.

• 11-12.SL.2

  Partially covered

  Integrate multiple sources of information presented in diverse media and formats in order to make informed decisions and propose solutions, while evaluating the credibility and accuracy of each source and noting any discrepancies.

  Covered by

  • Coffee — The Daily Global Connection

  • · Ep 19 · Peer Review Versus Press Release
  • · Every course's Sources bibliography, with per-claim verification
  • · Ep 10 · The Oral History That Survived (recovering Nathan “Nearest” Green's erased role)

  What we do and don't cover: Partial: 'noting any discrepancies' is the Nathan Green lesson's whole point — the documentary and oral records disagree, and the episode teaches how to resolve that. But this is a speaking-and-listening standard, and the discussion half happens in a classroom we don't run.

• 11-12.W.1

  Partially covered

  Write arguments to support claims in an analysis of substantive topics or texts, using valid reasoning and relevant and sufficient evidence.

  Covered by

  • Coffee — The Daily Global Connection

  • · Ep 1 · Assignment, Option D, a 1,200-1,500 word research paper with a required counterargument section

  What we do and don't cover: Partial: the Coffee project's Option D asks for exactly this (a thesis, primary sources, and a required counterargument section). It is one optional project in one episode — not a writing programme. Transcribed from the standard's lead sentence; sub-parts a-e detail the same expectations.

• 11-12.W.7

  Partially covered

  Conduct short as well as more sustained research projects to answer a question (including a self-generated question) or solve a problem; narrow or broaden the inquiry when appropriate; synthesize multiple sources on the subject, demonstrating understanding of the subject under investigation.

  Covered by

  • Coffee — The Daily Global Connection

  • · Ep 1 · Assignment, all four options are 2-3 week research projects requiring synthesis across sources

  What we do and don't cover: Partial: only the Coffee episode currently ships a graded 2-3 week research project. Where it runs, it meets this standard squarely.

• 11-12.W.8

  Partially covered

  Gather relevant information from multiple authoritative print and digital sources, using advanced searches effectively; assess the strengths and limitations of each source in terms of the task, purpose, and audience; integrate information into the text selectively to maintain the flow of ideas, avoiding plagiarism and overreliance on any one source and following a standard format for citation.

  Covered by

  • Coffee — The Daily Global Connection

  • · Ep 1 · Assignment, Option B, 3+ peer-reviewed sources and an APA bibliography
  • · Ep 1 · Assignment, Option C, interview ethics: informed consent, right to review
  • · Ep 1 · Assignment, Option B, climate-vulnerability report, 3+ peer-reviewed sources, APA bibliography
  • · Ep 1 · Assignment, Option D, primary-source research paper with an APA bibliography

  What we do and don't cover: Partial, same reason: the project demands authoritative sources and APA citation, but only the Coffee episode currently ships one.

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:

• Mathematics — nothing. This catalog does no mathematics instruction, so it meets no Arizona mathematics standard.
• Science — two partial claims, no more. Arizona is not an NGSS state; we verified that against the 2018 Arizona Science Standards document itself rather than assuming it. There is no laboratory work, no investigation, and no modelling in this catalog, so we claim exactly two Earth-science standards, partially, and explain the limit on each entry.
• HS.C2.5 — the Arizona-rights comparison our Arizona course does not make. HS.C2.5 asks students to compare the rights guaranteed in the Arizona Constitution to those in the U.S. Constitution. Arizona Civics teaches Arizona's structure and direct democracy, not a clause-by-clause rights comparison — so despite being our Arizona flagship, it does not meet this standard and we do not claim it. HS.C2.6 (contributions of individuals and groups, including Arizonans) is likewise not taught.
• Most of the Civics and Economics anchors we checked. HS.C1.1-C1.4 (civic virtues and deliberative processes as named content), HS.C2.2, HS.C3.3 (parties, interest groups, and media's impact on institutions — our media-literacy course is consumer protection, not political media analysis), HS.C3.4 (international order), HS.C4.4-C4.7 (public-policy decision analysis and in-classroom deliberation), all of HS.E1 (financial literacy), HS.E2 (scarcity and incentives as named concepts), HS.E3.1/E3.3/E3.4, HS.E4 (the domestic economy, fiscal and monetary policy), and HS.E5.2/E5.4 — the courses do not genuinely teach these, so we do not claim them.
• Arizona's Economics anchors have no economic-systems standard. The curriculum contrasts traditional (reciprocity) and market economies directly and at length, but Arizona's high-school Economics anchors (HS.E1-E5) contain no economic-systems standard for it to meet — the closest homes are financial literacy and market mechanics. The gap is in the standards, not the lessons.
• Arizona's 2016 ELA standards have no media-bias standard. Indiana's 9-10.CC.8 and 11-12.CC.8 (analyze bias in media; analyze media's impact on the public) are where our media-literacy work maps. Arizona's 2016 ELA standards contain no comparable standard — we searched the 9-10 and 11-12 documents. The closest, 11-12.SL.2, is about integrating sources, and we claim it for what it is. The gap is in the standards, not the lessons.
• PE Standard 2 — no honest home for the sport-strategy courses. Arizona's high-school Standard 2 outcomes are specific: dance forms (S2.H1.L1, S2.H4), biomechanics vocabulary (S2.H2), practice planning (S2.H3), and the historical role of games in society (S2.H1.L2). None of them is the concepts-strategies-tactics knowledge our golf, tennis, football, pickleball, lacrosse, and croquet courses teach in depth, so — unlike Indiana, whose HSL1.2.1.A names exactly that — Arizona gets no Standard 2 claim. And every outcome that asks a student to DEMONSTRATE motor skill or participate is out of reach of an online course; we claim knowledge-side outcomes only.
• Health strands beyond 1, 3, and 6. Strand 2 (analyzing influences), Strand 4 (interpersonal communication), Strand 5 (decision-making), Strand 7 (practicing health behaviors, as observed practice), and Strand 8 (advocacy) were checked against the Grades 9-12 performance objectives and are not genuinely taught by these courses. Strand 6 Concept 2 PO 3 (a long-term personal health plan) was considered and rejected: the blueprint is a 90-day plan, and we will not stretch '90 days' into 'long-term'.
• The AI-literacy ladder, the language courses, and Learning How to Learn — deferred, not denied. Arizona's closest frameworks (Computer Science, World and Native Languages, Educational Technology) have not been fetched and verified yet. Our rule is fetch-or-don't-cite, so these courses carry no Arizona claims this pass.