To be honest, I'd forgotten why I get so sucked into these things.
Why is this a writing standard?
Draw evidence from literary or informational texts to support analysis, reflection, and research.
And this a separate reading standard?
Cite the textual evidence that most strongly supports an analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text.
Aside from the redundancy, the reading standard is the one that asks you to write or speak, while the writing standard does not.
I don't understand why it is still exceptional for a critic of these standards to focus on the basic structural flaws, Robert Shepherd notwithstanding.
But you know today, all across America, students and teachers are being evaluated on these two separate standards as if they make some kind of sense. And they don't!