English Language Arts · 11th Grade

Active learning ideas

Jack London and the Call of the Wild

Active learning works for this topic because London’s Naturalist argument hinges on subtle patterns in decision-making and environment. Students need to trace cause and effect in real time, not just absorb abstract themes. The activities move the analysis off the page and into discussion and collaboration, where misconceptions about instinct and intellect become visible and correctable.

• Common Core State Standards
• CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RL.11-12.1
• CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RL.11-12.3

• 25–45 min
• Pairs → Whole Class
• 3 activities

Activity 01

• Think-Pair-Share
• 25 min · Pairs

Think-Pair-Share: Instinct vs. Intellect

Pairs list everything the dog does in the story and everything the man does, then evaluate which decisions prove more effective for survival. Partners discuss what London seems to be arguing about the relationship between instinct and abstract thought, then share their conclusions with the class.

Evaluate the role of instinct versus intellect in survival narratives.

Facilitation Tip

During the Think-Pair-Share, circulate and listen for students who reduce the man’s failure to one error; prepare to redirect them to the pattern of decisions.

What to look for

Pose the question: 'In 'To Build a Fire,' which is more crucial for survival, instinct or intellect? Why?' Have students use specific textual examples to support their claims, citing London's depiction of the man and the dog.

• Understand
• Apply
• Analyze
• Self-Awareness
• Relationship Skills

Activity 02

• Inquiry Circle
• 45 min · Small Groups

Inquiry Circle: London vs. Thoreau on Nature

Small groups each receive a passage from Thoreau's 'Walden' and a comparable passage from 'To Build a Fire' describing the same natural phenomenon. Groups identify the philosophical assumptions embedded in each passage and present their comparison to the class.

Compare London's depiction of nature with that of Romantic writers.

Facilitation Tip

For the Collaborative Investigation, assign each group a specific passage from both London and Thoreau so they must ground their comparison in concrete language.

What to look for

Provide students with a short passage from 'To Build a Fire' that describes a character's decision. Ask them to identify whether the decision is driven by intellect or instinct and to explain how this choice aligns with Naturalist principles.

• Analyze
• Evaluate
• Create
• Self-Management
• Self-Awareness

Activity 03

• Gallery Walk
• 30 min · Whole Class

Gallery Walk: Predicting Naturalist Outcomes

Post eight to ten decision points from the story as brief summaries. Students annotate each with a prediction of consequence based on Naturalist principles, then in a debrief compare their predictions to what London wrote and discuss whether Naturalism has a logic that makes outcomes predictable.

Predict the outcome of a character's choices based on Naturalist principles.

Facilitation Tip

In the Gallery Walk, place a large timeline on the wall where students can pin their predictions and rationale, creating a visible chain of cause and effect.

What to look for

Students write a brief paragraph comparing London's view of nature to that of a Romantic writer (e.g., Emerson). They then exchange paragraphs and assess for: 1) Clear identification of a key difference, 2) Use of specific textual reference (even if brief), and 3) Adherence to Naturalist principles in describing London's nature.

• Understand
• Apply
• Analyze
• Create
• Relationship Skills
• Social Awareness

A few notes on teaching this unit

Experienced teachers approach this topic by making the Naturalist argument tangible. Avoid framing the dog as ‘smarter’ or the man as ‘stupid’ — instead, focus on the reliability of inherited responses versus abstract reasoning under pressure. Research shows students grasp Naturalism better when they map patterns visually and discuss them aloud before writing. Use cold reads of short decision passages to build confidence in identifying instinct versus intellect before tackling the full story.

By the end of these activities, students will articulate how London builds his argument through accumulated decisions rather than a single mistake. They will compare Naturalist and Romantic views of nature using textual evidence. They will also identify instinct and intellect in action, explaining why instinct proves more reliable in the Yukon’s demands.

---

Watch Out for These Misconceptions

• During Think-Pair-Share: Instinct vs. Intellect, watch for students who claim the man dies because of one mistake like ‘he built the fire under the spruce tree.’

  Redirect them to the graphic organizer where they listed every decision in sequence; prompt them to notice how each small, reasonable choice cumulatively misreads the environment.

• During Collaborative Investigation: London vs. Thoreau on Nature, watch for students who label the dog as ‘smarter than the man’ or claim the dog understands the situation.

  Ask them to reread the description of the dog’s behavior: it shivers, it waits, it does not ‘know’ why — it simply responds to cold. Have them revise their notes to clarify instinct as inherited adaptation, not intelligence.

---

Methods used in this brief

• Think-Pair-Share
• Inquiry Circle
• Gallery Walk