Chapter function: Integrated assessment. Analyze a piece of public, policy, or service information and present recommendations, consolidating the systems developed across Chapters 11–14 without introducing new productive grammar.
This chapter is a project chapter, not a grammar chapter. Over the last four chapters you have built a set of tools for describing public and professional situations with precision: complex relative clauses (Chapter 11), the perfect and pluperfect systems (Chapter 12), the imperfect subjunctive and conditions (Chapter 13), and the passive voice alongside impersonal and passive se (Chapter 14). In this project, you will apply all four systems together. You will read and interpret a piece of public-facing information — a policy summary, a service notice, or a short media item — and produce a structured spoken and written analysis with recommendations. No new grammar is introduced here. The goal is integration: choosing the right structure from what you already control, not learning something new.
Mariana's consulting team has been asked to prepare a short public-facing analysis of a new municipal recycling program for a community newsletter. The client wants more than a summary: they want an assessment of what the announcement does well, what it leaves unclear, and what the city could do differently. This is exactly the kind of task professionals in policy, journalism, education, and public communication complete regularly — reading an official or media text critically and turning that reading into a clear, well-organized response.
Cliente: Necesitamos algo breve pero serio. No solo un resumen — quiero saber qué piensan ustedes.
Mariana: Entendido. Vamos a identificar lo que ya se ha decidido, lo que todavía no se ha aclarado, y lo que nosotros recomendaríamos si tuviéramos que ajustar el plan.
Cliente: Perfecto. Y si pueden, preséntenlo primero de manera oral en la próxima reunión, antes de mandarnos la versión escrita.
The following is an adapted instructional text written for this course, not an authentic published document.
Se comunica a los residentes que, a partir del próximo trimestre, será implementado un nuevo sistema de reciclaje en todo el municipio. El proyecto, cuyo objetivo principal es reducir la cantidad de residuos que se envían al vertedero municipal, fue aprobado por el concejo el mes pasado, después de que varios grupos comunitarios habían presentado propuestas similares durante más de un año. Se instalarán contenedores separados para papel, vidrio y plástico en cada barrio, y se espera que el nuevo sistema esté funcionando plenamente antes de fin de año. Sin embargo, el comunicado no especifica quién cubrirá el costo de los nuevos contenedores ni qué pasará en los barrios donde ya existían programas de reciclaje independientes. Tampoco se aclara si habrá sanciones para quienes no separen correctamente los residuos, un punto sobre el cual varios vecinos, con quienes se habló durante una reunión informal, expresaron preocupación.
This project chapter recycles vocabulary from Chapters 11–14 rather than introducing a new domain, as required for assessment chapters. The following items support the specific topic of the source text.
| Español | English | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| el residuo | waste, refuse | masc.; usually plural: los residuos |
| el vertedero | landfill, dump | masc.; institutional/public-services register |
| el contenedor | container, bin | masc.; recycles vocabulary pattern from earlier volumes |
| el concejo | (municipal) council | masc.; do not confuse with consejo (advice/council in other senses) |
| la sanción | penalty, sanction | fem.; formal/legal register |
| el vecino / la vecina | neighbor, resident | gendered noun; recycled from earlier volumes |
No new productive grammar system is introduced in this chapter. The following is a consolidated reference to the four systems you will integrate, each linked back to the chapter where it was activated.
El proyecto, cuyo objetivo principal es reducir los residuos, fue aprobado por el concejo.
Los vecinos, con quienes se habló durante una reunión informal, expresaron preocupación.
Un punto sobre el cual varios vecinos expresaron preocupación.
Varios grupos comunitarios habían presentado propuestas similares durante más de un año.
El comunicado no ha especificado quién cubrirá el costo.
Si el municipio quisiera evitar confusión, aclararía quién cubrirá el costo de los contenedores.
Recomendaríamos que el comunicado especificara un plazo claro para cada barrio.
El proyecto fue aprobado por el concejo el mes pasado.
Se instalarán contenedores separados en cada barrio.
Se comunica a los residentes que...
No se aclara si habrá sanciones.
Complete the project in four stages. Each stage builds directly on the one before it.
Stage 1 — Analytical outline
Before drafting full sentences, outline your analysis in four parts: (1) what has already been decided or approved; (2) what remains unclear or unspecified; (3) what concerns have been raised, and by whom; (4) two or three concrete recommendations. Write each part as a short list of ideas in Spanish, not yet as connected prose.
Stage 2 — Spoken presentation
Using your outline, prepare a two- to three-minute spoken presentation as if speaking to the client in the opening scenario. Structure it in the same four parts as your outline. Practice it aloud at least twice before your recorded or partner-observed delivery.
Stage 3 — Written draft
Write a structured written analysis (180–220 words) covering the same four parts. Use at least one complex relative clause, one present perfect or pluperfect verb form, one imperfect subjunctive or conditional sentence expressing a recommendation, and one passive or impersonal/passive se construction.
Stage 4 — Revision and oral defense
Revise your written draft using the editing checklist in Section 12. Then answer three follow-up questions from a partner, instructor, or your own self-check list (Section 9), responding in complete, well-formed Spanish sentences without reading directly from your script.
Exercise 15.1 — Identify the systems
Reread the source text in Section 4. For each of the following sentences, identify which of the four systems (relative clause, perfect/pluperfect, subjunctive/conditional, passive or impersonal se) it contains.
Exercise 15.2 — From description to recommendation
Rewrite each descriptive sentence as a recommendation using the imperfect subjunctive or conditional, as practiced in Chapter 13.
Exercise 15.3 — Choosing the right structure
For each situation, decide whether a true passive, passive se, impersonal se, or an active sentence with a named subject is most natural, and write the sentence.
Read the following follow-up questions aloud, pausing after each one for the learner to respond orally as part of Stage 4.
Exercise 15.4 — Listening and response
Listen to (or read aloud) each question above. Respond orally in a complete sentence before moving to the next question. Record yourself if possible and review your grammar and pronunciation afterward.
Exercise 15.5 — Deliver the presentation
Deliver your Stage 2 spoken presentation to a partner, instructor, or recording device. Use the four-part structure from Section 7 and integrate at least three of the four grammar systems reviewed in Section 6.
Solo-study alternative: Record your presentation, listen back, and note at least two places where you could have used a more precise structure (for example, replacing a simple active sentence with a passive or relative clause).
Reread the source text in Section 4 a second time, now focusing on inference rather than surface meaning.
Exercise 15.6 — Reading for inference
Task: Complete Stage 3 and Stage 4 from Section 7. Your final written analysis should be 180–220 words, organized in four clearly identifiable parts, and should integrate all four grammar systems reviewed in Section 6 at least once each.
Editing checklist
Public announcements about municipal or community programs commonly leave some operational details unresolved at the time of first publication, particularly around funding, enforcement, and timelines, and follow-up communication often fills these gaps as a program moves forward. Recognizing this pattern — rather than assuming an omission is always an oversight — helps a reader or analyst ask more precise, useful questions instead of simply criticizing a text for what it does not yet say. This pattern is common across many public-information contexts, though the pace and format of follow-up communication vary by institution, country, and local practice.
This project chapter integrated four systems developed across Unit III — complex relative clauses, the perfect and pluperfect systems, the imperfect subjunctive and conditional, and the passive voice with impersonal and passive se — through a realistic public-analysis task. You practiced moving from description to recommendation, choosing the most natural structure for each communicative purpose, and defending your analysis orally under follow-up questioning.
Exercise 15.7 — Cumulative self-check
Your completed Stage 2 (spoken presentation) and Stage 3–4 (written analysis, revised) together constitute the assessed performance task for this project chapter. Evaluate your own work, or have a partner or instructor evaluate it, using the following criteria.
| Criterion | What to look for |
|---|---|
| Task completion | All four analytical parts are present in both the spoken and written versions. |
| Grammar integration | All four target systems appear at least once, correctly formed. |
| Register | Consistent formal, professional register throughout, appropriate to a client-facing analysis. |
| Clarity and organization | The four-part structure is easy to follow for a listener or reader encountering it for the first time. |
| Interactional control | Follow-up questions in Stage 4 are answered in complete, accurate sentences without reading directly from the script. |
| System | Chapter | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Complex relative clauses | 11 | el proyecto, cuyo objetivo... |
| Perfect / pluperfect | 12 | habían presentado propuestas |
| Imperfect subjunctive / conditional | 13 | recomendaríamos que aclarara... |
| Passive / impersonal se | 14 | se instalarán contenedores |
1. Complex relative clause (cuyo) combined with a true passive (fue aprobado).
2. Pluperfect (habían presentado).
3. Passive se (contenedores as plural subject).
4. Complex relative clause with a preposition (sobre el cual).
1. Sería útil que el comunicado especificara quién cubrirá el costo.
2. Convendría que se aclarara si habrá sanciones.
3. Recomendaríamos que el proyecto mencionara los barrios con programas independientes.
1. No se especifica quién cubrirá el costo de los nuevos contenedores. (impersonal se)
2. El proyecto fue aprobado por el concejo. (true passive, agent named with por)
3. Se informa a los residentes por correo cada vez que comienza un nuevo programa. (impersonal se with personal direct object)
1. El programa, cuyo objetivo es reducir los residuos, fue aprobado el mes pasado.
2. Los vecinos habían presentado propuestas antes de la reunión del concejo.
3. Sería mejor que el municipio aclarara el costo. / El municipio debería aclarar el costo.
4. Se instalarán los contenedores.