Few middle grade novels sit as comfortably between English and science as Callum McBride. Its author graduated in geology and spent several years teaching science, and readers have noted that the book uses plenty of scientific and technical vocabulary. That blend gives teachers a legitimate reason to design writing tasks that serve both subjects at once.

A cross-curricular unit works best when each subject has a clear role. English focuses on analysis, argument, and style, while science contributes accurate background about animal behavior, the brain, or how researchers test unusual claims. Agreeing on roles in advance prevents overlap and makes it easier to explain the unit to students and families.

The pairing also helps students see writing as a tool for thinking in every subject. A student who explains how a fictional ability would have to work, and then evaluates whether it is plausible, practices the same reasoning used in lab reports. These shared habits make writing feel useful rather than like an English-only chore.

Writing tasks that serve both subjects

Good tasks ask for both evidence from the novel and evidence from science. A student might write an explanatory essay on how real animals sense and respond to their environment, then connect that knowledge to a scene in which Callum is inside an animal's mind. The result shows comprehension of the book and understanding of the underlying science.

• Write a science-fiction critique that evaluates how believable the novel's central ability is
• Explain how one animal's real senses would shape what Callum experiences
• Create a lab-style report proposing how a fictional ability could be tested
• Write a short explanatory article on a technical term found in the novel
• Compare how fiction and nonfiction describe the same scientific idea

Assessing with shared rubrics

A shared rubric clarifies who grades what. Rows for argument, organization, and style belong to English, while rows for accuracy, use of scientific vocabulary, and quality of evidence belong to science. Students see two sets of expectations on one page and understand that good writing includes both.

Weight the rows to reflect the goals of the unit. If the main purpose is to strengthen explanatory writing, accuracy of content might carry less weight than clarity and structure. Being transparent about weights avoids the frustration that arises when students feel they lost points for something they did not realize mattered.

Handling technical vocabulary

Reviewers have observed that the novel can be challenging because of its technical language, so vocabulary support is part of the plan. Pre-teach a short list of terms and ask students to use them in context in their writing. Using a term correctly in a sentence is stronger evidence of understanding than copying a definition.

Students who struggle with reading may need extra supports like glossaries or paired reading. These scaffolds should be available without stigma, and the writing task should be adjusted only in length or format, not in rigor. Keeping expectations high while offering access is what makes the unit fair to every learner.

Feedback across two classrooms

When two teachers share a writing task, feedback can become inconsistent or overwhelming. Agree on who comments on what, and limit each student to a manageable number of priorities. A student who receives conflicting advice from two teachers often responds by changing nothing.

Shared digital tools can help, since both teachers can see the same rubric and comments. AI-assisted grading that applies a common rubric to all papers gives both teachers a consistent starting point to review. The final judgment remains theirs, but the shared baseline reduces duplicate effort and keeps messages aligned.