Vardaman's chapter about his mother and the fish is one of the shortest in the book and one of the most discussed. Students find it strange, moving, and slightly unsettling. That makes it a natural anchor for an essay on figurative language and how a child makes sense of loss.

The challenge is that the chapter is so brief that students can say very little about it without repeating themselves. A strong essay uses it as a doorway to the rest of Vardaman's narration. Weak ones treat it as a puzzle with one right answer.

When grading, look at how the student connects the fish to earlier scenes. Vardaman's thinking follows a logic that is childlike but not random. Essays that trace it show real attention to the text.

It is also worth checking whether the student distinguishes metaphor from literal thought. Vardaman is not writing a poem; he is working through an event with the tools he has. That distinction changes what the figurative language means.

Criteria for Figurative Language Analysis

A good rubric for this kind of essay looks past naming devices. Identifying a metaphor earns little on its own. The credit comes from explaining what the comparison does and why it fits this character.

• Identifies the figurative language with an accurate label
• Explains what the comparison reveals about the speaker
• Connects the passage to events earlier in the novel
• Considers how a child's perspective shapes the language
• Avoids reducing the passage to a single decoded meaning

Feedback That Encourages Depth

Ask students what Vardaman gains from thinking this way. The question moves them from decoding to interpretation. It also encourages empathy, which tends to improve the writing.

Be alert to essays that treat the chapter as a joke or as pure absurdity. A comment that acknowledges the strangeness but asks about its emotional function can redirect them without shutting down their reaction.

Grading Short Passages Fairly

Essays on short passages can look thin even when the thinking is careful. Set length expectations carefully and grade the depth of analysis, not just the word count. A tight, well-argued page can outshine three pages of filler.

AI-assisted grading can check the structural pieces, like whether the essay includes a claim and follows quotations with commentary. You then decide whether the interpretation is convincing. That split works well for essays built on small, dense texts.

Extending the Unit

After the essay, ask students to compare Vardaman's language with another narrator's approach to grief. It shows how voice changes the way loss is expressed. Many find the second look more rewarding than the first.

This kind of follow-up also gives you a natural revision task. Students can return to their original essay with a wider view and improve it. That builds the habit of rereading that good analysis depends on.