Because it is less wide-ranging, Exercise B, which asks students to summarize the events in the prologue in an initial paragraph and then speculate briefly about what they expect to happen in the scenes to come, offers a more "doable" task than Exercise A.  A summary asks only for connections between the text's language and the student's perception of how that language constructs reality.  Consequently, building a paragraph based on a matrix of information about the prologue should be fairly straightforward.

     If students have prepared a matrix for events such as suggested in Phase 3 above, the relationship between that matrix and the related paragraph might look something like this:

die Person	Wie sie Beckmann beschreibt
Beerdigungsunternehmer, rülpst mehere Male	hat Soldatenmantel an, hat eine Bürste auf dem Kopf
Elbe (ein Fluß in Hamburg), keine junge Frau, stinkt nach Öl und Fisch	sechs Jahre Soldat, hat ein schlimmes Bein

    In dieser Szene rülpst ein Berrdigungsunternehmer mehere Male.  Er sieht einen Soldaten.  Der Soldat springt in die Elbe.  Die Elbe ist eine Frau und spricht mit ihm. . . .

    Once the student recapitulates the fundamental information in one paragraph, an additional one will be needed to speculate about future events.  The use of werden plus an appropriate verb infinitive will be the only additional information necessary.  Statements such as "Der Beerdigungsunternehmer wird weiter rülpsen, Das Mädchen wird mit Beckmann reden" necessitate minimal changes in word order and word choice.  Thus, the virtue of this assignment over the previous sample for Phase 4, Exercise A, is its developmental clarity.  It asks for one new language task at a time.

     What the assignment lacks is the step toward interpretation and innovation that may be desirable for some classes in Phase 4.  This assignment "plays it safe" with its request for reiteration and very modest speculation.  As such, it may be insufficiently challenging for some classes -- those with advanced linguistic skills or extensive practice in analytical and imaginative writing in English.  For such classes, the teacher might introduce a new genre that forces the reader to assume a stance toward the play.  With assignments that ask students to assume roles vis-à-vis the play, they must utilize the language of Phase 3 in ways that produce new viewpoints that speak to the German audience (culture standards).

     With the assignment, "Schreiben Sie eine Kioskwerbung für Draußen vor der Tür, for example, the engagement of a presumed audience, an new addressee, is introduced.  Writing an advertisement requires a different kind of paragraph than that written for the Exercise B assignment ("In dieser Szene rülpst ein Beerdigungsunternehmer mehere Male.  Er sieht einen Soldaten.  Der Soldat springt in die Elbe.  Die Elbe ist eine Frau und spricht mit ihm. . . .").  As an ad, the text might change to something like "Deutschland wie wir es kennen: Die Flüße stinken nach Fisch und Öl.  Der Berdigungsunternehmer mit zu viel Arbeit.  Der Soldat mit zu wenig.  Die Frau ohne Mann. . . ."

     A similar shift in the position of the writer, to a genre with very different objectives, might be accomplished if the teacher asks the student for a critical review (communities standards).  For example: "Das Jahr ist 1947.  Sie sind ein Journalist für eine deutsche Zeitung.  Kritisieren Sie das Stück."  A typical answer might read as follows: "Was suchen wir heute im Theater?  Deutschland wie wir es kennen?  Wollen wir stinkende Flüße, rülpsende Berdigungsunternehmer, und hinkende Soldaten sehen?  Ich glaube nein. . . ."

    The key to success in all of the examples above is the minimal step from that of a neutral summarizer of content to that of a unambiguous voice vis-à-vis the text.  Such voices are encouraged with an assignment that asks students to use the language of Draußen vor der Tür to convince others about what the play says or does not say to them.