Multi-Source Reading
In this unit, students read two or more sources on the same topic, compare perspectives, track claims, and evaluate evidence quality. Students use structured note-taking to prepare for synthesis writing.
SWBAT (Objectives)
- Identify each source’s main claim, purpose, and intended audience.
- Compare perspectives: points of agreement, disagreement, and missing information.
- Track claims and support (data, examples, expert opinion, reasoning).
- Evaluate evidence quality (relevance, reliability, bias, limitations).
- Take structured notes to prepare for synthesis writing and discussion.
Lesson Setup (Sources + Topic)
- News analysis or feature article
- Research summary or report excerpt
- Opinion piece with clear stance
- Policy brief or organizational statement
AI in education · remote work · public transit funding · social media regulation · renewable energy policy
Provide 2–3 short texts (350–700 words each) with different perspectives. Include titles, dates, and author/organization.
Reading Strategy (3 Passes)
- Title → topic + angle
- Intro → main claim
- Headings → structure
- Conclusion → recommendation/implication
- Underline claims (what the author says is true)
- Circle evidence (data/examples/expert quotes)
- Note hedging (“may”, “suggests”, “likely”)
- What is missing?
- What assumptions are made?
- Where do sources agree/disagree?
- Which evidence is strongest?
Claim Tracking (What is being argued?)
Evidence: ____________________
Type: data / example / expert / logic
Confidence: strong / medium / weak
Notes: assumptions / missing info
suggests · indicates · argues · claims · implies · concludes · recommends · warns · highlights
If you see one of these verbs, it’s likely a claim is nearby.
Evaluate Evidence (Quality Checklist)
Does the evidence directly support the claim, or is it only loosely related?
Who is the author/organization? What is their expertise? Is the source reputable?
Is there enough evidence, or is it one example? Is it cherry-picked?
What is not measured? Who benefits from the argument? What assumptions are hidden?
Note-Taking (Compare Sources Fast)
Source B: claim / evidence / stance / limitations
Agreement: ___________________________
Disagreement: ________________________
Missing info: _________________________
My evaluation: ________________________
C=claim · E=evidence · R=reasoning · L=limitation · B=bias risk · Q=quality (1–5)
Example: “C + E + L (Q=4)” = clear claim, good evidence, stated limitation.
Final Output (Speaking or Written)
Summarize both sources: main claim + strongest evidence + one limitation. End with your evaluation.
Create a one-page “synthesis sheet” (claims, evidence quality, agreement/disagreement, your conclusion). This prepares students for Unit 6 writing/speaking tasks.
- Clear comparison (not two separate summaries)
- Specific evidence (not “the author says…”)
- One thoughtful evaluation sentence
- Accurate stance language (may, suggests, appears)