Unit 07 · Research, Evidence & Media Literacy · Week 21
How do researchers create a new understanding from multiple sources?
A complete five-day investigation with a local source packet, explicit research instruction, printable evidence workspaces, and evaluator-reviewed mastery.
Weekly targets
Local research simulation · Rivermark Learning Annex
Decision: Rivermark must decide whether to convert an unused municipal annex into an evening study center for students ages 13–18.
Background brief: The annex has four rooms, basic internet wiring, and a bus stop nearby. Renovation, supervision, accessibility, transportation, operating cost, demand, and neighborhood impact all require investigation. No conclusion is supplied.
Evidence boundary: Rivermark and every document in this packet are course-created simulations. Students may cite them for this instructional case but must never present them as evidence about a real community.
Week 21 evidence packet
Prepared by licensed municipal engineer Tomas Adey, 20 March 2026. Estimates $186,000 for code, accessibility, lighting, and restroom work, with a ±20% early-design range. Staffing and yearly operation are excluded.
Facilitator notes from 22 students recruited through two school clubs. Participants frequently requested quiet space, device charging, and later bus service. The notes capture priorities of attendees but are not representative of every student.
Each entry must identify creator, title or document description, organization, date, document type, and local course packet. When data are incomplete, say so rather than inventing details.
Day 101 · Required lesson
Organize by ideas, not one paragraph per source.
Rows represent subquestions; columns represent sources. Record agreement, tension, distinct contribution, and limitation. Synthesis begins where sources meet.
Complete matrix rows for demand, access, cost, neighborhood impact, and missing evidence. Draft one cross-source inference.
Day 102 · Required lesson
Preserve meaning and make source ownership visible.
Quote only wording whose exact form matters. A paraphrase changes both wording and structure without changing meaning. Both require attribution and citation.
Write one accurate quotation integration and one genuine paraphrase from the packet. Highlight attribution, evidence, and your explanation.
Day 103 · Required lesson
Use warrants, counterevidence, and qualification.
A warrant explains why evidence supports a claim. Responsible writers narrow conclusions when the evidence is partial or conflicting.
Draft a claim about feasibility, a warrant, the strongest counterevidence, and a qualified revised claim.
Day 104 · Required lesson
Compose a report whose structure follows the inquiry.
Use an introduction with question and provisional thesis; sections organized by subquestion; source synthesis; limitations; conclusion; and annotated bibliography.
Draft 900–1,200 words. Annotate each bibliography entry with usefulness, limitation, and the claim it can responsibly support.
Day 105 · Required lesson
Check accuracy before style and completion.
Verify every factual statement against the packet, every borrowed idea against attribution, and every conclusion against the stated limitations.
Submit report, synthesis matrix, citation audit, revision note, and a 150–200 word defense explaining the strongest conclusion and most important uncertainty.
Weekly mastery assessment
Submit the named product, five daily responses, source notes, and final reflection. A button press or draft submission does not establish mastery.
| Criterion | 2 · Secure | 1 · Developing | 0 · Insufficient |
|---|---|---|---|
| Research concept accuracy | Specific, accurate and complete | Partly demonstrated; revision required | Missing, unsupported or inaccurate |
| Source use and attribution | Specific, accurate and complete | Partly demonstrated; revision required | Missing, unsupported or inaccurate |
| Evidence-to-claim reasoning | Specific, accurate and complete | Partly demonstrated; revision required | Missing, unsupported or inaccurate |
| Limitations and ethical disclosure | Specific, accurate and complete | Partly demonstrated; revision required | Missing, unsupported or inaccurate |
| Organization, revision and reflection | Specific, accurate and complete | Partly demonstrated; revision required | Missing, unsupported or inaccurate |
Mastery: 8/10 after evaluator review. Below 8/10, revise the lowest criterion and resubmit. Automated tools may organize evidence but may not award the score.
Earlier notes remain in their original fields. Bring revisions and tool evidence here.