Choosing a Source for a Claim About Reading
A student argues in an essay that "silent reading comprehension improves when students choose their own texts." They have four candidate sources: (A) a blog post by a teacher describing success with free-choice reading in one class; (B) a peer-reviewed study of 300 middle schoolers comparing assigned and self-selected texts on a standardized comprehension test; (C) a publisher's report promoting its free-choice reading program; (D) a news article summarizing study B but adding that the effect was "dramatic." The student wants to cite all four for strength and has not read B's results section, which reportedly found a small positive effect that was not statistically significant.
1. Rank the sources for this specific claim and justify the ranking.
Read the worked answer
B is strongest: peer-reviewed, 300 participants, a standardized outcome, and directly on the claim. D is next only as a pointer to B, not as independent support, because it derives from B and adds an unsupported intensifier ("dramatic"). A is weak: a single classroom, no comparison, and a blog format with no review. C is weakest for evidence: a publisher with a financial interest in the conclusion, and no described method.
Crucially, B's actual finding - small and not statistically significant - undercuts the student's confident claim. Citing four sources does not add strength when three are weak or derivative and the strongest one does not support the assertion. The ranking must be based on fit to the claim and methodological quality, not on count.
2. Given B's reported result, how should the student revise the claim?
Read the worked answer
The student should weaken the claim to match the evidence: "One study of 300 middle schoolers found a small positive association between self-selected texts and comprehension scores, though the difference was not statistically significant; a teacher's classroom account describes similar benefits." That sentence reports the direction and the uncertainty, attributes the study, and does not present a blog as confirmation.
The revision should also drop "improves," which implies causation, unless B used a design that supports causal inference. "Was associated with slightly higher scores" is safer. If the student wants to keep a strong claim, they need stronger evidence - replication or a larger effect - not more citations of the same weak kind. Matching claim strength to evidence strength is the skill being tested.
3. The student wants to cite D because it is easier to read. What is the defensible way to use it?
Read the worked answer
Use D as a signpost, not as evidence: "As reported in [news outlet], a study of 300 middle schoolers found..." and then cite B for the substance. This gives readers an accessible entry point while grounding the claim in the primary source. The student should not repeat D's word "dramatic," since B reportedly found a small, non-significant effect; adopting D's intensifier would misrepresent the study.
If the student cannot access B, they should say the claim rests on D's summary and flag that the primary study was not reviewed, rather than presenting D as if it were the study. Citing a secondary source transparently is acceptable; citing it as if it were primary, or borrowing its embellishments, is not.