Two Texts on a School Garden
Students read two short texts about a school's decision to replace part of its lawn with a vegetable garden. Text A is a newsletter written by the garden club. It states that the garden "transformed lunchtime," that "every student now eats vegetables," and that behavior referrals "dropped sharply." Text B is a one-paragraph report from the school office. It gives numbers: 40 students joined the club out of 600; referrals fell from 22 in the fall to 19 in the spring; the cafeteria's vegetable waste decreased by about 10 percent. A student claims the two texts contradict each other and asks which one is "true." The teacher wants the class to compare how each text uses evidence and language rather than pick a winner.
1. How do the two texts differ in the kind of evidence they present, and what does each kind of evidence let a reader conclude?
Read the worked answer
Text A relies on broad, emphatic claims with no numbers: "transformed," "every student," "dropped sharply." These are persuasive statements that convey enthusiasm but cannot be checked. Text B relies on specific counts and comparisons: 40 of 600 students, referrals 22 to 19, waste down about 10 percent. Specific numbers let a reader judge scale and size of change; broad claims let a reader feel the writer's position but not measure it. The key move is that the texts do not actually contradict-Text A exaggerates what Text B measures. "Every student now eats vegetables" is unsupported when only 40 of 600 joined, and "dropped sharply" overstates a fall from 22 to 19. A strong answer says the two texts are compatible in direction (things improved) but differ in precision and honesty of scale. The reader should trust the measurable claims for magnitude and treat the newsletter's language as advocacy, useful for understanding the club's pride but not for judging how large the effect was.
2. A classmate says Text B is "more true" so Text A should be ignored. How would you respond, and what would a fair comparison of the two texts look like?
Read the worked answer
I would push back gently: "more precise" is not the same as "more true," and ignoring Text A loses information. Text B measures outcomes, but Text A reveals why people care-the club's purpose, the community's experience, the motivation behind the project. A fair comparison asks what each text is for. Text B answers "how much changed?" Text A answers "what did this mean to the people involved?" The better conclusion combines them: the garden likely had a real but modest effect (per Text B), and it mattered a great deal to a small group (per Text A). A fair comparison also flags where Text A overreaches-"every student" and "sharply" are not supported-without discarding the whole text. The judgment call is to use each source for the question it can actually answer, and to name the exaggeration rather than let it stand or let it discredit everything else.