The Garden Presentation
A group of three fifth graders is preparing a four-minute presentation for the school wellness fair on the question “Should our school add a vegetable garden?” They have gathered four sources. (1) A seed-company blog post titled “Gardens Boost Test Scores 20%!” with a “Shop Now” banner and no author. (2) A two-page PDF from the county extension office describing a 2019 study of 12 elementary schools, including its sample size and stated limitations. (3) A student-made video with 2,100 views showing a garden at another school; it lists no sources. (4) An undated infographic with bright icons and the line “Studies prove gardens reduce behavior problems.” The group has two class periods and one tablet. Jada wants to open with the 20 percent statistic because “it’s the most exciting.”
1. How should the group evaluate the four sources for this specific question? Give a judgment for each, with the reason.
Read the worked answer
Source 1 (seed-company blog). Use with caution or not at all as evidence. The 20 percent figure has no named author, no study citation, and appears beside a sales banner, which is a conflict of interest. The claim is also far larger than typical findings, which raises suspicion.
Source 2 (extension PDF). Strongest source. A county extension office is a public educational agency, not a seller. It names a year, a sample of 12 schools, and its own limitations - the presence of limitations is a credibility signal, because it shows the authors are not overselling.
Source 3 (student video). Useful as illustration, not evidence. It shows what a garden looks like at one school, which helps an audience imagine the proposal, but it reports no outcomes and cites nothing.
Source 4 (undated infographic). Weakest. “Studies prove” with no study named, no date, and no author is an assertion. Bright design signals persuasion, not evidence.
Rule to state aloud. Ask: Who made this? Why? Can I check it? Does it actually address our question?
2. Jada wants to open with the 20 percent statistic. What should the group do instead, and how should they explain the change to her without dismissing her idea?
Read the worked answer
Acknowledge the instinct. Jada is right that a big number makes a strong opening. The problem is not excitement; it is that an unverifiable number will collapse under a single question from the audience.
Replace it with a checkable opening. Use the extension study’s actual finding, stated with its scope: “A 2019 study of 12 elementary schools found….” Naming the scope makes the claim smaller but far harder to challenge.
Give Jada a real job. She can write and deliver the opening, and she can be the one who says, “We could not verify the 20 percent figure, so we are not using it.” That sentence is itself persuasive - it shows the group checked.
Prepare for the obvious question. If someone asks about test scores, the group should say, “We found one claim of 20 percent, but it came from a company selling seeds and cited no study, so we left it out.” Audience trust rises when limits are stated first.
3. The group has one tablet and two periods. What should they verify, and how should they credit sources in a four-minute talk with visuals?
Read the worked answer
Verify in priority order. First, open the extension PDF and record the exact finding, the year, the number of schools, and one stated limitation - this is the evidence backbone. Second, check whether the blog post names any study; if not, mark it “unverified” and set it aside. Third, check the infographic for a date or author; with neither, do not use it. Fourth, confirm the video is from a school garden and note that it is an example, not evidence.
Credit on slides. Under each borrowed fact, put a short line: source name and year. On the final slide, list the four sources with a one-word label - Evidence, Example, Unverified.
Speak the credit. “According to the county extension office’s 2019 report…” takes two seconds and prevents the impression that the group did the study.
Time budget. Two minutes per period for verification, the rest for building three slides and rehearsing; four minutes goes fast.