Main Idea or Detail? Beaver Article Responses
Ms. Ortiz's fifth graders read a 430-word article called 'Beaver Ponds at Work.' The article has four numbered sections. 'Dams Slow the Stream' explains that beavers build dams. 'Ponds Trap Mud' explains that ponds slow water and trap sediment. 'Wetlands Fill with Life' explains that herons and frogs live in the wetlands. 'Beavers Move On' explains that beavers leave and meadows form. A sidebar titled 'Pond Visitors' lists three animals: herons, frogs, and muskrats. The class question is: 'What is the main idea of the article?' Three students answer. Devon writes, 'Beavers chew wood and build dams.' Lila writes, 'Beaver dams create ponds and wetlands that change the land and support many living things.' Mateo writes, 'Herons, frogs, and muskrats use beaver ponds.' Ms. Ortiz's rubric says a main idea must cover the whole article, not one section, and must be supported by details from more than one section. She also wants students to explain why the other two answers are too narrow or too broad. The class has 25 minutes to revise one response and defend it with two details.
1. Which student response best meets Ms. Ortiz's rubric? Explain why it fits and why each of the other two does not, using the section titles and sidebar.
Read the worked answer
Lila's response best meets the rubric. It covers the whole article because it names both the cause (beaver dams) and the effects (ponds, wetlands, changed land, many living things). Those effects appear across the section titles 'Ponds Trap Mud,' 'Wetlands Fill with Life,' and 'Beavers Move On,' so the idea is supported by more than one section. Devon's answer stops at 'Dams Slow the Stream' and describes a detail-chewing wood and building dams-without the article's larger point about change. Mateo's answer uses the sidebar list, which is extra information, and mentions only pond visitors; it is too narrow. The rubric's two tests-whole-article coverage and support from more than one section-eliminate Devon and Mateo.
2. A fourth student, Priya, writes, 'Beavers are important because they build dams, and the article explains how their work changes the environment for other animals.' Is this a strong main idea? What one revision would make it stronger, and which detail from the article would you add?
Read the worked answer
Priya's response is stronger than Devon's or Mateo's because it links beavers to environmental change, but it is still vague. 'Important' does not say what the article is mainly about, and 'changes the environment' does not name ponds or wetlands. A stronger version is: 'Beaver dams create ponds and wetlands that change the land and support many living things.' To support it, Priya could add a detail from 'Ponds Trap Mud'-the ponds slow water and trap sediment-or from 'Wetlands Fill with Life'-herons and frogs live in the wetlands. Either detail comes from a different section than the dam-building detail, so the revised main idea would meet the rubric's requirement of support from more than one section.