Grade 8 · Evaluating Sources · Source Quality
Reading Media and Data Claims
Check a statistic against its source.
Learning objectives
- Check a statistic against its source
- Detect a misleading graph or headline
- Compare how two outlets frame one story
AERO English Language Arts alignment
AERO.ELA.8.RI.7
Integrate and evaluate information presented in different media and formats, including charts, maps, infographics and video, as well as in words. Grade 8 / MYP 3 emphasis: handle subtler techniques such as irony, bias and conflicting evidence, and justify interpretations.
AERO.ELA.8.RI.9
Analyse two or more texts on the same topic, comparing how each shapes its presentation of key information and interpretation of facts. Grade 8 / MYP 3 emphasis: handle subtler techniques such as irony, bias and conflicting evidence, and justify interpretations.
AERO.ELA.8.RI.10
Read and comprehend a wide range of informational and digital texts, including texts about the Gulf region, independently and proficiently. Grade 8 / MYP 3 emphasis: handle subtler techniques such as irony, bias and conflicting evidence, and justify interpretations.
AERO.ELA.8.RI.3
Analyse how a text introduces, illustrates and elaborates key individuals, ideas or events, including through examples and anecdotes. Grade 8 / MYP 3 emphasis: handle subtler techniques such as irony, bias and conflicting evidence, and justify interpretations.
AERO.ELA.8.RI.5
Analyse the structure an author uses to organise a text, including how major sections and paragraphs contribute to the whole and to the development of ideas. Grade 8 / MYP 3 emphasis: handle subtler techniques such as irony, bias and conflicting evidence, and justify interpretations.
MYP criteria
- Criterion A — Analysing
- Criterion B — Organizing
ENGAGE
When Numbers Tell Different Stories
Numbers can make a news report appear completely trustworthy, but statistics do not speak for themselves. A writer chooses which figures to include, which words describe them and how a graph displays them. Imagine that visits to a National Sport Day activity rose from 500 entries to 525 entries. One headline might announce a surge, while another might say that participation barely changed. In this lesson, you will trace claims back to their sources and decide which presentation is fairest.
Think about it
- Can a correct statistic still create a misleading impression?
- What would you check before trusting a dramatic graph?
EXPLORE
One Event, Two Stories
Source note from a fictional National Sport Day walking event: Gate counters recorded 500 entries during the two-hour session in 2025 and 525 entries during the same period in 2026. This is an increase of 25 entries, or 5%. The counters measured entries, not unique visitors, so one person could be counted more than once. Organisers also noted that the 2026 weather was cooler.
Doha Active News reported: “Families Flock to Walking Event as Participation Surges.” Its article called the result a dramatic success and stated that 525 people participated. An accompanying bar graph began at 480 rather than zero, making the 2026 bar appear several times taller than the 2025 bar. The article mentioned neither repeat entries nor the cooler conditions.
Community Review used the headline: “Walking Event Numbers Barely Move.” It reported that the counter recorded only 25 additional entries and displayed the results on a graph running from zero to 600. The report correctly explained that entries were not the same as individual participants. However, it suggested that the programme had little effect without providing evidence about participants’ experiences, repeat visits or the influence of weather.
Your role
Separate what the source proves from what each outlet wants you to notice.
Think about it
- Which claims can be checked directly against the source note?
- How does each graph scale shape the reader’s impression?
- What does each outlet emphasise or leave out?
EXPLAIN
How to Audit a Media Claim
A media claim has three connected parts: the original evidence, the way that evidence is presented and the conclusion offered to the audience. Evaluate all three. A number may be accurate while its label, visual display or interpretation is misleading.
- Trace: Find the original report, table, survey or data note.
- Read: Check what was measured, when it was measured and who or what was included.
- Audit: Recalculate totals, differences and percentages.
- Compare: Notice changes in wording, scale, emphasis and omission.
- Evaluate: State what the evidence supports, does not support and cannot yet prove.
| Check | Application to the event |
|---|---|
| Raw difference | 525 minus 500 equals 25 additional entries. |
| Percentage change | 25 divided by 500, multiplied by 100, equals 5%. |
| Unit | The source counted entries, not individual people. |
| Conditions | Cooler weather may have influenced the result. |
| Safe conclusion | Recorded entries increased by 5%. |
Common misconception
A graph is not automatically objective. A shortened axis, uneven intervals or missing labels can exaggerate or hide differences.
Framing is the selection and emphasis that guide interpretation. “Surges” frames the rise as large, while “barely move” frames it as unimportant. Both outlets use the same raw difference, but neither headline gives the precise 5% change. Look for loaded verbs, unsupported cause-and-effect claims, missing context and differences between a headline and the evidence beneath it.
- Begin a comparison by identifying the shared topic and evidence.
- Explain Outlet A’s headline, wording, graph and omissions.
- Use a clear transition such as “By contrast” to analyse Outlet B.
- Judge which presentation is better supported and cite exact evidence.
- End with a balanced conclusion that recognises limits in the source.
Criteria A and B
Criterion A rewards accurate analysis of evidence, choices and effects. Criterion B rewards a logical comparison with grouped ideas, transitions and a justified conclusion.
MYP_PRACTICE
Complete a Source Audit
Use the fictional Education City source pack in the task below. Check the calculation, identify the unit being counted and examine how each outlet frames the result. Then organise a short comparison that distinguishes fact from interpretation and reaches a justified judgement about source quality.
- Read the data note before reading either headline.
- Calculate the numerical and percentage change.
- Underline wording that enlarges or reduces the importance of the change.
- Identify one limitation or omission in each outlet.
- Write a structured comparison using evidence and a cautious conclusion.
EXIT_TICKET
Before you close this lesson
Think about it
- What is one check you will make when a headline uses a percentage?
- How can two outlets use the same correct data but create different impressions?
Watch
Check Yourself with Lateral Reading: Crash Course Navigating Digital Information #3
CrashCourse · 14 min
Learn to investigate online claims by leaving a page and checking what reliable external sources say about it.
Before you watch: Why might studying only one webpage give you an incomplete picture?
- What is lateral reading, and how is it different from reading vertically?
- Which outside sources would you consult to verify an unfamiliar website?
Watch
How to choose your news - Damon Brown
TED-Ed · 5 min
Learn how news is selected and how source choices can shape the information you receive.
Before you watch: How do you currently decide whether a news report is trustworthy?
- What kinds of bias can influence news selection?
- What steps could you take before sharing a news story?
Interactive practice · source audit
Education City Pathway Report
Audit the fictional source pack. Calculate the change, test each headline against the source and write a 120–150 word comparison. Organise your response around shared evidence, contrasting frames and a final judgement. Do not choose an outlet only because its headline sounds more positive or dramatic.
Check your answer
Task
All figures and reports in this practice source pack are fictional.
Items
Sentence frames
Prompts
Your answer
This draft stays in this tab only. Copy anything you want to keep into your learning log below.
Key vocabulary
- primary source
- The original evidence from which later claims are made.
- frame
- The angle created by selecting and emphasising certain details.
- truncated axis
- A graph axis that begins or ends before the full expected range.
- percentage change
- The amount of change compared with the original value.
Practice questions
0/3 correct
Level 1 · Criterion A
According to the National Sport Day source note, what was the percentage increase in recorded entries?
Level 2 · Criterion A
Which feature most clearly makes the Doha Active News graph misleading?
Level 2 · Criterion B
Which plan would organise a clear comparison of the two outlets?
MYP criterion tasks
Level 3 · Criterion A
Compare how the two outlets frame the walking-event data. Use at least two precise details.
Level 3 · Criterion A
Why does the source note not prove that exactly 525 people attended in 2026?
Reflect & track
Your learning log
Saved privately in this browser — no account needed.
How confident do you feel?