D3.1.6-8: Gathering Information and Choosing Sources Wisely

Overview

Lesson Procedure

65-75 minutes of class time across 5 phases.

1. Warm-Up10 minutes
2. Direct Instruction20-25 minutes
3. Guided Practice15 minutes
4. Independent Practice10-15 minutes
5. Closure10 minutes

1. Warm-Up10 minutes

   Warm-Up Prompt

   "Three classmates tell you about a fight in the cafeteria. One saw it, one heard about it at lunch, and one read a post about it that night. Whose story would you trust most, and what would you want to check?"

   Take several answers and list the reasons students give: "she was there," "he heard it secondhand," "the post might be exaggerated," "do the stories match?" Tell students that historians and scientists ask the same questions, and that today they will use five of them to decide which sources to rely on when they gather information.

2. Direct Instruction20-25 minutes

   Part 1: The question and the event. In the winter of 1811-1812, three very large earthquakes shook the region around New Madrid, a Missouri town on the Mississippi River (Source 3, paragraphs 1-2). Writers from that time and the years after reported a striking claim: that the river ran backward (Source 1). Today's question is: "Did the Mississippi River really run backward during the New Madrid earthquakes?" The earthquake is a vehicle for the skill: the same steps work for any inquiry.

   To gather relevant information means to collect the facts and claims that help answer the question, and to leave aside the rest. Students will gather from several sources, and they will choose which ones to rely on by using five lenses.

   The five lenses for choosing sources

   Lens	What it means	Question to ask
   Origin	Who made the source, when and where, and how the maker got the information: by seeing it (an eyewitness) or by hearing or reading about it (secondhand)	Was the maker there, and how long afterward was it written?
   Authority	What gives the maker the knowledge or position to be believed on this topic	Does this maker have the training, the access or the job to know?
   Structure	What kind of source it is and how it is built: a letter, a collection of reports, a history book, a scientific report, a web page; whether it names its own sources	Can I trace where its information came from?
   Context	What was happening when the source was made, and why it was made	Could the time, the fear or the purpose have shaped what it says?
   Corroborative value	How well the source agrees with, or can be checked against, other sources made separately. To corroborate is to confirm with other evidence	Do other independent sources say the same thing?

   Part 2: Where the accounts come from. Fuller's 1912 report for the U.S. Geological Survey, a science agency of the federal government, quotes many early accounts. The table below gathers what Fuller and the USGS tell us about each one. Students will need it for every lens.

   Source Information: where each account on this page comes from (facts from Fuller's 1912 report and the USGS page)

   Account	Who made it, and when	How the maker knew	What kind of source
   Eliza Bryan (Source 1, paragraph 1; Source 2, paragraph 2)	A letter by Eliza Bryan, printed in Lorenzo Dow's works (Cincinnati, 1850)	Fuller lists her among the writers who describe how the inhabitants felt and behaved during the shocks. Fuller says he did not see Dow's book; he quotes her from G. C. Broadhead's 1902 article in the magazine American Geologist, which printed extracts from her letter to Dow dated March 22, 1816 (Fuller's bibliography calls it an "abstract," a shortened version)	Letter, reaching us through later printings
   Mitchill's informant (Source 1, paragraph 2)	An unnamed person on the river, reported by S. L. Mitchill, a "geologist and Congressman" who "collected records from all parts of the country" (Fuller, page 10)	Was on the river, 87 miles below the Ohio	A report gathered into a collection of accounts
   Timothy Flint (Source 1, paragraph 3)	Recollections of the Last Ten Years, Boston, 1826	Fuller says the book describes conditions "on his visit seven years later" (bibliography, page 112)	A book of travel memories
   John Haywood (Source 1, paragraph 4)	The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, Nashville, 1823	Fuller does not say how Haywood learned of these events	A history book
   Myron L. Fuller (Source 2)	U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 494, 1912	A geologist who visited the region by railroad and wagon (pages 7-9) and compared the old accounts with the land	A scientific report with footnotes for every quotation
   U.S. Geological Survey (Source 3)	A web page of the Earthquake Hazards Program, October 2, 2019	A summary of modern research by government scientists	A web page summary, without footnotes

   Part 3: Read the sources. Students read Sources 1-3 and keep an evidence log: for each piece of information about the river, they write the claim, the source and paragraph, and one lens note. Key words: recede (pull back), perpendicular (straight up and down), moorings (ropes or posts that hold a boat in place), velocity (speed), cable (the rope holding a boat), reflux (a flowing back), bayou (a slow side stream), fissures (cracks), retrograde (moving backward), seismograph (an instrument that records ground shaking), seiche (a wave that sloshes back and forth across a body of water), uplift (ground pushed upward), magnitude (a number scientists use to describe the size of an earthquake; a higher number means a larger earthquake), physiographic changes (changes in the shape of the land).

   1Bryan says: At first the Mississippi seemed to recede from its banks, its waters gathered up like mountains, leaving boats high upon the sands. The waters then moved inward with a front wall 15 to 20 feet perpendicular and tore boats from their moorings and carried them up a creek closely packed for a quarter of a mile. The river fell as rapidly as it had risen and receded within its banks with such violence that it took with it a grove of cottonwood trees. A great many fish were left upon the banks. The river was literally covered with the wrecks of boats.

   2An informant of Mitchill, who was on the Mississippi River, 87 miles below the Ohio, stated that the stream rose 6 feet from its former level and acquired three times its former velocity. William Shaler, also quoted by Mitchill, says of the experiences of a friend: He immediately cut his cable and put off into the middle of the river, where he soon found the current changed, and the boat hurried up, for about the space of a minute, with the velocity of the swiftest horse; he was obliged to hold his hand to his head to keep his hat on. [...]

   3Flint, in describing the earthquake, says: A bursting of the earth just below the village of New Madrid, arrested this mighty stream in its course, and caused a reflux of its waves, by which in a little time a great number of boats were swept by the ascending current into the mouth of the bayou, carried out and left upon the dry earth, when the accumulating waters of the river had again cleared their current.

   4Haywood says that on the first shock the waters in the Mississippi near New Madrid rose in a few minutes 12 or 14 feet and then fell like a tide. * * * Spouts of water 3 or 4 inches in diameter sprang from the Mississippi to a great height. In some parts of the Mississippi the river was swallowed up for some minutes by the seeming descent of the water into some great opening of the earth at the bottom of the river. Boats with their crews were engulfed and never more heard of.

   1The contemporary accounts are doubtless exaggerated, for calm observation and accurate recording of an earthquake is impossible if the shocks are severe and dangerous. It is interesting to note, however, that, except a few features, such as the flashes of light (doubtless resulting from the general belief in the volcanic origin of the disturbance), most of the reported phenomena have been verified by the recent investigations. Fortunately a number of scientists or men of education were in or near the region during the period of disturbance and have given vivid pictures of their experiences.

   2The best account of the destruction by waves is that of Bryan, who mentions the falling of trees and describes how an unusual wave of the river in receding "took with it the grove of cottonwoods which hedged its borders. They were broken off with such regularity that in some instances persons who had not witnessed the fact could with difficulty be persuaded that it was not the work of art." [...]

   3Disregarding the element of fantasy in these descriptions, there is little room to doubt that the earthquake produced water waves of considerable size on the Mississippi. They doubtless started from the sides, for the most part, and meeting in the middle produced the sharp wall-like "chop" described at this point. As usual, it was the return wave which did the damage along the shore. That there were upheavals of the bottom is certain, as has been indicated in the discussion of faults and domes, and it is not unlikely that the water was thrown back, giving the appearance of a chasm. There is also no reason to doubt that fissures opened and closed beneath the water as they did on the land, giving rise to large waves by the ejection of water. That waves of great size moved upward against the current is certain, and that the movement of the water was retrograde for the moment, at least in shallow water, is probable. The rise in the river about which there is universal agreement was probably due in part to the waves moving upstream, and in part to a temporary ponding due to local uplifts of the river channel.

   1This sequence of three very large earthquakes is usually referred to as the New Madrid earthquakes, after the Missouri town that was the largest settlement on the Mississippi River between St. Louis, Missouri and Natchez, Mississippi. On the basis of the large area of damage (600,000 square kilometers), the widespread area of perceptibility (5,000,000 square kilometers), and the complex physiographic changes that occurred, the New Madrid earthquakes of 1811-1812 rank as some of the largest in the United States since its settlement by Europeans. They were by far the largest east of the Rocky Mountains in the U.S. and Canada. The area of strong shaking associated with these shocks is two to three times as large as that of the 1964 Alaska earthquake and 10 times as large as that of the 1906 San Francisco earthquake. Because there were no seismographs in North America at that time, and very few people in the New Madrid region, the estimated magnitudes of this series of earthquakes vary considerably and depend on modern researchers' interpretations of journals, newspaper reports, and other accounts of the ground shaking and damage. The magnitudes of the three principal earthquakes of 1811-1812 described below are the preferred values taken from research involved with producing the 2014 USGS National Seismic Hazard Map.

   2The first principal earthquake, M7.5, occurred at about 2:15 am (local time) in northeast Arkansas on December 16, 1811. The second principal shock, M7.3, occurred in Missouri on January 23, 1812, and the third, M7.5, on February 7, 1812, along the Reelfoot fault in Missouri and Tennessee. [...]

   3[...] Huge waves on the Mississippi River overwhelmed many boats and washed others high onto the shore. High banks caved and collapsed into the river; sand bars and points of islands gave way; whole islands disappeared. [...]

   4Large waves (seiches) were generated on the Mississippi River by seismically-induced ground motions deforming the riverbed. Local uplifts of the ground and water waves moving upstream gave the illusion that the river was flowing upstream. Ponds of water also were agitated noticeably.

   Part 4: Model the lenses. Think aloud through the five examples, one lens at a time. For each, say what the lens shows and what selection decision it leads to.

   • Origin: when and how the maker knew (Source 1, paragraph 3)

     Should Timothy Flint's account be used as an eyewitness report of the moment the river reversed?

     Result: No, not on its own. Flint writes that the earthquake "arrested this mighty stream in its course, and caused a reflux of its waves" (Source 1, paragraph 3), but the Source Information table shows that his book describes conditions on a visit seven years later. He could have heard the story from people who lived there. Selection decision: keep Flint for what the land looked like afterward and for what local people were saying, and look for an eyewitness to confirm the reversal itself.

   • Authority: who has the knowledge to judge (Source 2, paragraph 3)

     Haywood says the river was "swallowed up" by an opening in the riverbed. Whose judgment should guide us on whether that happened?

     Result: Fuller's, more than Haywood's. Fuller was a geologist who studied the region and compared the old accounts with the land. Reading the accounts, he sets aside "the element of fantasy in these descriptions" and explains that it is "not unlikely that the water was thrown back, giving the appearance of a chasm" (Source 2, paragraph 3). Selection decision: use Haywood as a record of what people reported, and use Fuller to judge what most likely happened.

   • Structure: how the source is built (Source 3, paragraph 1)

     The USGS page gives magnitudes, numbers that scientists use to describe the size of an earthquake. How can we tell where those numbers come from?

     Result: The page is a short summary without footnotes, but it tells the reader where its numbers came from: they are "the preferred values taken from research involved with producing the 2014 USGS National Seismic Hazard Map" (Source 3, paragraph 1). Fuller's report, by contrast, is built with a footnote for every quotation, so a reader can trace each old account. Selection decision: both structures help, in different ways, and a careful researcher notes which claims can be traced and which cannot.

   • Context: the conditions when the source was made (Source 2, paragraph 1)

     Why might people who lived through the shocks report things that did not happen?

     Result: Fuller explains that "calm observation and accurate recording of an earthquake is impossible if the shocks are severe and dangerous" (Source 2, paragraph 1). He also says reports of "flashes of light" probably came from "the general belief in the volcanic origin of the disturbance," an idea people held at the time. Selection decision: take eyewitness accounts seriously, but check any detail that frightened people or the beliefs of the time could have shaped.

   • Corroborative value: do independent sources agree? (Sources 1-3)

     Did water on the Mississippi really move upstream?

     Result: Several sources agree. Shaler's friend found "the current changed, and the boat hurried up" (Source 1, paragraph 2); Flint writes of "the ascending current" (Source 1, paragraph 3); Fuller calls it "certain" that "waves of great size moved upward against the current" (Source 2, paragraph 3); and the USGS writes of "water waves moving upstream" (Source 3, paragraph 4). The experts differ on one point: Fuller thinks a brief backward flow "is probable" in shallow water, while the USGS says the waves "gave the illusion that the river was flowing upstream." Selection decision: claim that waves moved upstream, which the sources corroborate, and present the question of a true reversal as one the experts still disagree on.

3. Guided Practice15 minutes

   Pairs build a corroboration chart for one claim: "The Mississippi River rose during the earthquake." They list every source on the page that reports a rise, copy the height it gives, if any, and then answer: (1) Do the sources agree that the river rose? (2) Do they agree on how high? (3) Which source would you choose to report the height, and why? Pairs may disagree on question 3 if they give reasons from the lenses.

   Teacher model, started for the class: "The first source I list is Fuller, who says the rise is something 'about which there is universal agreement' (Source 2, paragraph 3). That tells me the experts accept the rise. Now I need the early accounts, and I check whether their heights match."

4. Independent Practice10-15 minutes

   Each student writes a one-paragraph answer to the compelling question, using information gathered from at least three sources. For each source used, the student adds one sentence explaining which lens made it worth choosing. The paragraph ends by stating what the sources do not settle.

   Success criteria: the information used is relevant to the question; at least three sources are cited by paragraph; at least three different lenses are named; the answer separates what the sources corroborate from what is still uncertain.

5. Closure10 minutes

   Exit ticket: "Which source on this page would you trust least for the question of whether the river ran backward, and which lens tells you so? Give one reason."

   Teacher note on the sources: Sources 1 and 2 are quoted exactly from Fuller's report as printed in 1912, with omissions marked; Source 3 is quoted exactly from the USGS page. The early accounts in Source 1 are Fuller's quotations of other writers, so they reach students through at least one later printing. The heights and speeds they give, such as "15 to 20 feet" and "three times its former velocity," are the writers' own claims. Source 1, paragraph 4, mentions boats "engulfed and never more heard of"; the USGS page reports only one life lost in falling buildings at New Madrid, a different kind of loss, and the number of boatmen lost on the river is not known from these sources. Sources 4 and 5 are invented for this page.

   Quiz passage. Questions 9-17 of the quiz use Source 4, an invented set of sources about a flood. Some of them are deliberately weak, for students to judge.

   1Willow Creek is an invented town, and every source below is invented. On the night of May 3, 1903, the creek flooded the town. A class asking "How high did the water rise in town?" found five sources.

   2A. The diary of Clara Hayes, age 14, written the next morning: "From the hill behind our house we watched the water climb the church steps until only the top step showed. Papa said it must be ten feet deep on Main Street."

   3B. The Willow Creek Weekly newspaper, May 7, 1903: "Mayor Ross told this paper the water stood twelve feet on Main Street, the worst flood in the town's history."

   4C. A report by the state's engineers, 1904. The engineers measured the high-water marks, the lines of mud the flood left on walls, and found that the water reached 8 feet 6 inches at the church and 9 feet at the bank on Main Street. The report includes a table of all 14 marks they measured.

   5D. A booklet titled "Our Town's Courage," printed in 1953 by the town's historical society for the flood's 50th anniversary. It says the water "rose higher than the rooftops" and lists no sources.

   6E. A website about floods that names no author. It says the Willow Creek flood reached "about 9 feet" and lists no source.

   Homework passage. The homework uses Source 5, an invented set of sources about a railroad and a farming town.

   1Pine Bluff is an invented farming town, and every source below is invented. In 1890 a railroad line reached the town. A class asks: "Did the railroad help Pine Bluff's farmers?" The town library holds six items.

   21. A pamphlet printed by the railroad company in 1889, inviting farmers to settle along the line and promising "a ready market for every bushel."

   32. The diary of a farmer, Samuel Ortiz, kept from 1889 to 1895, recording what he paid to ship his wheat and what he was paid for it.

   43. A table of wheat prices at the Pine Bluff grain elevator, a building where farmers sold and stored grain, for 1888-1896. A college student copied it from the elevator company's account books in 1975.

   54. A newspaper article from 1894, written by a farmers' club, complaining that the railroad's shipping rates were too high.

   65. A history of the county written in 1990 by a historian, with footnotes that point to the diary, the elevator books and the newspaper.

   76. A painting of the first train arriving, made in 1940 for the fiftieth anniversary of the railroad.

Differentiation Strategies

Assessment Guidance

1. Question 1 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   Source 1, paragraph 2, tells of a boat that "hurried up" the river. How did this story reach Fuller?

   AThe boat's owner wrote it down for Fuller BShaler told a friend's story; Mitchill printed it CMitchill was on the boat and wrote it himself DFlint saw the boat on his visit years later

2. Question 2 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   Which piece of information is least relevant to the question "Did the Mississippi River really run backward?"

   A"A great many fish were left upon the banks." B"the current changed, and the boat hurried up" C"caused a reflux of its waves" D"water waves moving upstream"

3. Question 3 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   According to Source 3, paragraph 1, why do estimates of the earthquakes' magnitudes "vary considerably"?

   AScientists did not agree on the dates BRivers erased all signs of the shaking CNo instruments then recorded the shaking DFuller refused to publish his numbers

4. Question 4 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   In Fuller's original report, every quotation in Source 1 has a footnote naming the book or journal it came from. How does this structure help a researcher?

   AIt proves that every account is true BIt makes the report shorter to read CIt shows that Fuller saw each event DIt lets you trace each account back

5. Question 5 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   Source 1, paragraph 1, says the river took "a grove of cottonwood trees," while Source 2, paragraph 2, quotes Bryan as saying it took "the grove of cottonwoods which hedged its borders." What best explains the difference?

   ABryan wrote two different letters BHer words changed as they were recopied CFuller made up one of the two quotations DThe two passages describe two groves

6. Question 6 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   A website copies Flint's sentence from Source 1, paragraph 3, word for word. Does the website add corroborative value?

   AYes, because now two sources say it BYes, because websites are more recent CNo, because it only repeats Flint DNo, because Flint is always wrong

7. Question 7 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   Haywood says "Spouts of water 3 or 4 inches in diameter sprang from the Mississippi to a great height" (Source 1, paragraph 4). Which lens raises the most doubt about using this detail?

   ACorroboration: no other source here says it BStructure: the sentence is far too short CContext: Haywood wrote it in Tennessee DAuthority: it gives exact numbers, so it is true

8. Question 8 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   Fuller writes that "most of the reported phenomena have been verified by the recent investigations" (Source 2, paragraph 1). What does this tell a researcher gathering information?

   AEvery early account can be used without checking BMany early reports held up, but each needs checking CEarly accounts should not be gathered at all DOnly reports about flashes of light were verified

9. Question 9 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   Read Source 4. Which source comes from an eyewitness who saw the flood herself?

   ASource A, the diary of Clara Hayes BSource B, the town newspaper CSource C, the state engineers' report DSource D, the 1953 booklet

10. Question 10 of 20 · Multiple Choice

    In Source 4, which source has the most authority on how high the water rose?

    AThe diary, because Clara watched it happen BThe newspaper, because it quotes the mayor CThe engineers' report, based on measurements DThe booklet, because it is the town's own history

11. Question 11 of 20 · Multiple Choice

    The engineers' report in Source 4 includes "a table of all 14 marks they measured." Why does this structure make the report more useful?

    AIt means the flood was very large BIt makes the report easy to remember CIt proves the mayor was not honest DReaders can see every measurement

12. Question 12 of 20 · Multiple Choice

    The 1953 booklet in Source 4 is titled "Our Town's Courage" and says the water "rose higher than the rooftops." What does its context suggest?

    AIt was made to honor the town and may exaggerate BIt must be accurate because it is the newest source CIt is an eyewitness account written in 1903 DIt was written by the state's engineers

13. Question 13 of 20 · Multiple Choice

    The website in Source 4 says the flood reached "about 9 feet," which matches the engineers. How much corroborative value does the website add?

    AA great deal, because it agrees with the engineers BNone, because websites can never be used CA great deal, because it is easy for anyone to find DLittle, because it may have copied the report

14. Question 14 of 20 · Multiple Choice

    The newspaper reports the mayor's figure of twelve feet on Main Street, but the engineers found 9 feet at the bank on Main Street. Which choice is best for a researcher?

    AUse the mayor's figure, because he led the town BUse the engineers' figure and note the mayor's claim CAverage the two figures to get 10.5 feet DLeave out height, since the sources disagree

15. Question 15 of 20 · Short Answer

    Clara's diary (Source 4) says: "Papa said it must be ten feet deep on Main Street." Explain why this sentence has a different origin from the rest of her entry, and how a researcher should use it.

    Show model answer

16. Question 16 of 20 · Short Answer

    Choose two sources from Source 4 that you would gather information from to answer "How high did the water rise in town?" Defend each choice with a different lens.

    Show model answer

17. Question 17 of 20 · Short Answer

    Does Clara's diary corroborate the engineers' report? Explain what the two sources agree on and what the diary cannot confirm.

    Show model answer

18. Question 18 of 20 · Short Answer

    Answer the compelling question "Did the Mississippi River really run backward during the New Madrid earthquakes?" in three to five sentences. Use information from at least three of Sources 1-3, and name the lens that led you to choose each.

    Show model answer

19. Question 19 of 20 · Short Answer

    Source 3 is the newest source on the page. Explain why it should not be the only source a researcher gathers from, using the structure lens and one other lens.

    Show model answer

20. Question 20 of 20 · Short Answer

    A classmate says, "Eliza Bryan's account is the best source, because it is the most detailed." Respond using two lenses.

    Show model answer

These standards connect to D3.1.6-8: prerequisites to review first, parallel standards at the same level, and next steps that build on it.

Standard text: National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS), The College, Career, and Civic Life (C3) Framework for Social Studies State Standards: Guidance for Enhancing the Rigor of K-12 Civics, Economics, Geography, and History (Silver Spring, MD: NCSS, 2013). NCSS was not involved in the production of this lesson and does not endorse it.