Fact vs Fiction

Overview

Students learn to evaluate sources by separating facts from fictional or misleading claims. They apply a “Fact vs. Fiction” framework to multiple short texts and media, then write a brief explanatory response using evidence from the sources.

Learning intentions

• Students will be able to gather information from more than one print or digital source.
• Students will be able to assess credibility and accuracy by asking targeted questions.
• Students will be able to distinguish facts, opinions, and fictional or misleading claims.
• Students will be able to integrate information into a short explanatory response that avoids plagiarism.

Success criteria

• I can identify a claim as fact, opinion, or fiction/misleading.
• I can explain why a source seems credible (or not) using specific evidence.
• I can compare claims across two sources and state what the evidence supports.
• I can write an informative paragraph using my own words and citing the sources by description (e.g., “Source A text,” “Source B image/video”).

Curriculum links

• Writing to inform: CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.CCRA.W.2
• Research and credibility: CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.CCRA.W.8
• Evaluating arguments/evidence: CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.CCRA.R.8
• Integrating content in words and media: CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.CCRA.R.7

Lesson structure (50 minutes)

1. 0–5 min · Hook: claim sort. Teacher displays 3–4 quick statements on the board (some factual, one opinion, one fictional) and asks students to vote “Fact,” “Fiction/Misleading,” or “Not sure.” Students mark their choice on a personal mini-chart and turn to a partner to justify one choice.

2. 5–12 min · Mini-lesson: Fact vs. Fiction framework. Teacher models a framework with 4 guiding questions:

• What is the claim saying?
• What evidence is provided (details, data, examples)?
• Who made the source and why should we trust it (author, purpose, context)?
• Does it match other reliable information (compare across sources)? Students copy the questions into a “Source Check” organizer and underline keywords in one example claim.

3. 12–22 min · Guided practice: two-source comparison. Teacher provides two short sources on the same topic (one more credible, one more sensational). Options: a short informational excerpt and a short image or social-media style post; or two brief texts. Students complete the organizer: label each claim, rate credibility (high/medium/low), and record evidence they used.

4. 22–28 min · Whole-group calibration. Teacher asks pairs to share one “Fact” they identified and one “Fiction/Misleading” they challenged, then records evidence on a class T-chart: “Supported by evidence” vs. “Lacks evidence / conflicts.” Students revise one organizer entry based on class discussion (quick correction only, not full rewrite).

5. 28–42 min · Independent writing: short explanatory paragraph. Teacher explains the task: Write a paragraph (6–8 sentences) that answers: “Which source is more credible and what evidence supports that?” Include at least one comparison statement between the sources. Students draft using sentence starters (provided on board):

• “The claim that… is supported because…”
• “This source seems less credible because…”
• “When compared with Source B, Source A suggests…”

6. 42–47 min · Peer review for evidence and wording. Teacher gives a checklist:

• Did I identify at least one claim correctly as fact/opinion/fiction/misleading?
• Did I include evidence (what I saw/what the source said)?
• Did I explain credibility with reasons?
• Did I write in my own words? Students trade drafts and circle one sentence that uses evidence clearly, then suggest one improvement.

7. 47–50 min · Exit ticket: quick credibility justification. Teacher displays one final new claim and a “credibility prompt” (e.g., “What would you check to decide if this is true?”). Students write a 2–3 sentence response using the framework questions.

Resources

• Source Check organizer (one per student)
• Two short source packets on the same topic (print and/or digital-ready)
• Board slides or printed claim cards (fact/opinion/fiction/misleading)
• Credibility checklist for peer review
• Writing sentence starters displayed or printed
• Student writing paper or digital document template
• Timer for segmenting work

Assessment

• Formative: hook voting and partner justification to check initial understanding of fact vs. fiction.
• Formative: organizer completion (claim labeling + recorded evidence + credibility rating).
• Formative: paragraph peer review checklist plus teacher quick scan during independent writing.
• Exit ticket: 2–3 sentence credibility check using framework questions.

Differentiation

• Support: provide a model organizer filled in partially (e.g., identify the claim, then guide evidence selection); include sentence starters for writing.
• Support: offer a word bank for reasoning (“evidence,” “details,” “author,” “purpose,” “missing information,” “conflicts”).
• Extension: for students who finish early, add a third claim from a new mini-source and ask them to justify whether it belongs in “Fact,” “Fiction/Misleading,” or “Not sure.”
• EAL/SEN: allow responses with key phrases first, then expand; permit audio recording of peer feedback if needed; reduce length expectation for the first draft while keeping evidence requirements.