Worksheet Grade 8 English Language Arts

Anecdote or Data? Evidence Types in the Rissley Dam Debate

Grade 8 students classify six pieces of evidence about a fictional mill dam by type, then judge which ones actually support each side's claim and why.

Objectives

  1. Students will classify evidence as anecdote, single measurement, multi-year record, expert inspection, or outside example.
  2. Students will explain one limit of a single measurement used to describe a river.
  3. Students will match a claim to the evidence that supports it most directly.

Vocabulary

Fish ladder
A series of water steps built beside a dam so migrating fish, like salmon, can swim past it. Fish leap or swim from pool to pool to reach the river above.

Also: anecdote, single measurement, multi-year record, expert inspection, outside example

Teacher overview

Six pieces of evidence about a fictional mill dam are printed on this worksheet, and students sort them by type before deciding which ones actually bear on each side's claim. The town of Rissley, its dam, and its river are invented, and every figure in the evidence belongs to that invented scenario. The misconception this worksheet is built to catch is the belief that evidence is strong whenever it is specific: students routinely rank a single dated measurement above a fifteen-year record because the single measurement sounds more exact. Evidence E exists to make that error visible, and the debrief should return to it after item 6.

Answer Key

  1. Answer: Anecdote. It reports one person's remembered experience rather than a record anyone else could check.
  2. Answer: Multi-year record. It reports counts taken the same way every April across fifteen years, so it shows a pattern rather than a moment.
  3. Answer: Expert inspection. A licensed engineer examined the structure and issued a rating based on training and a defined standard.
  4. Answer: Outside example. It reports what happened in another town and invites the council to reason from that case to this one.
  5. Answer: Single measurement. It reports one number from one sample taken on one date at one spot.
  6. Answer: Accept any answer naming a real limit. One sample cannot show change over a day or a season, and dissolved oxygen swings between afternoon and dawn and between summer and spring, so a single August reading may not describe the river in April.
  7. Answer: Evidence C. The engineer's poor rating of the spillway concrete is the reason repair work is needed, and Claim 2 is the claim that calls for repairing the spillway. Also accept Evidence F if the student explains that the power it produces is the reason to keep the dam rather than remove it.
  8. Answer: Evidence B rests on counts taken the same way every year, so it can be checked and compared. Evidence A rests on one person's memory of a change more than sixty years ago, with no count behind it.
  9. Answer: Accept any question about how well Trenmore matches Rissley. Strong versions ask whether the two dams were similar in size or condition, whether the two rivers carry similar flow, or whether Trenmore spent money on the park that Rissley would also have to spend.
  10. Answer: Accept any answer naming information the card leaves out. Useful examples include how many days per year the dam actually generates, what the electricity earns or saves, and what the repair would cost against that amount.
  11. Answer: C, then F, then B. Evidence C is the strongest because a poor spillway rating is the direct reason to fund a repair. Evidence F gives a benefit worth keeping but no cost to weigh it against, and Evidence B is about fish rather than about the dam's condition or value. Accept F above C only if the student argues the generation figure establishes why the dam is worth repairing at all.
  12. Answer: Accept any clear claim paired with evidence that bears on it directly. A model response: "Rissley should repair the spillway before the next spring flood, because Evidence C reports that a licensed engineer rated the concrete as poor in March."

Differentiation

Support

Cut the six evidence cards apart and have students physically sort them under the five labels before writing anything, then complete only items 1 through 8. Model item 1 aloud, thinking through why a remembered story cannot be checked, so the difference between anecdote and record is established before students work alone.

Extension

Ask students to write a seventh piece of evidence that would genuinely change the ranking they gave in item 11, then explain in a paragraph what makes their new evidence stronger than the card it displaces.

ELL supports

Provide a five-card reference set with each evidence type named, defined in one line, and shown with a short example unrelated to dams. Allow students to answer items 1 through 5 with the label plus a short phrase rather than a full sentence, and provide the frame "Evidence ___ is stronger than Evidence ___ because ___" for items 8 and 11.

Extensions

Have students write the two-paragraph council decision that follows from their ranking in item 11, naming which evidence they relied on and which they set aside, and explaining why the evidence they set aside did not settle the question.