Cite several pieces of evidence from a story and an article, quoting or paraphrasing as appropriate, and use that evidence in writing

Learning goal: This lesson teaches Ohio's 2026 standards RL.7.1, RI.7.1 and W.7.9, first implemented in 2027-28. You will cite several pieces of text evidence to support analysis of what a literary text and an informational text state explicitly as well as inferences drawn from each text, quoting or paraphrasing as appropriate. Then you will use evidence from these grade-appropriate literary and informational texts to support analysis, elaboration, reflection and research in your own writing.

Explicit statements and inferences. A text states something explicitly when its own words say it. If a story says "Eli forgot to water the garden on Saturday and Sunday," that is explicit: you can point to the sentence. An inference is a conclusion the text does not state but that its details support. If the same story shows a neighbor looking at new, small tomato plants and saying they "look younger than I remember," you might infer that he has noticed the plants were replaced. No sentence says "he noticed." You reach that conclusion by combining details with reasoning. Both kinds of reading need evidence. An explicit claim needs the sentence that states it; an inference needs the details that, taken together, make it the most reasonable reading.

Why several pieces of evidence. One detail can usually be explained more than one way. The neighbor's remark could be a joke, a compliment or a hint. A second detail narrows the possibilities, and a third often settles the question. Grade 7 asks for several pieces of text evidence because an inference supported by three details from different parts of a text is much stronger than one resting on a single phrase. Look for evidence of different kinds: what a character says, what a character does, what the narrator describes, and what happens as a result. In an informational text, look for a stated fact, an explanation of a process, and an example.

Quoting or paraphrasing as appropriate. To quote is to copy the author's exact words inside quotation marks. To paraphrase is to restate the author's idea accurately in your own words and sentence structure, still crediting the text and its location. Neither is always better. Quote when the exact wording matters: a word choice you are analyzing ("younger"), a line of dialogue whose tone is the evidence, or a definition whose precise terms matter. Paraphrase when the idea matters more than the wording: a sequence of events, a process explained over several sentences, or a long passage you need to compress. A useful test is to ask, "If I changed these words, would my point disappear?" If yes, quote. If no, paraphrase. Keep quotations short. A quotation of two or three words woven into your own sentence is often stronger than a whole paragraph copied out.

A misconception, and why it is wrong. Many students believe a paraphrase is weaker than a quotation because it is "not really from the text." That is wrong. An accurate paraphrase with its location is text evidence. What makes evidence weak is inaccuracy, not the choice to paraphrase. A paraphrase that changes the meaning, drops a qualifier such as "usually" or "may," or adds an idea the author never stated is not evidence at all. The opposite mistake is quoting everything, which hides your analysis behind the author's words. Evidence only supports an analysis when you explain what it shows.

Evidence in your own writing: analysis, elaboration, reflection and research. Writing standard W.7.9 asks you to use evidence from literary or informational texts for four purposes. Analysis makes a claim about how a text works or what it means and proves it with evidence. Elaboration develops an idea further: you add a detail, an explanation or an example from a text so that a point becomes clearer and fuller. Reflection connects the text to your own thinking, and evidence keeps a reflection anchored to what the text actually says. Research uses an informational text as a source of facts to answer a question. The same sentence from a text can serve different purposes depending on what you do with it.

Original story — Mr. Okafor's Tomatoes

When Mr. Okafor went into the hospital for his knee, he paid Eli ten dollars a week to water the garden. "Tuesday and Friday," he said, "and every day if it is hot. Tomatoes do not forgive." Eli wrote TUES + FRI on his hand and felt very trusted.

The first week went well. The second week the heat came. On Saturday Eli went to the lake with his cousins, and on Sunday he slept until noon and then forgot, the way you forget a thing you have promised to remember. On Monday morning he found the tomato plants lying against their stakes like tired runners, the leaves curled and pale.

He watered them for an hour. By evening four of the six had lifted their leaves. Two stayed limp and brown at the edges, and by Wednesday they were plainly dead.

Eli counted his money. It was exactly enough for two tomato plants from the garden center, already in small pots, already with yellow flowers. He planted them where the dead ones had been and pressed the soil down hard, as if packing it tight would keep the secret in.

Mr. Okafor came home on crutches the next week. He stood at the edge of the garden for a long time. "Those two," he said at last, pointing, "look younger than I remember."

Eli had prepared a sentence about hot weather. It did not come out. What came out was, "I forgot. Saturday and Sunday. I'm sorry."

Mr. Okafor nodded slowly, as if Eli had confirmed a measurement. "The garden center puts a white tag in the pot," he said. "You left one in the dirt." He did not smile, but he did not look angry either. He held out the green watering can.

"Tuesday and Friday," he said. "And every day if it is hot."

Original article — Why Plants Wilt in the Heat

A wilting plant is a plant losing water faster than its roots can replace it. Water enters through the roots, travels up the stem and leaves the plant mostly through tiny pores in the leaves. This loss of water vapor from leaves is called transpiration. On a hot, dry, windy day, transpiration speeds up.

Leaves stay firm because their cells are full of water pressing outward, the way air keeps a bicycle tire firm. When the cells lose more water than they receive, that pressure drops and the leaves droop. Wilting is therefore a warning, not always a death sentence. If the soil is watered before the cells are damaged, many plants recover within hours. If the plant stays dry too long, leaf tissue can die, and brown, crisp edges usually mean that damage has already happened.

Gardeners use a simple check. Some plants droop slightly in the hottest part of the afternoon even when the soil is moist, and perk up by evening. A plant that is still wilted early in the morning, when the air is cool, is more likely short of water. Watering in the morning lets water reach the roots before the heat of the day, and a layer of mulch, such as straw or shredded leaves, slows evaporation from the soil surface. Regular deep watering generally does more good than a quick splash, because it reaches the roots where the water is taken up.

A worked model inside the lesson. Claim: Mr. Okafor already knows the plants were replaced before Eli confesses. Evidence one (paraphrase): he waits at the garden's edge a good while before he speaks, a pause that suggests he is studying something. Evidence two (quotation, because the word choice is the evidence): he says the two plants "look younger than I remember," a careful hint rather than an accusation. Evidence three (paraphrase): after Eli confesses, Mr. Okafor mentions the white garden-center tag Eli left in the soil, which shows he had found proof already. Reasoning: taken together, the pause, the hint and the tag show he knew and chose to let Eli tell the truth. Notice that the inference is labeled as an inference, that three pieces of evidence from different moments support it, and that each is quoted or paraphrased for a reason.

Worked example 1 — Explicit versus inferred, in the story. Question: Why did the two plants die? Explicit evidence (paraphrase): the story states that Eli did not water on Saturday or Sunday during a heat wave. Inference: the heat plus two dry days killed the plants. Several pieces of evidence support it: the heat "came" in the second week; on Monday the leaves were "curled and pale"; after watering, four recovered and two stayed "limp and brown at the edges." A student who writes only "they died because of heat" has cited one piece and ignored why four survived. With several pieces, the analysis explains both outcomes.

Worked example 2 — Quoting versus paraphrasing, in the article. Task: Use the article to explain what transpiration is. Quote the definition when you want the article's exact wording: it defines "this loss of water vapor from leaves" as transpiration. The term itself is ordinary science vocabulary, so once it is defined you can use it without quotation marks. Paraphrase the process, because the wording does not matter: water enters through roots, rises through the stem and leaves mostly through pores in the leaves. Then an explicit statement and an inference: the article states that transpiration speeds up on hot, dry, windy days; a reader can infer that a garden needs more frequent watering during a heat wave, which is exactly what Mr. Okafor's "every day if it is hot" instruction assumes. Two pieces of evidence (the statement about heat, the statement that roots must replace the lost water) support that inference.

Worked example 3 — Evidence used for elaboration and research (W.7.9). A student's research question: Could Eli's tomatoes have been saved on Monday? First draft: "Some could be saved." Elaborated draft: "Four of the six plants could be saved, and the article explains why. It says wilting happens when leaf cells lose the water pressure that keeps them firm, and that many plants recover within hours if they are watered before the cells are damaged. The story matches this: after an hour of watering, four plants 'lifted their leaves.' The article adds that 'brown, crisp edges usually mean that damage has already happened,' which fits the two plants that stayed 'limp and brown at the edges' and died." The informational text supplies research facts; the literary text supplies the case; the evidence elaborates a one-sentence answer into an explanation.

Worked example 4 — Evidence used for reflection. Weak reflection: "This story teaches us to be responsible, and I agree." Anchored reflection: "Eli's first plan was to hide the mistake by planting new tomatoes and pressing the soil 'hard, as if packing it tight would keep the secret in.' The story suggests hiding does not work: Mr. Okafor finds the tag. What made me think was that the job continued after the confession. He hands Eli the watering can and repeats his instructions, which I read as trust given back. When I have made a mistake, I have usually expected the relationship to end, not to continue with the same job." The reflection is personal, but every claim about the text is supported by evidence.

Representation task — evidence chart. Make a four-column chart with the headings Claim, Evidence, Quote or paraphrase? and Why that choice. Fill in four rows: one explicit claim from the story, one inference from the story, one explicit claim from the article and one inference from the article. For each inference, record at least two pieces of evidence from different places in the text. In the third column write Q or P, and in the fourth explain your choice in one sentence (for example, "quoted because the word younger is the hint").

Paraphrase check. Choose one sentence from the article. Write a paraphrase with the article closed. Then reopen it and compare. Did you keep every qualifier, such as "many plants," "usually" and "more likely"? Did you add anything? Correct the paraphrase and note the change.

Independent performance. Write a 450-500 word response to this research question: What does it take to keep a garden alive during a heat wave, and what does Eli learn about keeping a promise? Use evidence from both texts. Your response must include one paragraph of analysis about Eli or Mr. Okafor, one paragraph that elaborates on a point with facts from the article, one short research answer, and a closing reflection.

Success criteria: You cite at least three pieces of evidence from the story and at least three from the article. You identify at least one statement as explicit and at least one conclusion as an inference, and support each inference with more than one piece of evidence. You quote at least twice and paraphrase at least twice, and each quotation is short and chosen because its exact words matter. Every paraphrase keeps the author's meaning and qualifiers. Each piece of evidence is followed by a sentence explaining what it shows. Your reflection connects to your own thinking without making claims the texts do not support.