Conduct a short research project from several sources: use search terms effectively, assess credibility and accuracy, quote or paraphrase without plagiarism, cite in a standard format and generate further questions

Learning goal: Conduct short research projects to answer a question, drawing on several sources and generating additional related, focused questions for further research and investigation. Gather relevant information from multiple print and digital sources, using search terms effectively; assess the credibility and accuracy of each source; and quote or paraphrase the data and conclusions of others while avoiding plagiarism and following a standard format for citation. Write routinely over extended time frames, with time for research, reflection and revision, and over shorter time frames, for a range of discipline-specific tasks, purposes and audiences.

A short research project answers one question from several sources. Research is not copying what one web page says. It starts with a question that can actually be answered, gathers information from several sources of more than one kind, judges each source before trusting it, records what the sources say in a way that keeps their words separate from yours, and ends by answering the question and noticing the new questions the answer raises. A short project at grade 7 runs about two weeks and produces a two-page report with a source list. The model project below is set in the Fernbrook scenario; every source in it is simulated and labeled so.

Start with a focused question. "Flooding" is a topic, not a question. "Why does the lower field flood?" is a question, but a wide one. The model researcher narrowed it to something the report could actually settle: "Would a 40-square-meter rain garden at the bus loop hold the runoff from an ordinary storm, taken here as 10 millimeters of rain?" That question names a place, a size and a measurable outcome, so the researcher knows what information would answer it.

Gather relevant information from multiple print and digital sources, using search terms effectively. The standard asks for more than one kind of source. The model project used five: a print source (a chapter on small streams and their watersheds in a library book about creeks, simulated for this lesson); a digital source (the county soil and water office's web page on rain garden sizing, simulated); a second digital source (an unsigned post on a gardening forum, simulated); an interview (with the head custodian, Ms. Alvarez, who has watched the field flood for eleven years, simulated); and a school document (the facilities memo to the field committee, which gives the bus loop's area, simulated). Search terms decide what a search returns. "Flooding" returned news about rivers in other states. "Rain garden" returned photographs. "Rain garden size runoff area" returned sizing guides, and "rain garden sizing calculator parking lot" returned the county page that answered the question. Effective search terms name the specific things you need (a size, a quantity, a place type) and drop the general words that match everything. Add a term for each thing the source must contain; remove terms that bring in what you do not want.

Assess the credibility and accuracy of each source. Credibility is whether a source deserves trust: who wrote it, what they know, whether they say where their information came from, whether they gain by your believing them, and when it was written. Accuracy is whether what it says is correct, which you test by checking it against another source or against arithmetic. The library chapter was credible (a named author, a publisher, a reference list) and its definitions matched the county page. The county page was credible (a public office, a named contact, a date) and its sizing rule could be tested with arithmetic. The forum post was unsigned, undated and gave no source; it claimed rain gardens breed mosquitoes. Ms. Alvarez, asked about it, said the county page states that a garden built to drain within two days does not hold water long enough for mosquito larvae to mature, and the county page did say that. The researcher set the forum post aside: not because forums are always wrong, but because this post could not be checked and the one claim it made was contradicted by a source that could. Ms. Alvarez was credible about what she had seen (which storms flooded the field, and where the water came from first) and not a source on sizing, which she said herself. The facilities memo was credible for the one figure taken from it, the loop's area, because the facilities office measures the school's grounds; the researcher still noted that the memo says "about" 900 square meters.

Quote or paraphrase the data and conclusions of others while avoiding plagiarism. Plagiarism is presenting someone else's words or ideas as your own. Copying a sentence without quotation marks is plagiarism; so is copying a sentence, changing three words and leaving off the source; so is taking a figure or a conclusion from a source and not saying where it came from. To quote is to use the source's exact words inside quotation marks with a citation. To paraphrase is to restate the source's idea entirely in your own words and sentence structure, with a citation. Quote when the wording matters; paraphrase when the idea matters and the wording does not. In both cases the note-taking habit that prevents plagiarism is the same: in your notes, put every copied phrase in quotation marks the moment you copy it, and write the source beside it.

Follow a standard format for citation. A standard format is a fixed order of the parts of a source so that any reader can find it: author, title, container or publisher, date, and location such as a page number or web address. Your class will tell you which standard format it uses. The model project used MLA style, one standard format many schools use: author (or organization if no author), title in italics or quotation marks, publisher, date, location. In the text, a short reference in parentheses (the author's last name or the title's first words, plus a page number where there is one) points the reader to the full entry in the list. MLA writes that reference without a comma and without the word "page": (Harlan 41). When the sentence already names the author, only the page number goes in the parentheses: Harlan explains ... (41). A source with no page numbers, such as a web page or an interview, is cited by the author or organization alone. A full entry for a web page ends with its address; the simulated county page has none, so its entry below stops at the date, and a real entry would add the address. The label "simulated" belongs in the lesson's notes, not inside a citation. The model's Works Cited list, with every source simulated, reads:

Alvarez, Dana. Personal interview. 6 Oct. 2026.

County Soil and Water Office. "Sizing a Rain Garden." County Soil and Water Office, 2025.

Fernbrook Middle School Facilities Office. Memo to the field committee. Sept. 2026.

Harlan, Ruth. Small Streams and Their Watersheds. Riverbend Press, 2021.

(The unsigned forum post was set aside, so it is not listed.)

Original model report — Would a 40-square-meter rain garden at the bus loop hold an ordinary storm? (simulated sources)

The bus loop at Fernbrook is paved and slopes toward Miller Run. According to the facilities memo, it covers about 900 square meters (Fernbrook Middle School Facilities Office). The library chapter explains that "a paved surface sheds almost all of the rain that falls on it" (Harlan 41), so in a storm of 10 millimeters the loop sheds about 900 times 0.010, which is 9 cubic meters, or 9,000 liters. The county soil and water office's page states that a rain garden is usually built with a ponding depth of about 15 centimeters and "should drain within two days" (County Soil and Water Office). A 40-square-meter garden with a 15-centimeter ponding depth holds 40 times 0.15, which is 6 cubic meters, or 6,000 liters, before overflowing. That is two thirds of the 9,000 liters a 10-millimeter storm would send it. Ms. Alvarez, the head custodian, said in an interview that the field has flooded only after storms that "went on for most of a day," never after a short shower (Alvarez). So the answer the evidence supports is limited: the garden's storage, 6,000 liters, is two thirds of the 9,000 liters a 10-millimeter storm would shed if all of it ran off at once. The soil and water office's sizing page adds that some water soaks in while the storm is still falling, which this storage calculation ignores, so whether the garden actually overflows cannot be settled without the storm's timing and a measured soaking-in rate. Ms. Alvarez's report that flooding follows long storms suggests the storms that matter are larger than 10 millimeters, which is a reason to find out, not a proven overflow.

Generating additional related, focused questions. A research project that ends with an answer and nothing else has stopped early. The model report's answer raised four questions, and the researcher logged them: How much of a long storm's runoff soaks into the garden while it is still raining, and what soil test would tell us? Could a second garden at the west parking area take the rest? How many of last year's nine closure days followed storms longer than a day? Who owns the pipe under the road where the creek leaves the property, and does it affect the flooding? The researcher chose the third for the next project because Ms. Alvarez's logbook could answer it in an afternoon.

Routine writing over extended and shorter time frames. This project took two weeks: two days to narrow the question, four to gather and assess sources, three to draft, two to get responses and revise, and the rest to check citations. That is writing over an extended time frame, with time for research, reflection and revision. The same unit also asks for writing in a single sitting: a ten-minute paragraph in science explaining what a soil percolation test measures, a one-day letter to the coach about closure days, an exit slip in social studies on how a town decides what to spend money on. A range of discipline-specific tasks, purposes and audiences means that science, mathematics and social studies each have their own kinds of writing, and writing routinely means doing all of them often enough that none is a special event.

Worked search-term refinement: Question: how big does a rain garden need to be for a paved area? Search 1, "flooding": news about rivers, nothing usable. Search 2, "rain garden": mostly photographs and plant lists. Search 3, "rain garden size runoff area": sizing guides, useful but general. Search 4, "rain garden sizing calculator parking lot": the county office page with a rule for paved areas. Each refinement added a term for something the source had to contain (size, runoff, calculator, parking lot) and dropped a general term. The researcher recorded all four searches in the log so a reader could see how the source was found.

Worked credibility and accuracy check: The forum post said "rain gardens are mosquito farms." Credibility check: no author, no date, no source, and the writer's stake unknown. Accuracy check: the county page, a public office with a named contact and a date, says a garden built to drain within two days does not hold water long enough for larvae to mature. The two sources disagree, and only one can be checked, so the forum post is set aside and the report notes why. Setting a source aside is a research decision that belongs in the report, not a silent deletion.

Worked quotation, paraphrase and plagiarism: Source sentence (simulated library chapter): "A paved surface sheds almost all of the rain that falls on it, because there is nowhere for the water to go but sideways." Plagiarism: "A paved surface sheds nearly all the rain that lands on it because the water has nowhere to go but sideways," with no source: three words changed, structure kept, source omitted. Quotation: the chapter explains that "a paved surface sheds almost all of the rain that falls on it" (Harlan 41). Paraphrase: Harlan explains that rain cannot soak into pavement, so nearly all of it runs off (41). The paraphrase keeps the idea, changes the sentence entirely and still names the source, because the idea is Harlan's.

Worked calculation and its condition: Loop area 900 square meters; storm 10 millimeters, which is 0.010 meters; runoff volume 900 times 0.010 is 9 cubic meters, and one cubic meter is 1,000 liters, so 9,000 liters. Garden 40 square meters; ponding depth 15 centimeters, which is 0.15 meters; capacity 40 times 0.15 is 6 cubic meters, so 6,000 liters. 6,000 divided by 9,000 is two thirds. Conditions: every drop that lands on the loop is assumed to run off, which makes 9,000 liters an upper estimate, since real pavement holds a little in puddles and loses a little to evaporation; and no water is assumed to soak into the garden during the storm. The report states both conditions, and the second one became the first further question; without it, the report can state storage but not whether the garden overflows.

Research log: Choose a focused question about the Fernbrook scenario or a real question about your own school building that can be answered from sources you can reach. Keep a log with these columns: search terms tried and what each returned; each source's kind (print, digital, interview), author, date and where it came from; a credibility note and one accuracy check against another source; and notes with every copied phrase in quotation marks and the source beside it. The log is submitted with the report.

Independent performance: Over two weeks, complete a short research project: a 500-word report answering one focused question from at least three sources of at least two kinds, with a source list in the standard format your class uses. Success criteria: the question is focused enough that the report can answer it; search terms were refined at least twice and the log shows how; every source has a credibility note, and at least one claim was checked for accuracy against another source; at least one quotation and one paraphrase, each with a citation; no sentence from a source appears without quotation marks; the report answers the question with its conditions stated; and it ends with at least three additional related, focused questions and says which one you would pursue next and why. Alongside the project, complete three single-sitting pieces set by other subjects (a science conclusion, a mathematics explanation and a social studies paragraph) and note for each its task, purpose and audience.