Inquiry and Research: Gathering Relevant Information (TEKS.ELA.8.12.D)
Help Questions
Texas 8th Grade ELA › Inquiry and Research: Gathering Relevant Information (TEKS.ELA.8.12.D)
Research question: What were the economic and social impacts of the 1900 Galveston Hurricane on Texas, and how did the Seawall project change the city afterward?
Potential sources:
- Texas State Library and Archives Commission digital collection (letters, photographs, city council minutes from 1900–1905); high credibility as curated primary sources, very relevant, historical but directly tied to the event, potential individual biases, free high-resolution scans though some documents require careful reading.
- Texas Historical Quarterly peer-reviewed article (2022) analyzing Seawall engineering and social outcomes; high credibility, highly relevant, recent scholarship, low bias, accessible through databases.
- Popular news listicle (2023) about the "Top 10 Deadliest Hurricanes"; moderate credibility, shallow relevance to the specific Seawall question, recent but sensational tone possible, easy to access.
- Interview with a Galveston Historical Foundation curator (2021); credible expert perspective, relevant context, possible institutional bias, access via recorded talk or appointment.
- University press book (1985) on Galveston's recovery; credible historical synthesis, relevant but somewhat dated, interpretive bias possible, library access needed.
Which source or combination would provide the most reliable and comprehensive foundation for this research?
Use only the 2023 hurricane listicle because it is recent and easy to read.
Rely only on the 1985 scholarly book because older sources are always more accurate about history.
Use the curator interview and the listicle to balance expert opinion with popular coverage.
Combine the Texas State Archives primary documents with the 2022 peer-reviewed article to pair firsthand evidence with recent scholarly analysis.
Explanation
Primary documents from the state archives provide direct evidence of impacts and responses, while the recent peer-reviewed article offers current, credible analysis of the Seawall's effects. The listicle lacks depth, the interview is useful but not comprehensive, and the 1985 book is credible but dated for current interpretations.
Research question: Do middle school start times affect students' sleep and academic performance?
Potential sources:
- Meta-analysis (2021) in a sleep research journal reviewing dozens of studies on start times, sleep duration, and grades; high credibility, highly relevant, current, low bias, accessible via academic database.
- American Academy of Pediatrics policy statement (2014) recommending later start times; very credible, highly relevant, somewhat older, advocacy perspective but evidence-based, freely accessible.
- Local district online poll (2020) of parents/students; limited credibility due to self-selection and small sample, locally relevant, moderately current, accessible online.
- Student YouTube vlog describing personal experience; low credibility, anecdotal, unknown currency, high potential bias, easy to access.
- National news summary (2023) of sleep studies; moderate credibility, medium relevance, current, possible editorial bias, easy to access.
Which evaluation criteria are most important for selecting the strongest foundation for this research question?
Prioritize current, peer-reviewed research (such as a recent meta-analysis) and statements from authoritative medical organizations; examine methodology and sample size; avoid relying on anecdotes or unsourced summaries.
Choose the sources with the most views or shares because popularity shows importance.
Use only local polls because they are most relevant to your community.
Prefer the oldest sources to show a long tradition of research on the topic.
Explanation
A strong foundation requires high credibility (peer review, authoritative organizations), clear relevance, up-to-date evidence, and attention to bias and methods. Popularity, anecdotal accounts, and outdated sources do not meet these criteria on their own.
Research question: What are the environmental and economic effects of wind energy expansion in West Texas over the last five years?
Potential sources:
- U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) 2024 data on Texas wind generation and capacity; very high credibility, directly relevant to recent trends, current, low bias, open access.
- Texas Comptroller report (2023) on the economic impact of wind energy; government source with high credibility, directly relevant, recent, potential pro-development framing, free PDF.
- Peer-reviewed article (2022) in Energy Policy assessing wildlife interactions and local economic outcomes in West Texas wind farms; high credibility, highly relevant, recent, low bias, accessible via academic databases.
- Industry trade group white paper (2024) promoting wind energy; moderate credibility with clear pro-industry bias, relevant but one-sided, current, easy access.
- Interview with a West Texas rancher (2021) about turbines on nearby land; primary perspective, relevant for local impacts, subjective bias, accessible via local newspaper or recorded talk.
Which source or combination would provide the most balanced and reliable foundation for this research?
Use only the 2024 industry white paper because it is current and focused on wind energy.
Combine the rancher interview with the industry white paper to balance community voices and industry expertise.
Combine the EIA dataset, the 2022 peer-reviewed Energy Policy article, and the 2023 Texas Comptroller report to cover environmental trends and economic outcomes with high credibility.
Use only the EIA dataset since it provides hard numbers for Texas.
Explanation
The EIA provides trustworthy, current data; the peer-reviewed article adds rigorous environmental analysis; and the Texas Comptroller report offers credible economic context. The industry white paper and a single interview introduce bias or limited scope and are insufficient alone.
Research question: How have recent droughts affected agricultural water use in West Texas over the past 10 years? Potential sources:
- USDA Economic Research Service report (2024): A government statistical report on Texas agricultural water use from 2013–2023, with regional breakouts that include West Texas. Credibility: high (government data). Relevance: high (directly addresses region and timeframe). Currency: very recent. Bias potential: low, though methods and definitions should be checked. Accessibility: free PDF on a .gov site.
- Peer-reviewed journal article (2021), Journal of Arid Environments: Study on irrigation efficiency and water conservation practices in the Llano Estacado region. Credibility: high (peer-reviewed). Relevance: high (focuses on the West Texas subregion and practices). Currency: recent. Bias potential: low; funded by a university grant disclosed in the paper. Accessibility: may require an academic database or library.
- Local newspaper op-ed (2023), Midland Daily News: Opinion piece urging stricter drought policies for farmers. Credibility: low to moderate (opinion). Relevance: moderate to high (topic aligns but presents viewpoints, not data). Currency: recent. Bias potential: high (advocacy tone). Accessibility: free online.
- Rancher blog post (2024): Personal account describing a single operation's water challenges this year. Credibility: low (anecdotal). Relevance: narrow (one case). Currency: very recent. Bias potential: high (individual perspective). Accessibility: free online.
- Recorded interview (2022) with a Texas A&M AgriLife Extension water resource specialist: Expert commentary on regional water-use trends and drought responses. Credibility: high (expert source). Relevance: high (West Texas focus). Currency: fairly recent. Bias potential: low to moderate (institutional perspective). Accessibility: streaming on a university site.
Which source or combination would provide the most relevant and reliable foundation for this research question?
USDA report (2024) + peer-reviewed article (2021) + AgriLife expert interview (2022)
Local newspaper op-ed (2023) + rancher blog post (2024)
Peer-reviewed article (2021) alone
USDA report (2024) + local newspaper op-ed (2023)
Explanation
Combining the government report, a peer-reviewed study, and an expert interview balances relevance (West Texas focus), credibility (government/peer review/expert), and currency (2021–2024) while minimizing bias. The other options are either opinion/anecdotal, less comprehensive, or omit key credible perspectives.
Research question: What are the health impacts of energy drinks on teenagers? Potential sources:
- CDC fact sheet (2023) on youth caffeine and stimulant intake: Credibility: high (government). Relevance: high (teen health). Currency: recent. Bias potential: low. Accessibility: free .gov page.
- Systematic review (2022) in a pediatric medicine journal: Credibility: very high (peer-reviewed synthesis). Relevance: high (examines teen outcomes). Currency: recent. Bias potential: low (conflicts disclosed). Accessibility: may need database/library.
- Energy drink manufacturer website (updated 2024): Credibility: low to moderate (corporate source). Relevance: moderate (product claims). Currency: very recent. Bias potential: high (commercial interests). Accessibility: free.
- Influencer video (2024) reviewing energy drinks: Credibility: low (non-expert). Relevance: moderate (usage, trends). Currency: very recent. Bias potential: high (sponsorships not always disclosed). Accessibility: free.
- School nurse interview (2024): Credibility: moderate (practitioner experience). Relevance: moderate to high (school context). Currency: very recent. Bias potential: moderate (anecdotal). Accessibility: by appointment/recording.
For this inquiry, which evaluation criteria should be prioritized to select the best sources?
Popularity of the source and how polished the design/graphics appear
Relevance to teen health, credibility (peer-reviewed/government), currency within the last 5 years, and bias awareness (commercial interests)
Geographic proximity of the source and personal experience over published research
Free access and shorter length to read quickly
Explanation
Effective researchers select sources that are directly relevant, credible (peer-reviewed or government), current, and evaluated for bias—especially commercial influence. Popularity, proximity, or convenience alone do not ensure reliability.
Research question: How did the 1900 Galveston hurricane change building codes and disaster planning in Texas? Potential sources:
- Texas State Library and Archives Commission (TSLAC) primary documents (1901): City ordinances and commission records related to rebuilding and governance reforms. Credibility: high (state archives primary sources). Relevance: high (direct evidence). Currency: historical (appropriate for the question). Bias potential: low; context needed. Accessibility: digitized scans.
- Scholarly book chapter (2018), university press: Analysis of the hurricane's policy legacy, including code changes and the commission form of government. Credibility: high (peer-reviewed/academic press). Relevance: high. Currency: reasonably recent. Bias potential: low (scholarly). Accessibility: library/ebook.
- FEMA overview page (2020): Historical summary of U.S. disaster preparedness with references to early 20th-century reforms. Credibility: high (government). Relevance: moderate (broader than Texas but offers context). Currency: recent. Bias potential: low. Accessibility: free.
- Travel blog post (2022): "Haunted Galveston" attractions connected to the hurricane. Credibility: low. Relevance: low (tourism focus). Currency: recent but not useful. Bias potential: high (promotional). Accessibility: free.
- Oral history recording (1975), Galveston Historical Foundation: Firsthand recollections of post-storm rebuilding. Credibility: moderate (primary account with memory limitations). Relevance: moderate to high for perspectives. Currency: historical. Bias potential: moderate (personal perspective). Accessibility: audio archive.
Which combination offers the most reliable and comprehensive foundation for this research?
Travel blog (2022) + oral history (1975)
FEMA overview page (2020) alone
TSLAC primary documents (1901) + scholarly book chapter (2018) + FEMA overview (2020)
Oral history (1975) + scholarly book chapter (2018)
Explanation
Pairing primary legal records with scholarly analysis and a government overview provides strong relevance, high credibility, and comprehensive context. The other options are either too narrow, less credible, or miss key primary/scholarly evidence.
Research question: What strategies effectively reduce bullying in middle schools? Potential sources:
- Meta-analysis (2021) in School Psychology Review: Synthesizes dozens of studies on bullying interventions. Credibility: very high (peer-reviewed synthesis). Relevance: high. Currency: recent. Bias potential: low (transparent methods). Accessibility: academic database/library.
- U.S. Department of Education resource guide (2023): Evidence-informed practices for schools. Credibility: high (government). Relevance: high. Currency: very recent. Bias potential: low. Accessibility: free PDF.
- Documentary film (2019) about one school's anti-bullying program: Credibility: low to moderate (anecdotal). Relevance: moderate (single case). Currency: somewhat recent. Bias potential: moderate (filmmaker's perspective). Accessibility: streaming.
- Social media thread (2024) collecting student stories: Credibility: low (unverified). Relevance: variable (experiences, not research). Currency: very recent. Bias potential: high (selection bias). Accessibility: free.
- Nonprofit white paper (2017): Summary of an organization's program outcomes. Credibility: moderate (advocacy). Relevance: moderate. Currency: aging. Bias potential: moderate to high (promotional). Accessibility: free.
Which source or combination would provide the strongest foundation for evidence-based recommendations?
Documentary film (2019) + social media thread (2024)
Nonprofit white paper (2017) + documentary film (2019)
Department of Education guide (2023) alone
Meta-analysis (2021) + Department of Education guide (2023)
Explanation
Combining a peer-reviewed meta-analysis with a current government guide optimizes credibility, relevance, currency, and comprehensive coverage. The other options rely on anecdotal or older sources, or lack synthesized research.