Deliverable
📚 Source Evaluation Report
Art and society
VA:Cr3.1.HSIII.a
Big Ideas
Performance Tasks
Real-World Challenge
Learning Partners and Clients
Submission Required
Grading Required
Students gather primary and secondary sources related to rider behavior, station crowding, subway signage, and public art in transit spaces. They build a report that names each source, checks author or organization credibility, identifies bias or limits, notes rejected sources, and states how selected evidence will support their design purpose. Sources may include MTA materials, rider interviews, photos, maps, and articles.
Plan day
Day 5
Duration
45 min
Grouping
Individual
Steps
7 steps
Lesson plan
7 steps · 45 min| # | What teachers do |
|---|---|
| 1 | Launch the task by displaying 2 contrasting sample sources about subway movement or signage and briefly model how to check credibility, relevance, bias, and usefulness for a design problem focused on clearer rider movement and reduced crowding. (6 min) |
| 2 | Distribute or open the Source Evaluation Report tool and have students gather at least 4 candidate sources from prior notes and provided source sets, including a mix of primary and secondary sources such as MTA materials, rider interviews, maps, photos, articles, or transit art examples. (7 min) |
| 3 | Students review each candidate source independently and record: source title, author or organization, source type, what claim or information it provides, credibility check, possible bias or limitation, and whether it should be selected or rejected for the project. (12 min) |
| 4 | Students identify how their strongest selected sources connect to community needs, rider behavior, public art, and visual communication, then write a short evidence statement explaining how each source could inform future station flow maps or signage proposals. (8 min) |
| 5 | Pairs conduct a critique exchange by reading each other's reports, asking which sources best support clearer movement and reduced confusion, and giving feedback on missing perspectives, weak credibility, or unsupported claims. (6 min) |
| 6 | Students revise their reports based on peer critique by replacing weak sources, clarifying bias notes, and marking 2 to 3 sources as priority evidence for the upcoming design work and possible review by transit stakeholders. (4 min) |
| 7 | Close with a quick share-out in which volunteers name one selected source, one rejected source, and one reason responsible research choices matter before making station signage or flow decisions. (2 min) |
Preparation (7 items)
- Prepare a Source Evaluation Report template with fields for source name, author/organization, primary or secondary, credibility, relevance, bias/limitations, selected or rejected, and design use.
- Curate a classroom source set connected to subway rider behavior, station crowding, wayfinding, MTA signage, public art in transit, maps, photos, and short articles at accessible reading levels.
- Select 2 sample sources for the opening mini-model, including one strong credible source and one weaker or limited source students can compare.
- Provide access to prior student notes from the wayfinding and mural case notes activity so students can carry forward evidence from earlier analysis.
- Set up printed packets or digital links for all sources and confirm students have devices, clipboards, or writing materials needed to annotate and complete the report.
- Create a brief peer critique checklist focused on credibility, relevance to rider movement, bias or limitation, and usefulness for the future station flow map and signage proposal.
- Plan partner assignments in advance, including supports for students who benefit from strategic pairing, language scaffolds, or teacher check-ins.
Student-facing instructions
You will build a Source Evaluation Report that helps you decide which evidence should guide your future station flow map and signage proposal. Use your notes from earlier activities plus the source set provided today. Your task is to examine at least 4 sources related to rider behavior, station crowding, subway signage, maps, public art in transit spaces, or rider experience. For each source, record the title, author or organization, whether it is primary or secondary, what information it gives you, how credible it is, any bias or limits, and whether you will keep or reject it. Then write short evidence statements showing how your strongest sources could help you design for clearer movement, less crowding, and better rider understanding. You will exchange reports with a partner, ask for feedback about which sources are strongest or weakest, and revise your report before submitting it. Use your template, your notes, the provided sources, and a pencil or device.