Codes: AC9M10ST01, AC9M10ST03. Goal: audit a numerical claim against the original dataset and identify a biased selection. Prepare: fictional media post and learner Table A.
- Read · 2 min. Display the source's actual “Silver finish makes cart four times faster!” and ask what comparison the headline invites.
- Model · 5 min. Locate 8.1 from a 4 N trial and 1.8 from a 1 N trial. Their ratio is 4.5, not exactly four; force also changed. The readings are acceleration, not speed. Say that unmatched conditions and the absent finish variable cannot isolate a wheel-finish effect.
- Guide · 6 min. Pairs list what would need to be comparable to test finish: mass, net force, track/method and repeat procedure. The supplied table has no finish variable.
- Repair · 7 min. Students write a scoped alternative caption: “In eight fictional simulated trials of a 0.50 kg cart, acceleration increased as net force increased.” Add “approximately” if describing a linear trend. No finish conclusion.
- Ethics · 3 min. Ask why choosing only high/low values could matter if readers used it to decide on equipment. Require exact source and uncertainty, not a shaming judgement of the fictional writer.
- Exit · 2 min. Everyone names one numerical fact and one unsupported inference in the headline.
Access: read both headline and table aloud, allow highlighting or text notes, AAC claim/evidence/limit cards.