Y’all Do · Students practice in groups

Evidence Hunt

An Evidence Hunt sends a group back into the text to find, rank and explain the evidence that best supports a claim. TeacherHero builds it as a Y'all Do with three roles — reader, challenger and recorder — two candidate sentences to weigh against each other, and one shared whiteboard row as the product.

Locate, rank, and explain the strongest evidence.

Real generated output

With Your Group

The Y’all Do phase of a Grade 6 ELA lesson, as TeacherHero generated it. Planned for 9 minutes.

  1. The task

    Compare the two sentences in Evidence choices as evidence of Ada’s response. Challenge the fresh Response A using the story’s time and place. Build one shared whiteboard row with exactly one whole-sentence quotation. Use obligation and resolve to explain what Ada’s silence cannot prove.

  2. Grouping

    Groups of three sharing one whiteboard

  3. Roles

    • Reader: Read the evidence and fresh Response A aloud.
    • Challenger: Question whether each claim has enough evidence.
    • Recorder: Write the row after everyone explains their reasoning.
  4. Teacher directions

    • 0:00–1:00 — Distribute Discussion cards and one whiteboard per group. Identify the new question: whether another person’s reassurance changes the setting’s limits or establishes Ada’s agreement. This is not another analysis of movement through the crowd.
    • 1:00–2:30 — Readers read Story context, Evidence choices, and the fresh Response A. Each student privately chooses which sentence best shows Ada’s response to the woman before the group compares choices.
    • 2:30–4:00 — Have each member explain their choice using the single printed frame. Groups distinguish evidence of the woman’s attitude from evidence of Ada’s response. Require the recorder to hear both other members before writing.
    • 4:00–6:30 — Groups construct one new chart row on their whiteboards. They use Ada’s response as their one quotation and revise both unsupported claims in Response A. They must explain obligation and resolve rather than merely insert the words.
    • 6:30–8:00 — Groups raise their boards. Check for a distinction between permission from the woman and limits imposed by departure time and Tomas’s location. Give feedback such as: 'Your row identifies silence. Now explain what silence does not establish about agreement or resolve.' Groups revise their own row.
    • 8:00–9:00 — Ask one group to explain its evidence choice and another to challenge or strengthen its reasoning. Leave the teacher and class examples unchanged. Preserve the harbour-guards sentence for independent transfer; do not analyze it here. Students may consult quotations and vocabulary work already in their notebooks.
  5. Student directions

    • With your group: fill the next chart row from paragraphs 1, 3, and 4.
    • Use the frame: “Our evidence supports ___ because ___.”
  6. Discussion stems

    • Our evidence supports ___ because ___.
  7. What to look for

    • Students compare the functions of the two quotations rather than selecting by vocabulary matching.
    • Students identify Ada’s silence as her response without treating it as proof of agreement.
    • Students explain that the woman’s reassurance does not establish any change to the ferry’s departure or Tomas’s location.
    • Students connect obligation to Ada’s promises and avoid claiming that silence proves either strong or failed resolve.
    • The final board contains one jointly constructed row rather than separate answers copied together.
  8. Success criteria

    • Choose the sentence that shows Ada’s response, not the woman’s attitude.
    • Explain how time and place affect the claim in Response A.
    • Complete all five columns with exactly one whole-sentence quotation.
    • Use obligation and resolve to explain the limits of your evidence.
    • Revise the shared row after every group member explains a reason.
Why the coach chose it here — Evidence Hunt uses elaboration: students compare what two quotations can establish, challenge a fresh flawed interpretation, and jointly explain their evidence choice. This extends the teacher’s deadline model and the class’s crowded-gangway repair with a new question: does the woman’s reassurance change Ada’s available options, and does Ada’s silence establish agreement? A shared whiteboard row preserves the lesson’s chart structure and prepares students for independent chart construction. One reasoning frame supports the hardest inference without supplying completed cells.

Frequently asked questions

What is the group actually hunting for?

The sentence that does the job, not the one with the right vocabulary in it. The example gives groups two candidate quotations and asks which one shows the character's response rather than another character's attitude, so choosing is an argument about what each sentence proves.

Why is there a challenger role?

Because groups tend to accept the first plausible quotation. The challenger's job is to ask whether each claim has enough evidence before the recorder writes anything, so the row on the whiteboard is the one the group could defend rather than the first one suggested.

What does the finished product look like?

One row of a shared chart, with exactly one whole-sentence quotation and an explanation using the week's vocabulary. Keeping the product that small is deliberate: it makes the reasoning visible at a glance, which is what the teacher is checking while circulating.

Strategies that pair with it

Example free · generation with Pro

One move out of six phases.

A TeacherHero lesson generates all six with your course, unit, week and text in context, so the Y’all Do phase continues the one before it instead of starting over.

Explore a whole example lesson