Lesson Plan
Digital Detective Guide
Students will learn to evaluate online sources for credibility, identify fake news, and create accurate digital footprints by analyzing articles and collaboratively presenting findings.
In an age of digital information overload, students need critical thinking skills to distinguish fact from fiction online, fostering informed decision-making and responsible digital behavior.
Audience
6th Grade Students
Time
40 minutes
Approach
Interactive slides, group sleuthing, worksheet tracking, presentations.
Materials
Prep
Prepare Materials
10 minutes
- Review Spot the Fake News Slides to familiarize yourself with key concepts.
- Print enough copies of Fact vs. Fiction Tracker for each student.
- Assemble sets of Source Sleuthing Challenge for each group.
- Ensure the projector or devices are ready to display the slide deck.
Step 1
Introduction & Hook
5 minutes
- Display a surprising headline and ask students: real news or fake?
- Discuss initial thoughts and introduce lesson objectives.
- Explain student roles as 'Digital Detectives' looking for credibility clues.
Step 2
Slide Deck Presentation
10 minutes
- Present key criteria for credible sources using Spot the Fake News Slides.
- Highlight author expertise, publication date, URL credibility, and evidence support.
- Pause for quick Q&A to check understanding.
Step 3
Source Sleuthing Activity
10 minutes
- Divide students into small groups and distribute Source Sleuthing Challenge.
- Each group examines provided articles, websites, and social posts.
- Students record their judgments on the Fact vs. Fiction Tracker, noting reasons.
Step 4
Group Discussion & Presentation
10 minutes
- Groups use Group Source Presentation format to share findings.
- Encourage peers to ask questions about their credibility assessments.
- Facilitate a brief class discussion on common reliability indicators discovered.
Step 5
Reflection & Assessment
5 minutes
- Ask students to write one strategy they will use to verify online information.
- Collect trackers and reflections as exit tickets to assess individual understanding.
- Provide feedback and reinforce best practices.
use Lenny to create lessons.
No credit card needed
Slide Deck
Spot the Fake News
Welcome, Digital Detectives!
• Learn why checking facts matters
• Discover four key credibility clues
• Practice with real vs. fake headlines
• Prepare to sleuth in groups later
Welcome students and introduce the concept of a Digital Detective. Explain that today’s mission is to learn how to spot fake news online. Show excitement and set expectations.
Why Credibility Matters
• Prevent sharing false information
• Make informed decisions
• Protect yourself and others from scams
• Build trust in what you read
Explain the overwhelming amount of information online and why false or misleading stories can be harmful. Use a quick class brainstorm on where they see news (social media, websites, apps).
Four Criteria for Credible Sources
- Author Expertise
- Publication Date
- URL & Domain
- Evidence & References
Introduce the four main criteria we’ll use today. This slide serves as an overview—each will get its own slide next.
Criterion 1: Author Expertise
• Credentials and qualifications
• Affiliation or organization
• Prior work on the topic
• Contact information or bio
Define author expertise. Ask: What would you want to know about who wrote an article?
Criterion 2: Publication Date
• When was it published or updated?
• Is the event still current?
• Could information be outdated?
• Look for revision or update notes
Explain why the date matters. Discuss how outdated info can be misleading. Ask for examples of news that changes over time.
Criterion 3: URL & Domain
• Domain endings (.edu, .gov vs .com.co)
• Spelling and extra words
• Secure sites (https vs http)
• Clear organization branding
Show examples of trustworthy domains (e.g., .edu, .gov) and suspicious ones (.com.co, unusual spellings).
Criterion 4: Evidence & References
• Linked sources or citations
• Data, studies, and quotes
• Visual evidence (charts, photos)
• Cross-check with trusted outlets
Discuss how evidence underpins credible claims. Emphasize fact-checking and citations.
Real vs. Fake Headlines
Real Example:
• Headline: Scientists confirm water on Mars
• Meets all four criteria
Fake Example:
• Headline: Chocolate cures cancer overnight
• Lacks author credentials and evidence
Display two side-by-side headlines—one real, one fake. Guide students through analysis using the four criteria.
Interactive Question
Headline: “Study finds homework doubles student success”
Is this real or fake? Why?
• Think about author, date, URL, evidence
Pose an interactive question. Encourage students to raise hands or use chat. Reveal the answer after a few responses.
Summary & Next Steps
• Four credibility clues are your toolkit
• Practice in small groups next
• Use Fact vs. Fiction Tracker to record notes
• Ready to become true Digital Detectives?
Summarize key takeaways and connect to the upcoming group activity. Remind students to use their Fact vs. Fiction Tracker.
Activity
Source Sleuthing Challenge
Overview: In small groups, you will examine four brief source excerpts. Use the four credibility criteria—Author Expertise, Publication Date, URL & Domain, Evidence & References—to decide if each source is trustworthy. Record your judgments and reasoning on your Fact vs. Fiction Tracker.
Instructions:
- Read each source card carefully.
- For each card, discuss as a group and answer:
- Is the author qualified or anonymous?
- Is the publication date current or outdated?
- Does the URL/domain look legitimate?
- Is there clear evidence or citations?
- Mark “Credible” or “Not Credible” and jot down notes for each criterion.
- Be prepared to share one example of a strong clue and one red flag in your group presentation.
Source A: National Geographic Article
Title: Ocean Cleanup Efforts Show Promise
Author: Dr. Jane Williams, Marine Biologist
Published: March 5, 2023
URL: https://www.nationalgeographic.org/article/ocean-cleanup/
Excerpt: “Recent studies by leading oceanographers indicate that plastic-collection ships have removed over 50,000 tons of debris from the Pacific Garbage Patch. Data were gathered using satellite imagery and vessel logs.”
Notes & Verdict:
Source B: Unknown Blog Post
Title: Chocolate Cures All Ailments, Says Expert
Author: Health Guru123
Published: Undated
URL: http://www.chocohealthtips.com.cure-now/
Excerpt: “You won’t believe how chocolate can instantly boost your immunity! Verified by top nutritionists—see our secret recipe.”
Notes & Verdict:
Source C: Social Media Claim
Platform: Tweet from @EcoWatchOfficial
Author Bio: Eco activist (no credentials linked)
Date: April 1, 2024
URL: https://twitter.com/EcoWatchOfficial/status/1650001234567890
Excerpt: “Major breakthrough—sea turtle populations up 40% in protected zones! Read peer-reviewed study here: bit.ly/turtle-study”
Notes & Verdict:
Source D: Government Report (Outdated)
Title: Water Quality Standards in Urban Waterways
Agency: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Published: July 12, 2010
URL: https://www.epa.gov/water-quality/urban-standards
Excerpt: “The EPA defines acceptable contaminant thresholds based on data from 2005–2009. Communities should monitor annual levels to ensure compliance.”
Notes & Verdict:
Next Steps: Once you’ve completed all four, prepare to share one example of a credibility clue and one red flag from any source in the group discussion.
Worksheet
Fact vs. Fiction Tracker
Use this tracker alongside the Source Sleuthing Challenge to record your evaluation of each source based on the four credibility criteria. Fill in the table below for each source you examine.
| Source Name | Credibility Decision (Credible / Not Credible) | Justification per Criterion (Author Expertise; Publication Date; URL & Domain; Evidence & References) | Final Verdict (Summary) | Strategy Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Add more rows if needed.
Discussion
Group Source Presentation
Objective: Share your group’s findings from the Source Sleuthing Challenge using a clear, structured format. Peers will ask questions and offer feedback.
Presentation Structure (2–3 minutes)
- Source Overview
- Title: ______________________
- Author & Affiliation: ______________________
- Publication Date & URL: ______________________
- Title: ______________________
- Credible Clues Found
- List 2–3 strong indicators of credibility from our Fact vs. Fiction Tracker:
• _______________________________
• _______________________________
- List 2–3 strong indicators of credibility from our Fact vs. Fiction Tracker:
- Red Flags Noted
- List 2–3 concerns or warning signs:
• _______________________________
• _______________________________
- List 2–3 concerns or warning signs:
- Final Credibility Decision
- Is the source Credible or Not Credible?
• Our verdict: _______________ - Brief summary of reasoning:
• _______________________________
- Is the source Credible or Not Credible?
- Verification Strategy
- One method you’d use next time to check similar sources:
• _______________________________
- One method you’d use next time to check similar sources:
Peer Question & Feedback
After each presentation, the group’s Questioner will ask three peers to choose one question each:
- Which of the four criteria did you find most important? Why?
- What additional evidence could strengthen your decision?
- How might an unfamiliar URL trick a reader?
- If you found outdated info, how would you verify current data?
Leave space for notes:
Facilitator Prompts (Teacher Use)
- “Can you walk us through how you assessed the author’s expertise?”
- “What facts or references would you add to make this source stronger?”
- “How did the URL or domain influence your decision?”
- “How might an older publication date change real-world outcomes?”
Wrap-Up Discussion (5 minutes)
- What patterns emerged across all sources?
- Which credibility clues did you use most?
- What new strategy will you apply next time you research online?
Collect any final questions and reinforce key takeaways before moving to the reflection exit ticket.