You have already compared sources and asked hard questions about who made them and whether you can trust them. Today you turn that skill into a tool the whole class can keep using: a shared source-evaluation checklist, worded so clearly that any student could apply it without help. By the end you will have tested it, improved it, and saved it the class way.

A checklist only works if every check is a question someone can answer from the source itself. The five areas you already use are:

• Author: who made this, and what do we know about them?
• Purpose: why was it published (inform, persuade, sell, entertain)?
• Evidence: what claims does it make, and what backs them up?
• Currency: when was it made or last updated, and does that matter for this topic?
• Cross-checking: can the same claim be found in other independent sources?

Use the interactive activity to build one shared source-evaluation checklist for the class.

1. Look at the five headings: Author, Purpose, Evidence, Currency, and Cross-checking.
2. Your teacher will give your pair two of the five headings (or pick two the class has not covered yet). Draft one clear yes, no, or not sure question under each, then offer your best wording to the class to agree and type into the shared list.
3. Under each heading, agree checks written as questions a student can answer from the source (yes, no, or not sure).
4. Adopt or lightly reword the starter suggestions first. Write a brand-new check only if the class rejects a starter. Reject anything vague like "Is it good?" or "Do I like it?".
5. Mark a check as agreed only when the class can say it out loud and know what evidence would count as a yes or a no.
6. Stop at one strong check per heading if time is short; a second check is optional. Aim for a short list, not a long essay.

Source A (invented, for testing only)

Harbour View Youth Blog, post dated 3 March 2024, by "Team HV" (no real names). Headline: "New study proves phones destroy sleep for every teen." The post says "scientists now agree" that any phone use after 8 p.m. ruins sleep, quotes "Dr M. Byrne, sleep expert" with no workplace or link, and ends with a button: "Buy NightShield blue-light glasses, 20% off this week." No study title, no date for the research, and no other source is linked. A short note at the bottom says the post may include sponsored content.

Minimum path

1. As a class, model one check on Source A together (teacher leads; everyone sees what yes, no, or not sure plus one evidence note looks like).
2. In pairs, run three priority checks only: Author, Evidence, and Purpose. For each, mark yes, no, or not sure and note one line of evidence from the source.
3. Call out to the class one check that felt weak, vague, or hard to apply.
4. As a class, agree at most two wording fixes on the board (merge duplicates or sharpen a fuzzy question). Then save the agreed checklist the class way straight away.

Before you finish, check:

• Your pair has run Author, Evidence, and Purpose against Source A with a yes, no, or not sure plus brief evidence each.
• At least one weak or fuzzy check has been named aloud for the class.
• The class has agreed final wording for the shared checklist (even a short list of five strong checks is enough).
• The agreed checklist is saved the class way. Saving is non-negotiable; do not skip it to chase extra checks.

You now have a shared tool, not just a set of opinions about one post. The useful checklist is short, written as questions, and tough enough to catch a polished page that is selling something or hiding who made it. Keep it somewhere you can find it: you will reuse it when you judge sources later in the course.