Today you will
- learn the four RAVA checks: Reliability, Accuracy, Validity and Authority
- test your gut feeling about four sources
- grade two of your own investigation sources
Warm-up
Think of the last webpage you trusted at a glance. Did you trust it because of the logo, or because of something you could check?
Kit check
Open {{code:Project_Portfolio}}, then {{code:09_specialism/sm4}}. Check you can see {{code:sm4_search_log}} and {{code:sm4_references}}. If either one is missing, tell your teacher now.
RAVA is four separate checks. A source can pass one and fail another.
- Reliability means the source is careful every time.
- Accuracy means the facts match other evidence.
- Validity means the evidence backs up the claim.
- Authority means the writer is an expert on this.
Example
A named writer blogs about event insurance and links to a matching brokers' guide.
| Check | Grade | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| Reliability | medium | No track record shown yet |
| Accuracy | high | Matches the guide |
| Validity | medium | General advice, not my venue |
| Authority | medium | Experience, not a solicitor |
As a class, you will build a RAVA checklist you can use on any source.
Before you leave this step
- In {{code:Project_Portfolio}}, open {{code:09_specialism/sm4}}.
- Click {{btn:New}} and make a new document called {{code:sm4_source_grading}}.
- At the top of it, copy three agreed checks under each of the four RAVA headings.
Our RAVA source-check list
Common issues
- If you are grading the website instead of the claim, cover the logo with your hand and check the claim itself.
- If all four grades are the same, find the weakest check and write why it is lower.
- If Reliability and Authority have the same reason, remember that Reliability is about being careful over time. Authority is about the writer's expertise.
Portfolio Build: Section 1
- Open {{code:sm4_source_grading}} and check the class RAVA checklist is at the top.
- Type the heading Section 1: Flip Your Instinct.
- Rank the four pairs from 1 (trust most) to 4 (trust least), using gut feeling only.
- Now read each source's details again slowly. Look for a named author, real research, a trusted web address and a second source.
- Write a gap note for each pair, like the example.
- {{code:sm4_source_grading}} is saved in {{code:09_specialism/sm4}}.
- The class checklist is at the top.
- Each pair has a gut rank, an after-check rank and a gap note.
Flip Your Instinct pairs
Pair A. Claim: “Ten minutes of foam rolling after training usually reduces next-day soreness for field-sport players.” Source: a named GAA strength-and-conditioning coach writing on their own blog, with a link to a peer-reviewed sports-science abstract.
Pair B. Claim: “This herbal tea reverses inflammation in seven days.” Source: a polished wellness page with a stock “Dr” title in the byline, tidy layout, and a short “research” list. Every page has a shop link, and a 30-second check shows the citations do not open to primary studies and no real named clinician is contactable.
Pair C. Claim: “Student grant appeal deadlines are always six weeks from the decision letter.” Source: a polished page that copies Citizens Information styling, but the web address is not a known public-service domain and no contact body is named.
Pair D. Claim: “Local weekend markets in your county are growing every year.” Source: a tidy news-style article that only quotes one market promoter and repeats figures from that promoter’s press release, with no second dataset.
Example gap note: Gut 1, after check 4. Gap: trusted the title and layout; the check found no real author or primary source.
Unlock the full learning experience
You're previewing this lesson. Get full access to this lesson and hundreds more — each one ready to teach, with interactive activities, printable resources and pupil progress tracking built in.
This lesson is copyright of Coding Ireland 2017 - 2026. Unauthorised use, copying or distribution is not allowed.