You already built a shared checklist for judging digital sources. Today you put it under real pressure.
Where does our checklist fail, and what wording would catch that next time?
- Test it on three awkward sources that look fine at first glance.
- Find where it gives the wrong steer or no steer.
- Fix those gaps together and save a stronger version.
Your class checklist is built around these five checks. Your teacher reads your class’s own wording from the board; the questions below are what each check is for.
| Check | What it asks |
|---|---|
| Author | Is the author or organisation named, and can you tell what they do? |
| Purpose | Is this mainly trying to inform, persuade, sell or entertain? |
| Evidence | Does it give facts, figures or sources you could check, or only opinions? |
| Currency | Is there a clear date for when this was written or last updated? |
| Cross-checking | Can you find the same key claim on another independent source? |
Listen once as the checks are read. Notice which check you lean on most, and which you skip when you are in a hurry.
Where does our checklist fail, and what wording would catch that next time?
In groups of three or four, apply the class checklist to the invented sources below. For each one, work through the checks, then write only two things: a verdict and one gap line. Skip long write-ups.
Two lines per source is enough. Keep moving — the gaps you find matter more than long write-ups.
| Source | What it looks like | What is awkward about it |
|---|---|---|
| A. GreenPath Climate Brief Ireland’s recycling rate hits 55% | Named researcher. Cites two public datasets. | Dated March 2019, with no update note. A classmate saw a different government figure last month, not linked. |
| B. YouthHealthFacts.ie Why teens need nine hours of sleep (and screens are stealing them) | Polished design, calm tone, neat bullet statistics. | No author, no organisation on an About page, no date. No links to any studies. |
| C. ActivePlay Report 2024 Organised sport and teenage wellbeing in Ireland | Published by the Irish Youth Sport Alliance. Open about methods and limits. Carefully worded findings. | Funded by StrideCo, a sportswear company — disclosed, but in small print. |
Verdict: trust it / check it further / do not rely on it.
Gap line: where the checklist pointed you the wrong way, or gave you nothing useful to say. If a check gave nothing, write no steer and name the missing question.
All three sources have a verdict and one named gap.
Bring the gaps back as a class. For each awkward source you finished, name the failure in one line, then agree the smallest wording change that would catch it next time.
Use the interactive activity to rebuild the shared checklist under the headings you already use. Keep checks short enough that any student could apply them without help. Adopt a check only when the class agrees the wording is clearer than what you had.
Use the gap lines your groups actually wrote. Only add a check when it would have changed a call on one of today's sources.
When the class is happy, save the improved checklist the class way so later work can use this version, not the old one.
Mend our source-evaluation checklist
Pull the failures into one plain idea: a source can pass some checks and still mislead you if the checklist is silent on date, identity, or who benefits. The point of today was not to bin the old checklist. It was to make it earn its keep on harder cases.
By the end of this lesson the aim is an improved shared checklist, saved the class way, that catches the awkward patterns you actually met today.
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 - 2025. Unauthorised use, copying or distribution is not allowed.