Source Skills and Reliability

Overview

In lesson 16 of 24, students develop the source-evaluation skills needed for their Auckland: Sustainable New Home inquiry. They compare sources about Auckland’s growth and sustainability, considering who created each source, its purpose, evidence, currency, perspective, and usefulness. The lesson supports English language development through explicit vocabulary teaching, visual analysis, structured talk, and sentence frames.

Learning intentions

• WALT identify the author, purpose, date, evidence, and possible bias in a source.
• WALT compare different sources about Auckland’s future development.
• WALT select reliable and respectful sources for a social inquiry.
• WALT explain and justify whether a source is useful for answering an inquiry question.

Success criteria

• I can identify who created a source, when and why it was created.
• I can find evidence and describe a possible perspective or bias respectfully.
• I can compare the strengths and limitations of different source types.
• I can justify whether a source is useful for my Auckland inquiry.

Curriculum links

• Social Sciences: analysing data and sources, making decisions, and evaluating significant challenges.
• Social Sciences: understanding how places change and how societies function and change.
• Economic Activity: using indicators such as GDP per capita, life expectancy, literacy, and schooling to consider development.
• Social Sciences: exploring inequality, ethics, power, governance, and human rights in complex contexts.

Lesson structure (70 minutes)

1. 0–7 min · Hook and prior knowledge. Display the question, “Would you trust this source to help design Auckland’s next neighbourhood?” and show a striking image of a future Auckland waterfront beside a social media post making a claim about it using the hook and source-comparison slides. Students silently rank the source from 1–5 for trustworthiness, then share one reason with a partner.

2. 7–17 min · Explicit teaching and modelling. Introduce the source-check questions: Who made it? Why was it made? When? What evidence is provided? Whose views are included or missing? What language or images suggest a perspective? Teacher models a think-aloud using one source, colour coding author and date in blue, purpose in yellow, evidence in green, and possible bias in red on the source-check teaching slides. Students copy the five questions onto the source reliability investigation sheet and practise one colour-coded annotation.

3. 17–25 min · Vocabulary and visual literacy practice. Teach and display the words reliable, evidence, purpose, perspective, bias, current, respectful, and useful. Use simple definitions, icons, and examples connected to Auckland. Students match each word to an example and rehearse sentence frames: “The source may be reliable because…” and “The source is limited because…”. Provide bilingual discussion time where appropriate, followed by English reporting.

4. 25–47 min · Paired source investigation. Organise 15 pairs and provide five source types: a government webpage extract, community organisation statement, news item, infographic, and social media post. Each pair analyses two sources using the source reliability investigation sheet. Students record the creator, purpose, date, evidence, perspective or possible bias, and usefulness for an inquiry about Auckland’s sustainable housing, transport, water, or green spaces. Teacher circulates, checks understanding, and prompts students to distinguish “I disagree with this” from “This source has a particular purpose or perspective”.

5. 47–60 min · Compare and justify. Regroup students into groups of five, with one pair representing each source type. Students share findings and complete a quick ranking from most to least useful for a specific inquiry question. Each student contributes one reason using the frame, “For the question ___, ___ is more useful than ___ because ___.” Groups report one surprising comparison. Teacher records recurring ideas on the comparison and discussion slides and challenges unsupported claims with, “What evidence in the source makes you say that?”

6. 60–70 min · Plenary and assessment. Students complete an individual exit response on the final justification section: “For my Auckland inquiry, I would use ___ because ___. However, I would check ___ before relying on it.” Invite two students to read responses, then revisit the hook ranking. Students identify one source-check habit they will use in lesson 17.

Resources

• the complete source-skills slide deck
• the source reliability investigation sheet
• Printed extracts representing five source types
• Projector or interactive display
• Highlighters or coloured pencils in four colours
• Board and markers
• Dictionaries or bilingual glossaries
• Devices, if digital source viewing is preferred

Assessment

• During modelling, check whether students can correctly locate author, purpose, date, and evidence using colour coding.
• During paired investigation, question students about the difference between evidence, opinion, perspective, and bias; record students needing further support.
• Use the final justification to assess whether each student can select a useful source and explain a limitation or reason for checking it.

Differentiation

• Provide a source-check checklist with icons, simplified wording, and sentence starters: “The author is…”, “The purpose is…”, “The evidence shows…”, and “This may be limited because…”.
• For English language learners, pre-teach vocabulary with visuals, allow brief first-language discussion, pair students strategically, read extracts aloud, and provide a bilingual glossary. This targets ELLP reading and visual literacy while also developing listening and speaking through supported pair talk and reporting.
• Use colour-coded examples, chunk longer texts, enlarge infographics, and offer text-to-speech or a teacher-read version for students with reading or processing needs.
• Support respectful discussion by modelling that bias means a viewpoint or emphasis, not automatically that a source is false. Accept oral rehearsal before written responses and provide additional writing time where needed.

Extension

• Advanced students triangulate one claim across three different source types, identifying whether the sources agree, contradict, or add different perspectives.
• Students write a short recommendation about which source or combination of sources should guide an Auckland planning decision, including the evidence and limitations behind their judgement.