Lesson 3: Evidence Under Pressure
A polished page can still be the wrong source. Students practise reaching a bounded verdict: use, use with limits, verify first or do not use.
Lesson 3: Evidence Under Pressure
Ngā Whāinga Akoranga — Learning Intentions
WALT: I can test whether information is credible, relevant and useful for my purpose
WILF: I can identify the claim, trace who is responsible for it, inspect its evidence and explain what the source can and cannot support.
Whakataukī | Traditional Wisdom
“He kōrero te kai a te rangatira.”
Discussion is the food of leaders.
Te Whakatakotoranga | Run of show
Tirohanga Whānui | What this lesson is doing
Source-evaluation lessons often teach a memorable acronym and reward students for locating an author and date. That can make evaluation look complete while the central question remains untouched: what exact claim is this source able to support for this purpose? Here students compare sources outside the page, distinguish evidence from presentation and state uncertainty rather than forcing a binary “reliable/unreliable” label.
You'll need
- Three short source cards that make the same checkable claim: one primary or official source, one responsible secondary account and one decontextualised repost. Remove the conclusion labels.
- Devices for checking origin and context, or printed “about”, date and evidence excerpts prepared by the teacher.
Do Now — Same claim, different wrapper 8 min
What it is: Exposing how quickly presentation quality becomes a credibility judgement.
Run it
- Rank, reveal, revise (8 min): Show three source cards for twenty seconds. Students rank which they would use and record the visible cue that influenced them. Reveal that all repeat the same claim. Ask what the ranking actually measured: design, familiarity, institutional authority, evidence or something else? Students may retain their ranking, but must replace the first reason with a checkable one.
Act 1 — Claim is not source is not evidence 15 min
What it is: Separating three things students often collapse into one citation.
Run it
- Disassemble the card (15 min): Groups highlight the exact claim, box the person or organisation responsible, and underline the evidence offered. If no evidence is visible, write “not shown” rather than “none exists”. Then add the purpose of the source and the purpose of the current task. Discuss how a credible source can still be irrelevant, and a relevant source can still need verification.
Act 2 — Four moves before trust 15 min
What it is: A repeatable evaluation routine that looks beyond the source itself.
Run it
- Leave the page (15 min): For one card, groups complete four moves: trace the original; identify who is responsible and what expertise or stake is relevant; locate date and context; find an independent source that confirms, complicates or contradicts the claim. They record search terms and links, not only conclusions. If browsing is unavailable, use the teacher's prepared origin and corroboration cards.
Act 3 — The pressure test 15 min
What it is: Testing a source against a specific use rather than judging it in the abstract.
Run it
- Use it for what? (15 min): Give each group two possible uses for the same source—for example, background orientation and evidence for a consequential decision. Students decide what extra checking each use demands. They then write the strongest sentence the source supports and a stronger sentence it does not support. Swap and challenge any hidden leap between the two.
Synthesise — A bounded verdict 8 min
What it is: A concise decision that preserves both usefulness and uncertainty.
Run it
- Verdict in four parts (8 min): Groups report: “For the purpose of ___, we would [use / use with limits / verify first / not use] this source because ___. It supports ___. It does not establish ___.” List the checks that changed a group's initial ranking. Those changes are evidence of evaluation, not indecision.
Exit ticket — What would change your mind? 4 min
What it is: Naming the missing evidence that matters most.
Run it
- One decisive check (4 min): Students write their present verdict and one specific finding that would make them revise it. “More research” is not specific; “the original dataset excludes…” or “an independent source reports…” is.
Ngā Huarahi Ako | Differentiation
Tautoko / Support
- Use colour-coded cards with claim, source and evidence on separate strips before asking students to identify them in continuous text.
- Provide sentence frames for the four-part verdict.
Toitoi / Extension
- Find a source that is authoritative for one question but inappropriate for another. Explain precisely where its authority stops.
Te reo Māori
- Kupu: pūtake (source/origin), taunakitanga (evidence), horopaki (context), tika (correct/appropriate).
Mātauranga Māori | Provenance includes relationships
“Who said this?” is not only a credential question. For kōrero tuku iho and mātauranga held by whānau, hapū or iwi, provenance can include who has authority to share it, in what context and with whom. That does not mean treating all culturally located claims as beyond question, nor treating a website citation as permission. The practical move is to name the source community or speaker accurately, keep the context attached and recognise when a classroom task is not entitled to extract or republish the knowledge.
Hononga Marautanga | Curriculum
Te Mātaiaho (2025) · English · Phase 4 · statement id 90306Checking the credibility, relevance, and potential bias of information, selecting sources that support communication across varied contexts.
The lesson refuses a single credibility score. Students separate credibility from relevance, state the context of use and identify potential bias through origin, stake and corroboration. Their final verdict names both what a source supports and where its authority ends.
Sources and checking
- Curriculum quotation: statement 90306 is pasted byte-faithfully from the canonical active curriculum corpus.
- Teacher source cards: use a current claim relevant to the class and re-check every link on the teaching day. Keep the original beside any repost so students can trace provenance.
- The routine is a classroom procedure: this page does not claim that four moves guarantee truth. Its output is a bounded, revisable source-use decision.