Learning evidence
A claim–source–evidence–uncertainty table and verification trail
Teaches learners to examine origin, method, independent verification and context rather than appearance.
Completion evidence for this pathway is a claim–source–evidence–uncertainty table and verification trail. Page count or time spent alone does not demonstrate competence.
The intended capstone is a verification file tracing the source chain, visual context and counter-evidence for a public viral claim. It should connect the lessons in one artefact and retain failed tests as evidence.
A claim–source–evidence–uncertainty table and verification trail
A verification file tracing the source chain, visual context and counter-evidence for a public viral claim
When researching a new claim, chart or AI answer; when a source changes; or when old evidence is updated.
Lesson · Copyright protects original work, while Creative Commons licences communicate specific permissions and conditions in advance. This lesson includes a worked
Open page →Lesson · Citations connect a specific statement to its source, while a bibliography provides the full details needed to find that source. This lesson includes a wor
Open page →Lesson · Facts can be checked, opinions express judgement, claims require evidence and advertising is designed to influence a choice. This lesson includes a worked
Open page →Lesson · Graphs can mislead through truncated axes, uneven intervals, inappropriate chart types or missing denominators. This lesson includes a worked example, prac
Open page →Lesson · Source evaluation asks who produced the information, for what purpose, using which evidence and with what limitations. This lesson includes a worked exampl
Open page →Lesson · AI-generated answers should be broken into checkable claims and tested against primary sources, calculations or safe experiments. This lesson includes a wo
Open page →Lesson · An image can be authentic but misleading when it is cropped, relabelled or removed from its original date and place. This lesson includes a worked example,
Open page →Lesson · Research notes should separate source wording, evidence, interpretation, confidence and limitations. This lesson includes a worked example, practice task,
Open page →Lesson · Lateral reading means leaving a page to investigate its author, organisation and claims through independent sources. This lesson includes a worked example,
Open page →Lesson · Primary sources provide direct evidence, while secondary sources analyse, summarise or interpret that evidence. This lesson includes a worked example, prac
Open page →Project · This project turns a focused question into a short, sourced report with transparent notes and limitations. This lesson includes a worked example, practice
Open page →Project · This project produces an evidence-based verification file for a widely shared claim without amplifying uncertain content. This lesson includes a worked exa
Open page →Lesson · Recommendation systems predict attention from past behaviour, which can narrow the range of sources and viewpoints a user sees. This lesson includes a work
Open page →Lesson · Effective web searching turns a broad question into precise terms, filters and source-focused queries. This lesson includes a worked example, practice task
Open page →Lesson · Samples, averages and correlations are useful only when the group, distribution and alternative explanations are considered. This lesson includes a worked
Open page →Lesson · Verifying a viral claim requires finding the original context, checking date and location and comparing independent evidence. This lesson includes a worked
Open page →Lesson · A strong research question is clear, limited, answerable and connected to the evidence that can realistically be collected. This lesson includes a worked e
Open page →Quiz · A 12-question interactive assessment for Information, Media and Research Literacy, with explanations and a newly shuffled option order on every start. This
Open page →No week closes with reading alone. Use one session for concept and example, a second for practice, and a short third session for testing and explanation. Do not accelerate when a prerequisite is missing.
| Week | Focus | Evidence to produce |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Copyright, Creative Commons and Fair Use, How to Evaluate a Source, Lateral Reading and Source Checks, Recommendation Algorithms and Filter Bubbles | A claim–source–evidence–uncertainty table and verification trail |
| 2 | Creating Citations and a Bibliography, How to Verify AI-Generated Answers, Primary and Secondary Sources, Searching the Web More Effectively | A verification file tracing the source chain, visual context and counter-evidence for a public viral claim |
| 3 | Facts, Opinions, Claims and Advertising, Investigating the Source and Context of Images, Project: A Sourced Mini Research Report, Understanding Samples, Averages and Correlation | Error log and second version |
| 4 | How Graphs Can Mislead Us, Keeping Research Notes and an Evidence Table, Project: A Verification File for a Viral Claim, Verifying a Viral Claim Step by Step | Quiz result, misconception and next application |
The pathway's distinctive question is: How can you test a claim, image, chart or AI answer with reliable evidence? A first response may be a definition, but completion requires a claim–source–evidence–uncertainty table and verification trail. If input, method, limits and review date are unclear, the result is not traceable even when it looks strong.
Start with two different activities among Keeping Research Notes and an Evidence Table, Writing a Strong Research Question, Facts, Opinions, Claims and Advertising, Primary and Secondary Sources. In one, explain the concept in your own words; in the other, perform an application, measurement or user test. The two activities should not close with the same type of evidence. This distinction shows that Information, Media and Research Literacy has been tested through different forms of production.
Later connect Verifying a Viral Claim Step by Step, Lateral Reading and Source Checks, How Graphs Can Mislead Us, How to Verify AI-Generated Answers to the capstone: A verification file tracing the source chain, visual context and counter-evidence for a public viral claim Keep failed tests as well as successful ones. For every error, record conditions, expected result, actual result, possible cause and the single change made.
Check these traps separately: Treating professional appearance as proof of reliability; Mistaking one search result for independent verification; Presenting correlation as causation; Using an AI answer as a source. Reading a trap is insufficient; find an example from your own work and state which evidence made the problem visible.
Return rule: When researching a new claim, chart or AI answer; when a source changes; or when old evidence is updated. Do not delete the previous record; add a date, changed tool or source, new evidence and the next mini trial. Progress is therefore tracked through the quality of explanation, application and correction—not the number of pages completed.
The answer must produce evidence, not only a definition: A claim–source–evidence–uncertainty table and verification trail.
Keep it with conditions, expected result, actual result and the correction.
No. Sources define method and limits; practice evidence must be produced separately.
When researching a new claim, chart or AI answer; when a source changes; or when old evidence is updated.
A verification file tracing the source chain, visual context and counter-evidence for a public viral claim
Primary or institutional source for method and technical limits.
Open source →Primary or institutional source for method and technical limits.
Open source →Primary or institutional source for method and technical limits.
Open source →