Evaluating Sources & Bias — Practice · Grade 9 English

Chapter: Research & Source-Based Writing

What this practice covers

By the end of Evaluating Sources & Bias you should be able to:

11 questions, multiple choice and written answer, each with a worked explanation.

Vocabulary used: credibility, bias, primary source, secondary source, currency.

Problem 1

Which source is generally MOST credible for a research question about vaccine safety?
  1. A random social media post with no citations
  2. A peer-reviewed medical study
  3. An anonymous online forum comment
  4. A blog post with no listed sources
Answer and explanation

A peer-reviewed medical study

Peer-reviewed studies are vetted by other experts and rely on verifiable methodology, making them the most credible option here.

Problem 2

Explain the difference between a primary and a secondary source, using an example of each related to a historical event.
Answer and explanation

A primary source is firsthand, like a soldier's diary written during a war; a secondary source analyzes that event afterward, like a historian's book that references and interprets several diaries and records.

Problem 3

A news article about a new law is published on a website funded entirely by a political party that supports the law. What should a careful researcher do?
  1. Trust the article completely, since it is published online.
  2. Ignore the source completely and refuse to read it.
  3. Read it, but check its claims against independent, less biased sources before using it as evidence.
  4. Assume everything in the article is false.
Answer and explanation

Read it, but check its claims against independent, less biased sources before using it as evidence.

A source with a clear motive can still contain accurate information, but its claims should be verified against independent sources rather than trusted or dismissed automatically.

Problem 4

Why does the 'currency' of a source (how recent it is) matter more for some research topics than others? Give an example.
Answer and explanation

Fast-changing topics like technology or current events need recent sources to be accurate, while topics like ancient history or well-established scientific principles may rely fine on older sources; for example, a five-year-old article about the newest smartphones would already be outdated.

Problem 5

A student finds a compelling statistic on a website but cannot find the original study it claims to cite anywhere else. What is the BEST course of action?
  1. Use the statistic anyway, since it sounds convincing.
  2. Treat the statistic with skepticism and avoid using it unless the original source can be verified.
  3. Change the statistic slightly to make it easier to cite.
  4. Assume the website invented the statistic and report the website to authorities.
Answer and explanation

Treat the statistic with skepticism and avoid using it unless the original source can be verified.

An unverifiable claim should not be trusted as evidence; careful researchers only use statistics they can trace to a real, checkable source.

Problem 6

Decide how to use the sources. Give a detail and explain its relevance.
Answer and explanation

Trace the count to the original report and check whether attendance includes a different group. Until that distinction is documented, cite the report’s 38 volunteers and label the larger claim unverified.

Use the criteria to compare your reasoning, not to copy the model’s wording. A supported alternative interpretation may earn full credit.

Response criteria

  • Make an accurate, focused claim or revision.
  • Use a relevant detail or a clearly explained language choice.
  • Explain the relationship and recognize a relevant limit.

Problem 7

A learner writes: “A .org address guarantees an unbiased source.” Explain the problem and produce a better response.
Answer and explanation

An address describes registration, not evidence quality. Investigate authorship, funding, method, and corroboration.

Use the criteria to compare your reasoning, not to copy the model’s wording. A supported alternative interpretation may earn full credit.

Response criteria

  • Make an accurate, focused claim or revision.
  • Use a relevant detail or a clearly explained language choice.
  • Explain the relationship and recognize a relevant limit.

Problem 8

Compare what you must inspect in these two cases. What can transfer, and what must be checked again?
Answer and explanation

Evaluate expertise, access to evidence, method, publication context, purpose, date, and traceability. These are questions to investigate, not a scorecard based on appearance. The method transfers, but the particular detail, scope, and context must be read again. Trace the count to the original report and check whether attendance includes a different group. Until that distinction is documented, cite the report’s 38 volunteers and label the larger claim unverified.

Use the criteria to compare your reasoning, not to copy the model’s wording. A supported alternative interpretation may earn full credit.

Response criteria

  • Make an accurate, focused claim or revision.
  • Use a relevant detail or a clearly explained language choice.
  • Explain the relationship and recognize a relevant limit.

Problem 9

Using an assigned reading or one exercise source, write a developed response applying evaluating sources & bias. Aim for 180–250 words; name the reading or reproduce the sentence you revise.
Answer and explanation

The company has a sales interest, but that alone does not prove the count false. Ask for sample size, measurement, selection and comparison; the claim cannot establish tutoring caused the improvement without those details. A complete response supplies context, a focused claim, a brief supporting detail, explanation, and a relevant qualification. Do not simply repeat this model.

Use the criteria to compare your reasoning, not to copy the model’s wording. A supported alternative interpretation may earn full credit.

Response criteria

  • Make an accurate, focused claim or revision.
  • Use a relevant detail or a clearly explained language choice.
  • Explain the relationship and recognize a relevant limit.

Problem 10

Write two specific feedback comments on a response to this unit: one on accuracy or meaning and one on evidence or language. Then state a revision priority.
Answer and explanation

Check whether the response explains evaluate expertise, access to evidence, method, publication context, purpose, date, and traceability. these are questions to investigate, not a scorecard based on appearance. Ask for a relevant detail and the reason it supports the conclusion. Prioritize the mistaken assumption shown here: “A .org address guarantees an unbiased source.”

Use the criteria to compare your reasoning, not to copy the model’s wording. A supported alternative interpretation may earn full credit.

Response criteria

  • Make an accurate, focused claim or revision.
  • Use a relevant detail or a clearly explained language choice.
  • Explain the relationship and recognize a relevant limit.

Problem 11

Choose a fresh sentence or detail from the assigned selection. Explain how this unit’s method applies, and identify one uncertainty or limitation.
Answer and explanation

The archive proposal values participation, the historian asks for traceable uncertainty, and the resident asks for consent. A labeled memory layer with dates and participant approval connects these concerns without turning memory into the original map. The response must supply its own precise detail and explain it; copying the model without fresh evidence is insufficient.

Use the criteria to compare your reasoning, not to copy the model’s wording. A supported alternative interpretation may earn full credit.

Response criteria

  • Make an accurate, focused claim or revision.
  • Use a relevant detail or a clearly explained language choice.
  • Explain the relationship and recognize a relevant limit.

Browse all courses