Evaluating Sources & Synthesising Research

Currency: When was the source published or last updated? Is this recent enough for your purposes?

Authority: Who wrote or produced this source? What are their credentials? Who published or hosts it?

Purpose: Why was this source created? To inform, persuade, sell, entertain? How does its purpose affect your trust in it?

Accuracy: Does the source cite its evidence? Can you verify its key claims elsewhere?

Overall judgement: Is this source suitable for an academic essay? Why or why not?

Source A (Academic journal, 2023): 'Our study found a moderate correlation between heavy social media use and increased anxiety in adolescents aged 13-17.' Source B (Technology journalist, 2022): 'Critics of social media panic overlook evidence that online communities provide genuine support networks for isolated young people.' Source C (Youth advocacy report, 2024): 'The impact of social media is highly individualised — the same platform that harms one young person may be a lifeline for another.' Write your synthesising paragraph below:

Stop: what is your initial instinct about this source? What do you know about it before investigating?

Investigate: who wrote this? Who published or hosts it? What did you find?

Find better coverage: are the key claims in this source confirmed elsewhere? What did you find?

Trace: does the source cite its evidence? Did you trace one claim to its original source? What did you find?

Overall: would you use this source in a formal essay? Why or why not?

Your claim (what argument are you making?):

Briefly describe your three sources (type, author, purpose):

Write your synthesised paragraph, weaving all three sources together:

Check: does the paragraph advance your claim, or does it just summarise each source in turn?

List your three sources (author, year, title):

Your research paragraph with in-text citations:

Check: does each citation include the correct components? Is the synthesis genuinely integrated?

What is plagiarism? Is it always intentional? What are the different types of academic misconduct?

Why does attribution matter — ethically, not just procedurally? What is lost when a researcher fails to cite their sources?

What is the ethical responsibility of a researcher who discovers that a source they have already used contains factual errors or unacknowledged biases?

What are the legitimate uses of anecdotal evidence in research writing? When does it contribute, and when does it mislead?

Find one example in a piece of writing you have read where anecdote is used effectively — where does it strengthen rather than substitute for evidence?

Rewrite this anecdote-based claim as a properly evidenced research sentence: 'My uncle smoked all his life and lived to 95, so smoking clearly does not cause early death.'

What is the article's central claim or research question?

What methodology did the researchers use? What are the potential limitations of this methodology?

What does the article claim to have found? What qualifications or limitations do the authors acknowledge?

Would you use this article in a research essay? For what purpose?

Your research topic:

Source 1 — citation and annotation:

Source 2 — citation and annotation:

Source 3 — citation and annotation:

Choose a contested claim (e.g. 'Social media improves political participation'). Find two sources that support it and two that challenge it:

Write a 200-word research paragraph that synthesises all four perspectives into a nuanced claim. Your paragraph should not simply 'balance' opinions — it should make an argument that emerges from the synthesis:

A headline reads: 'Eating processed meat increases cancer risk by 18%.' What does this actually mean? Is it an absolute or relative risk increase? Why does the distinction matter?

A report states: '90% of dentists recommend this toothpaste.' What questions would you need answered before accepting this claim?

Find one statistical claim in a news article or advertisement. Apply critical analysis: what does the statistic actually show? What context is missing?

Your research paragraph:

Self-check: does the paragraph make an argument, or does it just summarise sources?

What is the difference between disinformation and misinformation? Give an example of each.

Describe two specific strategies for identifying whether a claim circulating online is credible.

What social, economic or political conditions make populations more susceptible to disinformation? Why is this a research literacy issue, not just a technical one?

Name your research topic and your central research question:

List at least five types of sources you will seek out. Include at least one primary source, one peer-reviewed secondary source, and one source that might challenge your initial assumptions:

What are two potential biases or gaps you need to guard against in your research?

Your research essay:

Your reference list:

What are the specific risks of using AI-generated content as a research source (e.g., ChatGPT, Gemini, Copilot)?

Under what circumstances, if any, might AI-generated content be a legitimate tool in a research process — and what precautions would be necessary?

How do the standard source evaluation frameworks (CRAAP, SIFT) apply — or fail to apply — to AI-generated content?

Describe one historical example of unethical research conduct (e.g. the Tuskegee syphilis study, research conducted without consent). What ethical principles were violated?

What safeguards now exist to prevent similar unethical conduct? Why are these safeguards important even when the research goal seems beneficial?

How should findings from unethically conducted research be handled? Should they be used if they are the only source of certain data?

What is the single most important thing you have learned about evaluating sources? Give a specific example.

What research habits will you carry forward into future study? Name three specific practices.

Where do you still feel uncertain or underprepared? What would help you develop in that area?

State the claim and where you encountered it:

Apply SIFT: what did you find when you investigated, sought better coverage, and traced the claim?

Your overall evaluation: is this claim reliable? What level of confidence is justified?

Rank these source types from most to least authoritative for academic research, and explain your reasoning: peer-reviewed journal, newspaper editorial, government statistics report, Wikipedia article, documentary film, expert blog, social media post by an expert.

Are there cases where a 'lower authority' source would be more appropriate than a 'higher' one? Give an example.

Your research question:

Your introduction (100-130 words): establish the context, explain why the question matters, and state your argument:

Does your introduction signal the kind of evidence you will use? Revise if not.

Why is it important to cite a source even when you are paraphrasing (putting it in your own words) rather than quoting directly?

What is the difference between acceptable paraphrase and unacceptable paraphrase (which is a form of plagiarism)?

Paraphrase the following sentence acceptably: 'The relationship between screen time and wellbeing in adolescents is complex and cannot be reduced to a simple causal narrative.' (Smith, 2023, p. 47)

Describe a topic where you have encountered genuinely conflicting expert opinion. What are the competing positions?

What specific criteria would you use to evaluate which position is better supported by evidence?

Write a research sentence that acknowledges the disagreement and takes a qualified position:

Your paragraph:

Identify: your claim sentence, your three pieces of evidence with citations, your analysis of the significance, your linking sentence.

What questions should you ask about the sample size and composition of a study before trusting its conclusions?

What is a 'conflict of interest' in research, and why does it matter even when the research is technically sound?

Find a study that makes a strong claim and identify one specific methodological limitation. How does this limitation affect how confidently you should accept the claim?

What is the most important change in how you evaluate information as a result of this worksheet?

What research habit are you most committed to developing? How will you practise it?

Write a 100-word definition of 'information literacy' that you could explain to someone who had never thought about it before.

Choose any website related to a topic you are currently studying. Apply the CRAAP test: assess it on Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy, and Purpose. Record your findings for each criterion.

Overall assessment: how credible and useful is this website for your research purposes? Would you use it? Why or why not?

Find a complex sentence or short paragraph from an academic or non-fiction source. Copy it here, then write an accurate paraphrase in your own words.

Now check your paraphrase: have you changed both the words AND the sentence structure? Does it still accurately represent the original meaning? Revise if necessary.

When would you choose to paraphrase rather than quote directly? Give two specific situations.

Choose a debatable question related to any subject you are studying. Find three credible sources with different perspectives on this question. Briefly summarise each source's position.

Now write a paragraph (150–200 words) that synthesises all three sources around your own position on the question. Use in-text citations for each source you reference.

Reflect: how did working with multiple sources change or complicate your argument? Was it harder or easier to write after doing the research?

Find two articles covering the same news story from different publications with known different political orientations. What language, framing, or evidence choices reveal each source's bias?

Does recognising a source's bias mean you cannot use it? Explain: when is a biased source still useful to a researcher?

What does intellectual honesty mean to you as a researcher? Give three specific examples of behaviours that demonstrate it.

Describe a situation (real or hypothetical) where a researcher might be tempted to misrepresent their sources. What are the consequences of such dishonesty?

Write a short personal commitment statement: how will you practise ethical research in your academic work?

What is the difference between information and knowledge? Use your experience of this worksheet to illustrate your answer.

What are the three most important things a good researcher does that a poor researcher does not? Explain each with a specific example.

How has your relationship with evidence and sources changed through your work on this worksheet? What will you do differently in future research?

Find an online source on any topic of current debate. Evaluate it using these questions: Who wrote it? What is their expertise? When was it published? Is it hosted by a credible organisation? Does it cite its own sources? Does it acknowledge counterevidence or opposing views?

Based on your evaluation: how would you rate the credibility of this source? How would you use it (or not use it) in a research project?

Read a short article or section of a book related to any topic you are currently studying. Take research notes: record the source details, the main argument, key supporting evidence, any relevant quotations (with page numbers), and your own commentary on each point.

Review your notes: are they sufficiently selective (not just copying out the source)? Are they clearly attributed? Are they organised in a way that will help you write? What would you change about your note-taking process?

Choose any topic you have researched. Write a short synthesis paragraph (150 words) that draws on at least three sources. The paragraph should present YOUR argument, supported by the sources — not a summary of what each source says.

Review your paragraph: is it genuinely synthetic (combining sources around your own argument) or is it a summary of sources in sequence? Revise one sentence to make it more synthetic.

For any research topic, find three credible sources. For each, write an annotation of 80–100 words: brief summary of the source's argument, evaluation of its credibility and limitations, and explanation of how it will be useful to your research.

Reflect: how did the process of annotation change your relationship with each source? Did any source become more or less useful as you thought critically about it?

Write a 200-word personal reflection: what is the most important thing you have learned about research and source evaluation? How has your approach to finding and using information changed?

Create a short 'Research Checklist' of five questions you will ask of every source before using it in your own work.

What is one specific area of research skill you want to develop further? How will you practise it?

What digital literacy skills do you consider yourself strongest in? Where are your gaps? (Consider: evaluating websites, understanding algorithms, recognising data visualisation, spotting AI-generated content, navigating academic databases.)

How has the rise of AI-generated content changed the challenge of evaluating online sources? What new questions do you need to ask of sources that did not exist five years ago?

Find three sources on a research question you genuinely want to investigate. Write a 200-word synthesis paragraph that does not simply summarise each source but weaves their ideas together around your own developing argument.

What was the hardest aspect of this synthesis task? What made it different from simply summarising the sources?

Choose a research question related to any current topic. Find four sources of different types. For each: record the full citation, apply the CRAAP test criteria, and write a 50-word evaluation explaining whether and how you would use it in a research essay.

Looking across your four sources: are they diverse enough (different perspectives, types, dates)? What gaps remain in your research? What additional type of source would most strengthen your argument?

Write a 'Research Learning Plan': identify three specific research skills you want to develop this year, describe one concrete activity for each, and set a timeline for review.

How will your improved research skills benefit you beyond English — in other subjects, in future study, or in your life?

What are the key research tasks you will need to undertake in Year 11 across all your subjects? For each, identify the types of sources you will need and the source evaluation skills most relevant.

What specific research skill do you most want to strengthen before Year 11? Write a concrete plan for developing it.

Write 200 words: what are you now able to do as a researcher that you could not do before this worksheet? What specific skills have you developed, and how will they benefit you in future study?

What is the one research habit you are most committed to developing? How will you practise it?

Choose two subjects other than English where you currently need research skills. For each, identify: what kinds of sources are most valuable, what evaluation criteria matter most, and how synthesis is expected to work in that discipline.

What do the research processes of these two subjects share with literary research in English? What is different?

Write three specific commitments you will keep every time you research a topic.

Describe one research habit you want to break and one you want to build.

In one sentence, explain why rigorous, ethical research matters beyond the classroom.