Sbq Survival Guide

Source–Based Questions Survival Guide ⌂ INFERENCE ⌂ ( CONCLUDING )

 To infer means to draw a conclusion about an issue by using information that is available to you and what you already know (contextual knowledge).  To infer is also to read “between the lines” of a message in the source provided.  Make use of your contextual knowledge to interpret the clues/ details in the source/ or make sense of the details in the source.  Then, draw a conclusion about the source/ infer the purpose of the author where necessary. LORMS ( INFERENCE ) ‘What’ question L1 – Repeats Surface Info / Provenance L2 – Inference in Content, unsupported L3 – Inference in Content, supported ‘Why’ / ‘What is the message…’ question L1 – Repeats Surface Info / Provenance L2 – Inference in Content, unsupported L3 – Inference in Content, supported L4 – Inference in Purpose / Agenda / Motive

Salient points to take note when writing your Inference answers:  2 distinct statements of inference + support from source evidence should be sufficient  paraphrasing the source ≠ making an inference  no need to write contextual knowledge, except for inferring purpose  if the purpose is not included in one of the inferences, answers should end with the purpose  paragraphing is essential, one paragraph for each inference + support  each inference must be followed immediately by support from the source QUESTIONS ( INFERENCE ) 1

• What does Source X tell you about ... ? • What is the cartoon trying to show? • What can you tell about ... ? EYA. • Does Source X argue for or against ... ? EYA. • Do you think the author of the source is for or against ... ? EYA. • Look at Source X. Was the cartoon drawn by a ... or a ... ? EYA. • What is the cartoonist attitude towards the ... ? EYA. • What impression of ... is given in Source X? EYA. • What is the message of Source X? EYA. • Why do you think the artist drew this cartoon?

⌂ COMPARISON ⌂ ( COMPARE & CONTRAST )

 To compare and contrast means to look for similarities and differences between two sources.  In order to compare sources, you need to refer to some common factors for comparison so that your comparisons are matching.  Then, draw a conclusion on how the two sources are similar/ different or how similar/ different the two sources are. LORMS ( COMPARISON ) ‘1-sided’ question (compare either Similarity or Difference) L1 – Similar L2 – Similar L3 – Similar L4 – Similar L5 – Similar

/ / / / /

Different Different Different Different Different

in Surface Info / Provenance in Content, unsupported in Content, supported in Tone in Purpose

‘2-sided’ question (compare both Similarity and Difference) L1 – Similar L2 – Similar L3 – Similar L4 – Similar L5 – Similar

and/or and/or and/or and/or and/or

Different based on Surface Info / Provenance Different in Content, unsupported Different in Content, supported Different in Tone Different in Purpose

Salient points to take note when writing your Comparison answers:

2

 need to have common statement of comparison when comparing similarity / difference in content  comparison must be kept in focus to the topic, not trivial comparisons  common statements must be distinct  comparison must be well supported with source evidences from both sources  each common statement of comparison must be followed immediately by source support from each source  no need to write contextual knowledge, except for comparing purpose QUESTIONS ( COMPARISON ) • How are Sources X and Y similar? • How do Sources X and Y differ? • In what ways are Sources X and Y similar? • In what ways are Sources X and Y different? • Contrast / Differentiate / Distinguish between Sources X and Y. • How similar are Sources X and Y? • How different are Sources X and Y? • To what extent / How far is Source X similar to Source Y? • To what extent / How far is Source X different from Source Y? • Compare Sources X and Y.

⌂ ASSERTION ⌂ ( JUDGING )

 An assertion is essentially a conclusion/ interpretation that has been made on an issue.  However, most interpretations are not fully accurate, so we have to use our contextual knowledge to examine whether the source contains some elements of truth.  Study the source to find out what you need to assert about the topic or issue. Then, comment on the sources and state how far they prove the assertion to be true.  Use your contextual knowledge to discuss other aspects of the topic/ issue that the assertion has not raised.  Draw your own conclusion which may not totally agree or disagree with the assertion.

3

LORMS ( ASSERTION ) ‘1-sided’ question (state whether source ‘Agree’ or ‘Disagree’ with the assertion) L1 – Agree or Disagree based on Surface Info / Provenance L2 – Agree or Disagree based in Content (evaluate any 1 source for reliability) ‘2-sided’ question (as above + conclusion on ‘how far’) L1 – Agree or Disagree based on Surface Info / Provenance L2 – Agree or Disagree based in Content (evaluate any 1 source for reliability) L3 – ‘How far’ do the sources prove the assertion to be true

Salient points to take note when writing your Assertion answers:  need to state whether each source agree or disagree in their content, with the assertion in the topic/ issue given  no need to bring in cross–referencing (CK/OS) when working on the content of each source, except when working on reliability  paragraphing is important, one paragraph for comments on each source QUESTIONS ( ASSERTION ) • Do the sources show / support / agree ... ? EYA. • Do the sources support the view that ... ? EYA. • To what extent / How far does Source X support Source Y ... ? EYA.

⌂ RELIABILITY ⌂ ( PROVING )

 To evaluate a source for reliability is to examine how reliable, truthful, accurate, authentic or credible the source is, in order to decide how much you can believe or trust the source.  Evaluating a source requires you to examine further into the source and not take it at face value.  To evaluate the reliability of a source, detect whether there are hints of biasness in the source information.

4

 Work on the factors in the mnemonic “SOLAR-OF” to help you detect biasness in the source. o Slant  is it one-sided? o Over-generalisations  does it contain sweeping claims/ statements which may not be true for every one/ situation? o Loaded Language  does it contain words that suggest additional meaning? o Association  does it link an opinion/ concept to a famous person or organisation who may not be an expert/ authority in the subject? o Repetition  does it have half-truths which seem to become accepted as “fact-like” as they can be made to stick in the mind by simply repeating it often enough o Opinion or Fact  does it contain information which are points of view and not based on certainty/ cannot be verified?  does it contain information that can be checked, and shown to be true or false, right or wrong?  Then, check the source against other sources/ contextual knowledge by doing a cross-referencing. Do other sources prove (confirm) or disproves (challenges) what the source is stating? (Note: Your choice of sources/ information to cross refer to will depend on their relevance and reliability too. Avoid cross-referencing to an clear-cut unreliable source to confirm/ challenge the base source)  Then, draw a conclusion on whether you think the source can be believed/ be trusted/ be proven/ is reliable. LORMS ( RELIABILITY ) ‘1-sided’ question (evaluate Reliable) L1 – Reliable based on Surface Info / Provenance L2 – Reliable in Content L4 – L2 + X–ref (CK/OS) to confirm reliability

‘1-sided’ question (evaluate Not Reliable)

5

L1 – Not Reliable based on Surface Info / Provenance L2 – Not Reliable in Typicality L3 – Not Reliable in Content L4 – L3 + X–ref (CK/OS) to challenge reliability ‘2-sided’ question (evaluate Reliable and Not Reliable) L1 – Reliable or Not Reliable based on Surface Info / Provenance L2 – Not Reliable in Typicality L3 – Reliable and Not Reliable in Content L4 – L3 + X–ref (CK/OS) to confirm and challenge reliability Salient points to take note when writing your Reliability answers:  only bring in "typicality" if the source cannot be trusted, cannot be believed, is not reliable and cannot be proven  questions such as “To what extent…reliable?”, “How far… reliable?” and “How reliable…" will have to bring in both the reliable and not reliable aspects  "reliability" is not about what the source tells us, but about whether we believe what it tells us  cross-referencing is about checking the reliability of a source  cross-referencing must be done purposefully such that the part of the information cross-referenced to must yield accurate reference to the point made in that particular source  for a 2-sided answer, always evaluate the reliability of a source first and then evaluate its non-reliability QUESTIONS ( RELIABILITY ) • Do you think Source X is fair ... ? EYA. • Do you believe / trust what Source X says about ... ? EYA. • Does Source X prove / show that ... ? EYA. • Do you think Source X provides a balanced view about ... ? EYA. • Is Source X reliable as evidence of ... ? EYA. • Sources X and Y give two differing accounts of ... Which source is not telling the truth / believable / fair? EYA. • In what ways is Source X reliable? EYA. • How reliable is Source X? EYA. • To what extent / How far is Source X reliable? EYA. • To what extent do you believe / trust what Source X says about ... ? EYA. • How authentic is Source X?

6

⌂ UTILITY ⌂ ( USEFULNESS )

 To evaluate a source for usefulness is to weigh the relevance (applicability) and amount of information (coverage) provided in the source.  It is to judge how much the source helps you to understand an issue better by studying what it tells and does not tell you.  Evaluate a source for usefulness by first identifying the specific topic/ issue in the question.  Study the source to find out what you need to know about the topic/ issue. Then, examine what the source does tell you (useful) and determine if there is a limitation in the information provided.  Use your contextual knowledge or other sources to see what information is missing (just like checking what pieces missing in a jigsaw puzzle).  Depending on the topic/ issue, sometimes it may be necessary to consider the reliability of the source (especially when you are trying to understand facts) and if it affects how you can use the information. An unreliable source can diminish the usefulness of a source as information is inaccurate.  However, this does not mean that if a source is unreliable, it is completely useless. It may be still useful in helping you understand why people would think or act in a certain way on the issue. LORMS ( UTILITY ) ‘1-sided’ questions (evaluate Useful or Limitations) L1 – Useful / Limitations based on Surface Info / Provenance L2 – Useful / Limitations in Content L3 – L2 + X-ref (CK/OS) to confirm or challenge reliability  affect utility ‘2-sided’ questions (evaluate Useful and Limitations) L1 – Useful and/or Limitations based on Surface Info / Provenance L2 – Useful or Limitations in Content L3 – Useful and Limitations in Content L4 – L2/L3 + X-ref (CK/OS) to confirm and challenge reliability  affect utility

Salient points to take note when writing your Utility answers: 7

 make use of the terms "limitations" or "limited use" to evaluate the source(s) which may not be very useful/ is only useful to a certain extent  do a cross-referencing to check the reliability of a source, which will affect its usefulness  cross-referencing must be done purposefully such that the part of the information cross-referenced to must yield accurate reference to the point made in that particular source  for a 2-sided answer, always evaluate the usefulness of a source first and then evaluate its limitations  a source is useful in 3 ways – 1) it shows something about an issue 2) its content can be verified (reliable) by other sources/ contextual knowledge 3) its content is not reliable, but the “unreliability” of the source is useful to let us know why it is not reliable (e.g. why it is used as a propaganda msg)  a source is not useful (has limitations) in 2 ways – 4) it is omitting some other important information, i.e. it doesn’t show other things about an issue 5) its content is challenged (not reliable) by other sources/ contextual knowledge QUESTIONS ( UTILITY ) • What can we learn from Source X? EYA. • In what ways is Source X useful? EYA. • What can you learn from Source X about ... ? EYA. • How does Source X help us understand ... ? EYA. • Which source is more useful as evidence about ... ? EYA. • Is Source X of any use to your understanding of ... ? EYA. • How useful is Source X for finding out about ... ? EYA. • How useful are Sources X and Y to your understanding on ... ? EYA. • How useful will this source be to a person who is interested in the ... ? EYA. • To what extent is Source X useful? EYA. • In what ways is this source useful ... ? EYA. • To what extent / How far do Sources X and Y help you understand ... ? EYA. • How much can we learn from Source X? EYA.

8