Independent response | Mentor Teaching

Independent evaluation: two fictional offline source cards

Independent card C: Maple Bend club sign-up summary

FICTIONAL OFFLINE SOURCE CARD — no live website is shown.
Page title: Maple Bend Library Club Sign-up Summary
Creator: Nia Torres, fictional library assistant
Date: November 3, 2025
Purpose: Summarize current members’ stated availability.
Evidence and method: A one-question form was sent to all 18 current club members on October 31. Twelve replied: 7 chose before school, 4 chose after school, and 1 chose either. The summary says members could select one answer. The tally sheet is not attached.
Limits: Six members did not reply. Stated availability is not the same as attendance at a trial.

Independent card D: Robin’s bus-route notes

FICTIONAL OFFLINE SOURCE CARD — no live website is shown.
Page title: Notes from the Route 4 Bus Stop
Creator: Robin, a fictional Grade 6 student
Date: November 3, 2025
Purpose: Share a student’s observations about morning travel.
Evidence and method: Robin says they asked 5 classmates who ride Route 4. Four said a before-school meeting might be hard because their bus arrives shortly before first period.
Limits and links: This is one student’s informal conversation with 5 classmates, not a poll of every club member. No bus timetable or wider survey is linked.

Question: What can Cards C and D help organizers consider before testing a before-school meeting for current club members? Write 4–6 sentences. Explain what each source can tell about the question, identify each creator or relevant access, and explain each source’s method or evidence. Explain how at least one source’s stated purpose or perspective affects what it can support. Give a cautious conclusion, name at least one relevant limit, and suggest a useful next check. You may recommend any schedule; your score is based on source reasoning, not your schedule preference. Use the planner and rubric to check your response.

Independent source evaluation planner

Use Cards C and D to plan your 4–6 sentence evaluation. You may favor either schedule. Separate what each source reports from what it does not establish.

Question I am checking

________________________________________________________________________________

Who made each source? What access or perspective do they have?

________________________________________________________________________________

What evidence and method does each source show?

________________________________________________________________________________

What purpose, date, or interest should I consider?

________________________________________________________________________________

What can the sources not establish? What should I check next?

________________________________________________________________________________

Draft your 4–6 sentence evaluation

________________________________________________________________________________

Source evaluation rubric

Score each criterion 0–2; total 0–8.
Question and source fit — 2: Accurately explains what each source can tell about the question and identifies each creator or relevant access. 1: Gives some accurate, relevant source-fit or creator/access information, but leaves part incomplete or inaccurate. 0: Gives no accurate, relevant source-fit or creator/access information.
Purpose and perspective — 2: Explains how at least one source’s stated purpose, interest, or perspective affects what it can support, without inventing motives. 1: Identifies a relevant stated purpose, interest, or perspective, but the explanation is incomplete, unclear, or partly unsupported. 0: Gives no relevant supported purpose or perspective reasoning, or only assigns unsupported motives.
Evidence and checking — 2: Accurately explains each source’s method, sample, or source trail and proposes a useful date, record, or comparison check. 1: Gives some accurate, relevant evidence or checking information, but does not meet both parts fully. 0: Gives no accurate, relevant evidence or checking information; appearance or a badge alone is not evidence.
Limits and conclusion — 2: Gives a conclusion within the evidence, names a relevant limit, and suggests a useful next check. 1: Gives only one or two of those three elements accurately and relevantly. 0: Gives none of those elements accurately and relevantly.
Your score does not depend on which meeting time you prefer. A source may be useful for one question and limited for another.