9.42 Secondary Source Evaluation and Bias Worksheet

Source A (editorial, 1970): Tariq Holland argues that a ban on single-use plastic bags is “clearly a failure,” citing two months of complaints and a photo of an empty storefront. The editorial assumes the policy caused the closure. Source B (city audit, 1970): The audit reports that complaints rose briefly, then returned to baseline by month four. It finds that the storefront owner had planned to move before the policy began, based on lease records. The audit still notes that some groups faced new costs and recommends adjustments. Both sources discuss the same policy but use different evidence.

You are researching how ordinary residents experienced the consequences of a national literacy initiative. Source A (2012, popular magazine feature): Lena Alvarez tells a dramatic story centered on one family, using vivid description and unnamed “neighbors” as voices. The article includes no citations. Source B (2015, scholarly monograph): Serena Martinez uses a sample of 120 diaries and letters held in three archives, explains how the sample was selected, and quotes participants with collection information. Both are secondary sources interpreting past experiences.

Source A (documentary narration, 2009): The narrator claims how immigration patterns changed a city’s politics was driven by “economic desperation,” pointing to unemployment estimates rising about 34% and to two factory closure announcements. Source B (academic article, 2010): Leila Bailey argues the same event was also shaped by political organizing, noting that membership in neighborhood associations rose roughly 20% and that meeting attendance increased after closures. Both sources connect economic changes to community action, but they emphasize different parts of the story.