You've helped them one at a time. The real understanding is how the ideas CONNECT — teach that next.
Claim (claim-identification — what EXACTLY is being asserted?) ×Weigh (credibility-evaluation — who is in a position to KNOW, and what is their stake?)
A post says 'this food is basically poison.' Why do Claim and Weigh mean you pin the claim before checking the source?
Claim then says: “You can evaluate whether a source is credible without ever stating clearly what the claim is.” — is that right?
The link: state exactly what is claimed, then ask who could know it.
Pin the claim, then weigh who could know.
Trace (evidence-traceback — where does this claim ORIGINATE? follow the chain back) ×Update (belief-revision — being wrong is how knowledge MOVES; carry old-guess and new-guess)
You trace a viral statistic back and find it came from a single unsourced tweet. How do Trace and Update connect?
Trace then says: “You should change your beliefs based on mood, not on where the evidence traces back to.” — is that right?
The link: follow the evidence back, and let what you find revise your belief.
Trace it to the source, then update on what you find.
Capstone — investigate one viral claim together
Three moves of a truth-checker. Bring in the cast member for each.
State exactly what is being asserted. Who?
Who do you bring in?
Follow the evidence back to its origin. Who?
Who do you bring in?
Revise your belief when the evidence says so. Who?
Who do you bring in?
The synthesis: pin the claim, trace the evidence, and revise your belief — how a careful thinker checks what is true.
