All Activities
History

Can We Trust This Source?

Overview

Students examine two contrasting accounts of the same event and analyse why they differ, exploring the concept of bias in historical sources.

Learning Objective
Students evaluate the reliability and bias of historical sources by analysing who created them and why.

Resources needed

  • Two short written or oral accounts of the same event from different perspectives

Lesson stages

0 / 7 done
  1. 1 Present two accounts of the same historical event from different perspectives.
  2. 2 Ask: what does each account say happened?
  3. 3 Ask: who wrote each account? When? Why?
  4. 4 Introduce the word bias: a source is biased when it presents a one-sided view.
  5. 5 Ask: is bias always deliberate? Can someone be biased without realising it?
  6. 6 Students identify specific words or claims that show bias in each account.
  7. 7 Discuss: does the existence of bias make a source useless? How do historians deal with it?

Tap a step to mark it as done.

Variations

  • Use a local or national historical event with well-known contrasting accounts.
  • Students write two biased accounts of a classroom event from opposite perspectives.
  • Compare a colonial and an anti-colonial account of the same event.
More information

Teach: bias, perspective, reliable, one-sided, motive, intent, evaluate. A simple framework: Author — Purpose — Audience — Limitations.

Pre-highlight the biased language in each source so students focus on analysis rather than finding it.

Can students identify specific words or phrases showing bias? Can they explain why bias exists without dismissing the source entirely?

The teacher can read two contrasting accounts aloud rather than providing written texts. No printed materials needed.

Students conclude that biased sources are worthless. Teach that a biased source is still valuable evidence — it tells us what that person or group believed and why.

Source evaluation is the most important practical skill in historical study. It transfers directly to critical thinking about media, news, and information in everyday life.