RE ATAR Unit 1: religious inquiry skills

Analysis and Use of Sources

  • identify the origin, purpose and context of particular sources
  • analyse, interpret and synthesise evidence from different types of sources to develop and sustain an academic argument
  • evaluate the reliability, usefulness and contestable nature of sources to develop informed judgements that support an academic argument
  • analyse and evaluate different interpretations and points of view

Identify the origin, purpose and context of particular sources

The process of identifying the origin, purpose and context of particular sources needs to be supported with evidence

Some questions for students to consider when identifying the origin of a source are:

  • authorship?
  • date?
  • primary/secondary, official/unofficial source?
    • relating existing ideas or generating new ideas?

Some questions for students to consider when identifying the purpose of a source are:

  • who is the audience?
  • what is the point of view?
  • are there differing and/or conflicting views in the source?
  • what values and beliefs are expressed?
  • how does this information compare with other sources?
  • is the information free of bias? Is it objective or subjective?
  • are there gaps (information left out)?
  • is the  information general or specific?
  • is it trying to comfort, convince, convert or condemn?
  • are assumptions being made (without substantiating evidence)?
  • is the argument tentative or decisive?
  • does it draw conclusions?

Some aspects to consider when identifying the context of a source are:

  • historical context?
  • religious context?
  • political context?
  • social/cultural context? Etc.

 

Analyse, interpret and synthesise evidence from different types of sources to develop and sustain an academic argument

Analyse: to 'break down' or 'pull apart' into component parts - to tease out the different ideas within a source and the ways they are connected.

Interpret: to make meaning out of- to explain - to understand in a particular way

Synthesise: to put things together to make a connected whole

Academic argument: is purposeful, is objective, supported by argument and/or evidence, defends or develops a position.

To develop and sustain an academic argument requires access to source material from which to take quotations or statistical information. This information is then interpreted and used to support a position held. The source material is inserted in the explanation to make a logical and convincing case.

analyse and evaluate different interpretations and points of view

interpretation: the way something is understood or explained. For instance, a statistician interprets statistical data to draw conclusions from it.

point-of-view: very similar to ' interpretation' - an attitude or standpoint, - how one sees or thinks of something. For instance, a cartoonist may hold the point of view that a public figure is incompetent and so makes an unflattering or ridiculous caricature of them.

Evaluate

Evaluate Sources

!: Evaluate the reliability, usefulness and contestable nature of sources to develop informed judgements that support and academic argument

The value of a source for making informed judgements relies on:

reliability: the degree to which a source accurate ly expresses the views it claims to represent. Questions to ask include:

who is the author of the source? ls it authoritative? is it consistent or contradictory?

usefulness: the degree of relevance or the degree to which the source serves the intended purpose. Questions to ask include :

who is intended audience? is it informative?

does it arrive at any conclusions?

does it contribute anything to the course content?

contestable nature : the degree to which the source stands up to scrutiny. Questions to ask include :

Does it critically question a held position? Is there obvious bias or gaps?

Is there a diversity of views on the subject? Is it overly sympathetic or hostile?

When reviewing the reliability of survey data, the following should be considered :

  • did the sample represent the population?
  • were the questions fair or were they leading, ambiguous, presumptuous, potentially embarrassing, relying on opinion or on possibly faulty memory?
  • did the data adequately reflect the views of the population?
  • is the data provided consistent ?
  • was the report free of bias and did it acknowledge any limitations?