Worked example · IT · Year 10
DCF: Producing → Sourcing, searching and planning digital content
A secure Year 10 response, annotated so you can see which success criterion each part meets. The key answer: the claim is false. Footpath CG17 will be diverted for up to 9 months during construction (due to start April 2027), then reopened on its usual route. The most reliable sources are A, C and F; I is reliable but general. B and D are biased in opposite directions. E is disinformation, G is out of date, H is an unreliable content site. Pupils’ exact scores may differ by 1; what matters is the reason.
| Source | Who wrote it? | Date | Evidence? | Purpose or bias? | Score and reason |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | Council Head of Planning, who made the decision | 15 May 2026, current | Full report, maps and conditions attached | To record a legal decision. Neutral wording | 5. The original, official source; .gov.uk domain. |
| B | The company’s press office | 15 May 2026, current | None | To make the company look good | 2. Leaves out the 9-month diversion; “no change at all” is not accurate. |
| C | Named local democracy reporter | 16 May 2026, current | Links to the decision notice; quotes both sides | To inform. Balanced | 5. Reputable paper since 1902; agrees with A. |
| D | “Admin”, no name | 17 May 2026, current | None | To persuade and raise money. Emotive capitals | 1. Anonymous, one-sided, contradicts A and C with no evidence. |
| E | New account, 38 followers | 20 May 2026, but the photo is from 2019 | A photo, which F shows is from somewhere else | To make people angry and share | 1. Fake: a reused photo with a false caption. |
| F | Named fact-checker | 22 May 2026, current | Links to the 2019 photo, the decision notice and the council | To check a claim. Neutral | 5. Shows its method, so readers can check it. |
| G | Anonymous forum user, “heard from a mate” | 2018, out of date | None; hearsay | Opinion | 1. About a different scheme that was refused. |
| H | None given | None given | None; six adverts | To earn money from adverts | 1. Wrong country and wrong number of turbines; empty, repetitive style. |
| I | Two university researchers | 2023, recent | 46 references; peer reviewed; path counter data | Research. Neutral | 4. Highly reliable, but about other wind farms, not this one. |
Every score has a reason tied to a named factor: author, date, citations, purpose or domain. It separates a reliable source from a relevant one (I), and spots that a current post can carry an old photo (E). Evidences criteria 1 and 2.
(a) Closed for ever: D and E (H says walkers are “banned”). Something different: A, C and F say a temporary diversion; B says no change at all; G says 2 years, for a different scheme.
(b) Three independent sources agree. A, the council’s own decision, says Footpath CG17 may be diverted along a signed route for no more than 9 months during construction, and must reopen on its original line before any turbine generates electricity. C reports the same condition, and F confirms the council said in May that the path was still open. Construction is due to start in April 2027, so the diversion can only happen after that. B is wrong that walkers will see “no change”, and D is wrong that it is “for ever”.
(c) Yes: it is peer-reviewed evidence from 12 other sites that walking drops during building work and usually recovers, which helps predict what may happen here, but it cannot prove what will happen at Garth-wen.
The answer to (b) relies on sources that are independent of each other and of the two sides in the argument, and it corrects both biased sources. Evidences criteria 2 and 3.
(a) Source E is disinformation: someone chose a photo from a 2019 quarry and captioned it “This went up TODAY on Garth-wen”. That cannot be an accident, so it was meant to mislead. Source G is more likely misinformation: Hillbagger_77 passed on something “heard from a mate” and probably believed it. Both are false; the difference is whether the person knew.
(b) Every time Cai likes a post against the wind farm, the platform learns that he engages with that view and shows him more of it. His feed fills up with the same claim from accounts that all agree, so “closed for ever” looks like something everybody knows. He could go straight to the original source, the council’s decision notice, or follow a local news site that reports both sides.
Uses the key terms accurately, links each to a specific source, and explains how an echo chamber forms rather than just defining it. Evidences criterion 4.
(a) No. The footpath up Garth-wen is not being closed for ever. The council gave the wind farm permission on condition that Footpath CG17 is only diverted along a signed route for up to 9 months while the turbines are built, and is reopened on its usual route before any turbine starts working (Cyngor Cwm Garth, 2026). The Valley Post agrees (Price, 2026). The viral photo of a locked gate is from a quarry in England in 2019, and the council confirmed in May that the path was still open (Evans, 2026). Building is due to start in April 2027.
(b)
99 words. It answers the question in the first word, then gives the evidence with a citation for each claim. It uses only the three sources scored 5, and each appears in a consistent reference list with author, year, title, site, address and date accessed. Evidences criteria 3 and 5.