Learning goals

I can evaluate source purpose, evidence quality, omissions, and uncertainty across credible and questionable sources.
I can write an evidence-led briefing that distinguishes fact, inference, opinion, and unresolved uncertainty.
I can convey the common ground and material conflicts among sources without creating false equivalence.

What you will be able to do

I can evaluate source purpose, evidence quality, omissions, and uncertainty across credible and questionable sources.
Skill
reception
I can write an evidence-led briefing that distinguishes fact, inference, opinion, and unresolved uncertainty.
Skill
production
I can request evidence, correct a claim respectfully, and acknowledge when my own claim needs revision.
Skill
interaction
I can convey the common ground and material conflicts among sources without creating false equivalence.
Skill
mediation
I can recognise persuasive framing and verify an inference before repeating it as fact.
Skill
strategies
I can examine how local knowledge and cultural framing affect credibility judgements while applying the same evidence standards.
Skill
pluricultural competence

Core vocabulary

trace the claim

Follow a statement back to its original evidence.

Trace the claim to the count sheet before repeating it.

Meaning / IPA

ตรวจย้อนที่มาของข้อกล่าวอ้าง

IPA: tɹˈeɪs ðə klˈeɪm

self-selected sample

People who decide for themselves to join a study or survey.

A self-selected sample may not represent all customers.

Meaning / IPA

กลุ่มตัวอย่างที่เลือกเข้าร่วมเอง

IPA: sˈɛlfsɪlˈɛktᵻd sˈæmpəl

primary record

A record made directly from the event or measurement.

The daily count sheet is a primary record.

Meaning / IPA

บันทึกต้นทาง

IPA: pɹˈaɪmɚɹi ɹˈɛkɚd

an omitted denominator

A missing total needed to interpret a proportion.

The omitted denominator makes the percentage hard to interpret.

Meaning / IPA

ฐานจำนวนที่ถูกละไว้

IPA: ɐn oʊmˈɪɾᵻd dɪnˈɑːmᵻnˌeɪɾɚ

conflict of interest

An interest that could influence judgement or presentation.

Disclose a conflict of interest without assuming dishonesty.

Meaning / IPA

ผลประโยชน์ที่อาจกระทบความเป็นกลาง

IPA: kˈɑːnflɪkt ʌv ˈɪntɹəst

independently verified

Checked by a party not responsible for the original claim.

The result has not been independently verified.

Meaning / IPA

ผ่านการตรวจสอบอย่างเป็นอิสระ

IPA: ˌɪndɪpˈɛndəntli vˈɛɹᵻfˌaɪd

provisional finding

A finding that remains open to revision.

Describe the count as a provisional finding.

Meaning / IPA

ผลที่พบเบื้องต้น

IPA: pɹəvˈɪʒənəl fˈaɪndɪŋ

misleading framing

Presentation that encourages an unsupported interpretation.

The headline creates misleading framing by changing the unit of measurement.

Meaning / IPA

การนำเสนอที่ชวนให้เข้าใจผิด

IPA: mɪslˈiːdɪŋ fɹˈeɪmɪŋ

issue a correction

Publicly replace an inaccurate statement with a more accurate one.

The team should issue a correction and retain the reason.

Meaning / IPA

เผยแพร่คำแก้ไขข้อมูล

IPA: ˈɪʃuː ɐ kɚɹˈɛkʃən

source attribution

Showing where information or an interpretation originated.

Keep source attribution attached to every disputed number.

Meaning / IPA

การระบุว่าแนวคิดมาจากแหล่งใด

IPA: sˈoːɹs ɐtɹɪbjˈuːʃən

Meaning through delivery

Stress the measurement noun: cups ORDERED, cups USED and cups DISCARDED are different claims. Read percentages with their denominators.

Thai support · ตัวช่วยภาษาไทย

เน้นเสียงและแบ่งวรรคเพื่อรักษาความหมาย ข้อจำกัด และระดับความมั่นใจ โดยไม่เติมคำหรือเสียงที่เปลี่ยนสาร

Trace the claim to the count sheet before repeating it.
A self-selected sample may not represent all customers.
The daily count sheet is a primary record.
The omitted denominator makes the percentage hard to interpret.
Disclose a conflict of interest without assuming dishonesty.
The result has not been independently verified.
Describe the count as a provisional finding.
The headline creates misleading framing by changing the unit of measurement.
The team should issue a correction and retain the reason.
Keep source attribution attached to every disputed number.

Extended listening · A fictional reusable-cup campaign announces a dramatic result

First listen for the situation and stance. Then record details, inference and uncertainty separately. Attempt the questions before revealing the transcript.

Thai support · ตัวช่วยภาษาไทย

ฟังภาพรวมก่อน แล้วแยกรายละเอียด การอนุมาน และจุดที่ไม่แน่ใจ ลองตอบก่อนเปิดบทพูด

Which quantity fell by fifty percent?
What are the stock-flow estimates?
Why is the newsletter link not independent corroboration?
What conclusion avoids both overclaiming and dismissal?

Listening notes

Transcript

Before we decide whether the campaign headline is accurate, we need to ask what was actually counted. Orders, stock use and waste are three different things. Ordering twelve hundred cups rather than twenty-four hundred is a fifty percent fall in orders. That arithmetic is straightforward. The difficulty begins when the headline changes the noun from orders to waste.

The stock recorder includes opening stock, deliveries, transfers and closing stock. On that basis, estimated cup use fell from twenty-four hundred to fifteen hundred and fifty. Relative to drinks sold, the estimate changes from eight cups for every ten drinks to just over six for every ten. Those figures tell a more qualified story. They still depend on an assumption about unaccounted-for stock, and they do not include every kind of café waste.

Now consider the poll. One hundred and fifty-three positive responses out of one hundred and eighty is a measure of what those responses said. It is not automatically a measure of what all customers did. We should neither treat a self-selected poll as representative nor dismiss it as having no possible value. It can reveal useful questions and experiences while being unsuitable for a population estimate.

Notice, too, how a claim can appear independently confirmed when several pages merely repeat it. The newsletter's first link took readers back to the campaign announcement. That disclosed the source but added no independent measurement. The later correction is stronger because it explains the change in claim and its evidential basis.

Your briefing should distinguish direct records, calculations, interpretations and unknowns. Cite the fictional source identifiers, disclose the campaign team's interest, and avoid replacing one overconfident verdict with another. You can say that the waste-halving claim is not established by these records without claiming to know that the project had no benefit. State what further evidence would answer the missing question.

Thai support · ตัวช่วยภาษาไทย

เปิดบทพูดหลังลองด้วยตนเอง ใช้ตรวจสอบหลักฐาน ไม่ใช้แทนการฟัง

Reading and source dossier

Read all source cards. Track authorship, purpose, definitions and limitations. Cite source and paragraph IDs in the answers. All sources are fictional practice material.

Thai support · ตัวช่วยภาษาไทย

อ่านทุกแหล่ง แยกผู้เขียน จุดประสงค์ นิยาม และข้อจำกัด อ้างรหัสแหล่งและย่อหน้า ข้อมูลทั้งหมดเป็นกรณีสมมติ

All source people, organisations, figures and quotations in this pack are invented for learning.

S1 · Campaign announcement

Campaign team

Invented for this course. Not a real organisation, study, quotation or public announcement. Cite the source ID within this exercise only.

[1] Our reusable-cup month has cut disposable waste in half. The team celebrates the creativity of volunteers and thanks everyone who brought a cup. The headline draws on a comparison between 2,400 disposable cups ordered in September and 1,200 ordered in October. It does not report a direct waste audit. The team also received 180 enthusiastic comments through the campaign page.

[2] The announcement was drafted before the October stock reconciliation was complete. It describes the comparison as a campaign success but gives no figures for drinks sold, remaining stock, cups brought from another store or the number of operating days. A small note says that September included two additional open days. The communications lead is also responsible for demonstrating the campaign's impact to its sponsor. That interest should be disclosed, but it does not by itself show that any count was invented.

[3] The team invites readers to share the headline widely. Readers evaluating it should distinguish support for reuse from support for this particular numerical claim. Even a desirable project can be described with an unsupported measure.

S2 · Stock reconciliation

Café operations recorder

Invented for this course. Not a real organisation, study, quotation or public announcement. Cite the source ID within this exercise only.

[1] Opening disposable-cup stock was 600 at the start of September and 400 at the start of October. The café received 2,400 cups during September and 1,200 during October. Closing stock was 400 and 150 respectively. In September, 200 cups were transferred to another kiosk; in October, 100 arrived from that kiosk. No other transfers were recorded.

[2] Under the recorder's stated assumption that all unaccounted-for stock was used, estimated café use was 2,400 cups in September and 1,550 in October. This is a stock-flow estimate, not a count of cups thrown away. It may include spillage or damaged cups. Drinks sold were 3,000 in September and 2,500 in October. The café opened for twenty-two and twenty days respectively.

[3] The recorder asks the campaign team to state the method and retain both the raw quantities and the assumption. Cup use per drink appears to have fallen, but the comparison cannot isolate the campaign's causal effect. The menu, operating days and mix of customers also changed. A later waste audit could test a different question, but it should not be described as if it had already happened.

S3 · Optional customer poll

Volunteer research group

Invented for this course. Not a real organisation, study, quotation or public announcement. Cite the source ID within this exercise only.

[1] An online poll asked campaign-page visitors whether they intended to bring a reusable cup more often. Of 180 submitted responses, 153 selected yes. The form did not require an account or prevent a person responding from more than one device. It also did not verify whether respondents had bought a drink at the café. The question measured intention after respondents saw the campaign's success message.

[2] The volunteer group describes the poll as useful feedback from an interested audience. It expressly does not call it an estimate of behaviour across all customers. Participants may have been more favourable to reuse than non-participants, and the positive introduction may have affected responses. Neither possibility proves that every response is unreliable.

[3] The group recommends using the poll to design follow-up questions: what makes bringing a cup difficult, which collection points help, and whether intentions translate into observed use. The distinction between intention and action should remain visible in any summary. Combining the poll percentage with the stock-order percentage would not create a stronger single measure because the two figures refer to different populations and outcomes.

S4 · Social post and revision

Unaffiliated student newsletter

Invented for this course. Not a real organisation, study, quotation or public announcement. Cite the source ID within this exercise only.

[1] A newsletter initially repeated the claim that half of all café waste had disappeared. Its editor had seen the campaign headline but not the reconciliation sheet. When a reader asked for the measurement method, the editor linked the original announcement as proof. This was attribution, but it was not independent verification: both statements depended on the same underlying claim.

[2] After reading the reconciliation, the editor published a correction. The revised sentence says that the café ordered fewer disposable cups in October and that a stock-flow estimate suggests lower cup use per drink; neither measure establishes that total waste halved. The earlier wording remains visible below a correction note so readers can understand what changed.

[3] The editor also removed a claim that all customers had adopted the campaign. The poll measured reported intention among voluntary respondents, not observed behaviour among all customers. The correction does not say the campaign failed. It says the available evidence supports a narrower and differently defined conclusion. The editor invites additional records and commits to updating the account if a direct waste audit becomes available.

Reading questions

Recalculate October estimated use.
Which population does S3 describe?
Does disclosure of the campaign lead’s interest establish dishonesty?
How does S4 preserve accountability?

Language in use

Grammar and reformulation

Title

Reporting verbs, epistemic modals, distinction between directly recorded observations and interpretive claims.

Examples

Trace the claim to the count sheet before repeating it.
A self-selected sample may not represent all customers.
The daily count sheet is a primary record.
The omitted denominator makes the percentage hard to interpret.

Local and daily-life application

Term
trace the claim
Thai
ตรวจย้อนที่มาของข้อกล่าวอ้าง
Pronunciation
tɹˈeɪs ðə klˈeɪm
Example
Trace the claim to the count sheet before repeating it.
Term
self-selected sample
Thai
กลุ่มตัวอย่างที่เลือกเข้าร่วมเอง
Pronunciation
sˈɛlfsɪlˈɛktᵻd sˈæmpəl
Example
A self-selected sample may not represent all customers.
Term
primary record
Thai
บันทึกต้นทาง
Pronunciation
pɹˈaɪmɚɹi ɹˈɛkɚd
Example
The daily count sheet is a primary record.
Term
an omitted denominator
Thai
ฐานจำนวนที่ถูกละไว้
Pronunciation
ɐn oʊmˈɪɾᵻd dɪnˈɑːmᵻnˌeɪɾɚ
Example
The omitted denominator makes the percentage hard to interpret.

Place
Source workshop
Trace the claim to the count sheet before repeating it.
Pronunciation
tɹˈeɪs ðə klˈeɪm tə ðə kˈaʊnt ʃˈiːt bɪfˌoːɹ ɹɪpˈiːɾɪŋ ɪt.
Tip
Follow a statement back to its original evidence.
Place
Source workshop
A self-selected sample may not represent all customers.
Pronunciation
ɐ sˈɛlfsɪlˈɛktᵻd sˈæmpəl mˈeɪ nˌɑːt ɹˌɛpɹɪzˈɛnt ˈɔːl kˈʌstəmɚz.
Tip
People who decide for themselves to join a study or survey.
Place
Source workshop
The daily count sheet is a primary record.
Pronunciation
ðə dˈeɪli kˈaʊnt ʃˈiːt ɪz ɐ pɹˈaɪmɚɹi ɹˈɛkɚd.
Tip
A record made directly from the event or measurement.

Independent practice

Trace each material claim to a source ID and paragraph.
Complete the required performance task; keep the first attempt.
Review using the analytic criteria, revise and explain one important change.

Interaction model

Participant A

Several websites repeat the number, so it must be verified.

Participant B

Do they report independent measurements, or do they all link back to the campaign?

Participant A

They all use the announcement. I should narrow my claim.

Participant B

The stock record also distinguishes use from waste.

Participant A

Then I will correct the headline and explain the changed measure.

Participant B

Please retain the method and identify the question the records cannot answer.

Synthesis studio

Organise by issues, not by source order. Distinguish genuine contradictions from differences in scope, population, purpose or definition. Evaluate all four supplied sources, recalculate the stock flow, and write a 600–800-word briefing that separates fact, calculation, interpretation and uncertainty. Include an explicit correction note.

Thai support · ตัวช่วยภาษาไทย

จัดตามประเด็น ไม่เรียงสรุปทีละแหล่ง แยกความขัดแย้งจริงจากความต่างด้านขอบเขต นิยาม หรือกลุ่มข้อมูล

Output

Evaluate all four supplied sources, recalculate the stock flow, and write a 600–800-word briefing that separates fact, calculation, interpretation and uncertainty. Include an explicit correction note.

Citation policy

Use [S1-P1] style local references. These invented sources must never be represented as external research. Clearly identify any permitted external source and its permission separately.

Your notes

Write, review, revise

Thai support · ตัวช่วยภาษาไทย

ใช้ข้อกำหนดเฉพาะของบทนี้ เก็บร่างแรก รับข้อเสนอแนะ แล้วแก้ไขโดยแสดงเหตุผล

Target words min

600

Target words max

800

Checklist

State the decision, audience and claim boundaries.
Trace factual claims and distinguish source evidence from interpretation.
Address the strongest relevant alternative fairly.
Revise a material weakness and explain the change.

Drafts

argument plan
first draft
peer feedback
revised final version

Revision focus

argument and inference
global structure
evidence and attribution
style and reader usability

Feedback cycle

Self-check → peer feedback → revise and explain your changes.

Your notes

Unrehearsed interaction

Read your role card separately. Make a bounded proposal, respond to an unexpected challenge, check one interpretation and seek a precise next step. Keep the disagreement visible when it remains unresolved.

Thai support · ตัวช่วยภาษาไทย

อ่านบทบาทแยกกัน เสนออย่างมีเงื่อนไข ตอบคำท้าทายใหม่ ตรวจความเข้าใจ และหาขั้นต่อไปโดยไม่กลบข้อขัดแย้ง

Scenario

A fictional reusable-cup campaign announces a dramatic result

Roles

Role
Evidence presenter
Brief
Explain the most defensible proposal from the dossier. State one limit you will not conceal.
Constraint
Do not invent an observation to close a gap.
Role
Critical reviewer
Brief
Choose a material definition, alternative explanation or source limitation and challenge the proposal.
Constraint
Acknowledge one valid part of the opposing case before challenging an inference.
Role
Recipient and mediator
Brief
Ask what the proposed action means for someone who has not read the sources. Test whether all participants attach the same meaning to a key term.
Constraint
Do not decide what someone intended without checking.
Role
Observer
Brief
Record exact moments of clarification, qualification, repair and recipient understanding.
Constraint
Assess the observed move, not confidence, accent identity or personality.

Goals

I can request evidence, correct a claim respectfully, and acknowledge when my own claim needs revision.
I can convey the common ground and material conflicts among sources without creating false equivalence.

Negotiation moves

Acknowledge a supported point.
Name the particular inference you question.
Request a targeted clarification.
Offer a conditional next step.
Read back a shared understanding without forcing agreement.

Duration seconds

480

Your notes

Audience and pragmatic effect

Reformulate one important claim for a specialist colleague, a new participant and a decision-maker. Test the received effect and preserve the factual boundary.

Thai support · ตัวช่วยภาษาไทย

ปรับข้ออ้างเดียวกันให้ผู้เชี่ยวชาญ ผู้เข้าร่วมใหม่ และผู้ตัดสินใจ ตรวจผลที่ผู้รับเข้าใจโดยรักษาข้อเท็จจริง

Contexts

specialist peer review
new participant orientation
decision briefing

Target functions

qualify a claim
request clarification
disagree diplomatically
repair an unintended implication

formal and explicit
neutral and action-oriented
collegial but bounded

Repair

Ask what the recipient understood, acknowledge the effect, clarify the intended proposition, and test the revised wording.

Your notes

Make the evidence usable

Brief a recipient who has not read the dossier. Preserve critical qualifications, explain one difficult concept, invite a check-back and revise the explanation if the recipient misunderstands. Comparative synthesis with source-attribution audit and source fact-check.

Thai support · ตัวช่วยภาษาไทย

สรุปให้ผู้รับที่ยังไม่อ่านต้นฉบับ รักษาเงื่อนไขสำคัญ อธิบายแนวคิดยาก ตรวจความเข้าใจ และปรับคำอธิบาย

Source en

A fictional reusable-cup campaign announces a dramatic result — Use the identified sources, not memory or invented facts.

Mode

text-concepts-and-communication

Audience

A peer decision group unfamiliar with this dossier; later repeat for a specialist reader.

Source ids

esl5-w03-S1
esl5-w03-S2
esl5-w03-S3
esl5-w03-S4

Constraints

Do not invent missing results or permissions.
Retain material uncertainty and disagreement.
Ask recipients to state a decision and what remains uncertain.
Do not speak for a cultural group or infer private motives.

Your notes

Timed speaking and defence

Thai support · ตัวช่วยภาษาไทย

เตรียมตามเวลาที่กำหนด พูดเป็นภาษาอังกฤษ แล้วตอบคำถามใหม่โดยไม่อ่านบท

Prompt

Preparation seconds

120

Speaking seconds

240

Follow up

Which source most strongly supports your central claim, and why?
Which limitation would materially change your proposed action?
A recipient has misunderstood one condition. Reformulate it without adding a new promise.

Your notes

Spoken task prompts

I can request evidence, correct a claim respectfully, and acknowledge when my own claim needs revision.

I can convey the common ground and material conflicts among sources without creating false equivalence.

Speaking secondsReady

◆ Source evaluation, misinformation, and responsible citation

Learning goals

Core vocabulary

trace the claim

self-selected sample

primary record

an omitted denominator

conflict of interest

independently verified

provisional finding

misleading framing

issue a correction

source attribution

Meaning through delivery

Extended listening · A fictional reusable-cup campaign announces a dramatic result

Transcript

Reading and source dossier

S1 · Campaign announcement

S2 · Stock reconciliation

S3 · Optional customer poll

S4 · Social post and revision

Reading questions

Language in use

Interaction model

Synthesis studio

Write, review, revise

Unrehearsed interaction

Audience and pragmatic effect

Make the evidence usable

Timed speaking and defence

Spoken task prompts

Support and access

My portfolio

Check your interpretation