The Two-Source Report
A student is writing a report on whether a local council should ban single-use plastic bags. She finds two sources. Source A is a council press release saying the ban 'has been warmly welcomed by residents' and citing a survey where 82 percent of 150 respondents supported it. Source B is a shopkeepers' association letter saying the ban 'has hurt small businesses' and citing a drop in customers at 8 of 20 surveyed shops. Neither source explains how respondents were chosen. The student wants to write a balanced paragraph that uses both sources fairly.
1. Identify the strengths and weaknesses of each source and explain what the student cannot conclude from them.
Read the worked answer
Source A (council press release):
- Strength: gives a specific figure (82% of 150) that can be checked.
- Weakness: it is a promotional document from the body that made the policy, so it has an interest in positive results. The survey method is not described, so the sample may be self-selected (only people who care enough to respond).
Source B (shopkeepers' letter):
- Strength: reports an observed drop in customers at 8 of 20 shops.
- Weakness: it represents shopkeepers, who may oppose the ban for business reasons. It does not say why customers dropped, and 8 of 20 is a small, possibly unrepresentative group.
What cannot be concluded:
- That 82% of all residents support the ban (only 150 people were surveyed, method unknown).
- That the ban caused the drop in customers (other factors such as season or online shopping are not ruled out).
- That the ban is a success or failure overall.
The student should report each claim with its source and note the limits, rather than treating either figure as fact.
2. Write a short judgement paragraph (about 60 words) that uses both sources fairly.
Read the worked answer
The council reports that 82% of 150 surveyed residents welcomed the ban, though the survey method is unclear and the council supports the policy. Shopkeepers report fewer customers at 8 of 20 shops, but the letter does not show the ban caused this. Both sources are interested parties with small samples, so the evidence is suggestive rather than decisive; more independent data are needed before judging the ban.