A child sees a post saying that a neighborhood museum is open every evening until eight and wants to plan a visit. Instead of accepting the screenshot or dismissing it, you can turn the question into a short investigation: name the claim, check who posted it, and compare it with the museum’s own current information.
Make the claim small enough to check
Start by restating the claim in one sentence. Is it about a date, a number, a person, a photograph, or a rule? If it bundles several statements together, pick one. In the museum example, “open every evening until eight” is more useful to check than the vague question “Is this post true?” Keep the original post visible only as long as needed, and do not repeat or share it while you investigate.
The Library of Congress’s teaching material on information literacy asks learners to consider who is behind information, its context, the claims and evidence, and what other sources say. The Digital Inquiry Group’s lesson on lateral reading teaches students to investigate a website or post by going outside it to see what other sources report about the publisher. Both resources were developed for teaching, so a family check-in is an adaptation, not a tested home intervention. [1] [2]
For a younger child, you can ask the questions aloud and let them point to the relevant line. An older child may write the claim and the name of the publisher. The goal is to make the steps visible, not to quiz the child on vocabulary such as “corroborate.”
Look beyond a polished page
Next, ask who made the page or post. Is an organization named? Does the page give a date, an author or a way to contact the organization? Does it explain where the information came from? A clean design, confident tone, large number of followers, or familiar logo does not by itself answer those questions.
Then leave the page and search for independent information about the source or claim. For the museum-hours example, go to the museum’s official website or contact page rather than relying on a screenshot of a search result. A current notice from the institution is relevant to its hours; a post by an unrelated account may only show that someone repeated the claim. If the claim concerns a school assignment, compare it with the assigned book, a class handout, or a suitable public institution’s resource.
This outside check is the basic idea of lateral reading described by the Digital Inquiry Group. Their lesson uses historical sources and classroom practice, not every kind of family internet question. It is a helpful method to try, but a single search result or one institution page can still be incomplete or out of date. [2]
Compare the evidence, not just the headlines
Open a second source that has a reason to know about the same claim. Check that it is independent of the first post: two pages that repeat the same press release are not two separate confirmations. Look at the date, location, and exact wording. “Open late on Fridays” is not the same as “open every evening,” and an old schedule may no longer apply.
The Library of Congress includes corroboration among its focus questions and recommends looking for additional information that can confirm facts, offer other perspectives, or provide context. Its examples involve historical primary sources, so do not treat the handout as a universal checklist that resolves every modern claim. It does support teaching children to compare information and ask what evidence is available. [1]
If sources disagree, say what you found: “The post says every evening, but if the museum’s current calendar lists late hours only on Friday, that does not support the post’s broader claim. Let’s use the calendar or contact them before we go.” If you cannot confirm the answer, the honest result is “We do not know yet.” A child can learn that checking sometimes ends with a question or a next step.
Keep the practice calm and low stakes
Choose ordinary questions to practise: where an event is held, who published a school resource, or whether a public place lists a particular service. Do not begin with frightening claims, personal information, or high-stakes health and safety questions. For urgent or consequential decisions, use the relevant trusted professional or official service rather than asking a child to settle the matter through a search.
If the first source is wrong, model a correction without embarrassment: “That page left out the date, so it gave us the wrong impression. We checked the current notice.” If the child finds the better source, ask what clue helped. Children can see that adults also check and revise what they think; the work is about the claim and its evidence, not catching someone out.
End with a short note in the child’s own words: “The post says ___. We checked ___ and ___. We think ___ because ___.” If the evidence is mixed, write that down. A repeatable question is more useful than promising that one technique can make every online page trustworthy.
References
Sources for the cited guidance and reported material. Worked examples and practical tools are original to Zolls.
- Library of Congress, Teaching with Primary Sources. Information Literacy and Historical Primary Sources.
- Digital Inquiry Group. Intro to Lateral Reading with Reconstruction Sources.