Primary source interrogation

Question a document about who made it, for whom, and what it isn't saying, which is what turns a source into evidence.

When to use this: When you want to go deeper
Learning impact: Strong change
Learning evidence: Credible with caveats
Where you are with the topic: Building understanding
How often to use it: Worth repeating often

When to use it

You are quoting a source as if quotation settles the argument.
You can paraphrase content but cannot say what the document is evidence for.
A seminar expects sourcing: author, audience, occasion, silence.

What to ask AI

Type something like: “Here’s a primary source [paste]. Don’t summarise. Ask the seven interrogation questions one at a time, author position, audience, occasion, assumed knowledge, what it argues against, what’s absent, how it survived. Wait for my answer each time, then tell me what I missed.”

You answer before hearing the miss-list.

How it helps

A source is not a window onto the past. It is an artefact made by someone, for someone, on an occasion, with silences.

Interrogation turns quotation into evidence by making those conditions explicit.

How the document survived reframes what you are allowed to conclude.

How to run it

Paste or identify the document.
Answer the seven questions yourself, one at a time.
Separate text-based claims from guesses.
State what the document is evidence for, and what it cannot prove.
Only then use a quotation in your argument.

Example exchange

You

Here’s the text of a 1917 recruitment poster. Don’t summarise it. Give me the first interrogation question only.

Who made this, and what was their position relative to the war effort?

You

Government printers… so it’s official propaganda?

Too thin. Which agency, ministry, or local committee? And what does “official” let you claim,versus what it still doesn’t prove?

Copyable prompt

Here's a primary source [paste]. Don't summarise it. Ask me the seven
interrogation questions one at a time, author's position, audience, occasion,
assumed knowledge, what it argues against, what's absent, how it survived. Wait
for my answer to each, then tell me what I missed.

The Tell

You know this method has flipped when you can say what the document says and not what it is evidence for.

Those are different, and only the second is historical argument.

Write the “evidence for / not evidence for” pair before you quote.

Principle evidence

Strength of the underlying learning idea, not a claim about AI products.

The underlying learning idea is rated moderate. Primary source interrogation is core sourcing practice (Wineburg and related historical thinking assessments).

AI delivery evidence

Whether an AI tutor delivers this method well is a separate question.

Principle moderate-to-strong as a literacy; AI as questioner may invent motives, speculative delivery.