I have been lucky to work with first-year students for three years now, building on each year’s successes (and failures) to improve each time as I set out to work with the WRTR classes, a required course for research and writing. It has also helped that I’ve worked with one of the professors for all three years, building a relationship with her that has allowed us to work as a team when I join her class for drop-in instruction. In addition, as the instructor’s focus for the research paper shifted away from the conspiracy theories of last year to how religion affects public life, taught in tandem with another professor, it also allowed me to work with a peer to create a course guide tailored to the assignment’s needs.
This year was the first time that I’ve been able to join the classes in person due to the pandemic, and what a difference it makes to be able to see the students face to face. While I did what I could to engage students last year, being able to start building a relationship with them face to face makes a huge difference as one tries to gauge their comprehension of the skills being presented to them. Such simple non-verbal cues like nodding help to know that the students are ready to move on to the next concept, and they are more likely to ask questions that both reflect their basic understanding and their curiosity about more complicated problems.
Due to the course focus on religion and regulations, my peer and I felt that it was important to focus on the question of authority when it comes to the ACRL’s framework for information literacy. I found this approach to evaluating resources for social justice and discussed it with my peer. We both liked how it encouraged students to ask questions about the creation of authority, the verifiability of assertions, and the discussion of bias. We did adapt the final point from privilege to perspective, wanting to use a less loaded term that might still encourage students to determine whether all sides of an argument are being presented.