First-Year Writing Instructor's Guide

For students new to the university, such as many of those enrolled in ENGL 1007, it is not always clear just what the Library can provide. The UConn Library sees faculty as an integral partner in facilitating student use of our spaces and services. Above all else, we are here to help!

There are several ways to search the UConn Library's collections. Students can benefit from explicit instruction in using these features, given the differences between library resources and common web search interfaces like Google. It is possible to search across the library catalog and article databases simultaneously using the search bar on the Library's homepage. Searches here can be refined using built-in filters depending on your information needs. You can also browse and select individual databases using the Library's Databases A-Z page. Databases can be easily filtered and organized by discipline or genre/media type provided.

Why choose one search method over the other? It can be a matter of preference, but usually it comes down to whether you want to conduct a general search and aren't sure where to begin (which calls for the "Articles + Catalog" search) or if you want to focus your search in a particular field or subject (which would point towards certain databases). Academic Search Premier, CQ Researcher, and Issues & Controversies can be helpful initial databases in this context. Searching "Articles + Catalog" is a good bet for locating a known item, such as a particular article or book. 

Tutorials are available for best using these search interfaces, and students can always Ask a Librarian for additional assistance.

It is important to keep in mind that searching isn't just the mechanical steps of retrieving a particular text -- it can be a creative part of the inquiry process and an opportunity to foster student engagement in research. (This refocusing on the conceptual foundations can also be useful given the constant design changes across various web interfaces.) Emphasizing the nature of searching as a process can be helpful here. Help students see how different disciplinary communities might take different approaches to the same question or problem and how those approaches are reflected in the presentation of research. Demonstrate how general interest publications offer perspectives unique to the scholarship on an issue. Use initial search findings to update and refine search terms and techniques. Take advantage of the rich metadata and web-enhanced citation practices present in many articles to reveal the workings of scholarly conversations for students.

As a general principle, such instructional activities should always pace students as the agents of their own inquiries: help them navigate the literature so that they can see themselves as participants in addressing the problems and questions that most interest them.

As with other aspects of writing pedagogy, a focus on product over process can work counter to allowing students to build effective, responsive, and lasting research habits. In keeping with the FYW program's habits of practice and the ACRL's Framework, ENGL 1007 should frame research as a process of engagement with other thinkers in addressing inquiries and problems of communal importance. Consider the following principles in designing assignments to support these learning outcomes:

• Scaffold assignments to support students along the way. Including frequent check-ins and informal assignments that require and demonstrate aspects of the research process (along with assessment) can both better guide students and lessen the pressures of high stakes assignments late in the term. 
• Consider flexibility with research requirements. Requiring a particular number of sources can ignore differences in source length and quality. Mandating the inclusion of direct quotations and the like can lead to problematic cherry-picking. Too-prescriptive directives about the nature of sources (peer-reviewed, for example) can limit student inquiries and lead to misperceptions about the research process.
• Consider how you privilege depth or breadth in research engagement. Where might surveying a broad number of sources be valuable? Can we ethically and accurately assess and write about sources we haven't read fully? How and why might you emphasize careful attention to a small number or even a single source? 
• Use diverse approaches to locating and engaging with research. In addition to searching web databases, demonstrate the use of literature reviews and citation networks. This can help make the methods and the stakes of scholarly conversations patent to students.
• Reconsider the role of grading in assessing the formal elements of citation. While questions of academic integrity remain of critical importance, an undue focus on formatting "correctness" can render research as arbitrary and remove the focus from meaningful engagement with other thinkers.

It is a goal of the UConn Library R&SSS unit to continuously develop FYW curricular support and to collaborate with faculty on crafting effective and responsive assignments and assessments of information literacy for use in ENGL 1007 and beyond. If you'd like to share or give feedback on materials, are looking to create or modify activities or learning outcomes, or would otherwise like to work with us, please reach out!

The evaluation process is complex and constantly changing alongside our information ecosystems. Further, while many students come to the university thinking that evaluation is a one-size-fits-all set of steps, it must always be contextual and is subject to our judgment. Rather than envisioning the task of teaching evaluation as attempting to protect against misinformation broadly or to understand disciplinary expectations of evidence across all of academia, it can be more impactful to consider evaluation as helping students understand the voices they're encountering (and not encountering) in the context of the diversity of inquiries they enter. 

Many earlier evaluation techniques introduced to students in this context resemble a "checklist approach," the most prominent of which is the CRAAP test. While each element of this acronym can help foster critical reading practices, if taken as an inflexible list of questions, it can result in inefficient, decontextualized, and inaccurate judgments. Lateral reading techniques and Mike Caulfield's SIFT method can be more nimble (and accurate) as evaluation methods in the age of the internet (even for non-digital texts). Additionally, these techniques place readers squarely at the center of this process, as opposed to mechanically checking off boxes on a list. Ultimately, evaluation is about cultivating one's judgments and critical methods and not about simply relying upon signals of authority.

We've included links to student-friendly instructional materials about some of these methods in the "Evaluating Sources" section of the ENGL 1007 course guide.

It is important to remember a few principles when introducing these concepts within the course:

• Work to incorporate evaluation and assessment into all encounters with others' texts. Evaluation isn't something only completed for particular academic settings, but should become a habitual part of any rhetorical practice. And as with any practice, it must be deployed iteratively across different contexts for readers to gain facility in its use. Even briefly posing factual questions about an author's biography can be a helpful in-class exercise and begin to build these habits.
• Develop active learning exercises within the course to demonstrate the effectiveness of these techniques and troubleshoot using them with students. Completing a lateral reading exercise collectively on an assigned reading can be an excellent place to begin. Certain information may arise that is or is not valuable for making judgments about a text's credibility or applicability to a question or problem. Having a shared text and context can serve as a helpful way to begin these conversations and to assess levels of student understanding and comfort with these concepts.