Lesson Report:
**Title: Tracing Primary Sources in News Reporting and Preparing for Analytical Writing**
In this session, students practiced identifying and classifying the underlying sources behind news articles, with a focus on distinguishing primary sources from secondary reporting. The work is intended to feed directly into their “factsheets/situation reports� and to prepare them to write professional, fact‑based analytical paragraphs that avoid slipping into personal opinion.
—
## Attendance
**Students explicitly mentioned as absent: 3**
– Mukadas – absent
– Necrona – absent
– Altenai – absent
**Late / partial attendance (for instructor’s awareness):**
– Albedo – “made it at some point and then disappearedâ€�; unclear if she returned.
– Hermine – reported she would be “very lateâ€�; presence not clearly confirmed in transcript.
—
## Topics Covered (Chronological, with Detailed Activities)
### 1. Opening, Context, and Learning Goals
– The instructor began by briefly apologizing for a severely hoarse voice and asked for patience.
– Stated goals for the session:
– Ensure **everyone has a solid, working understanding of what counts as a *primary source***.
– This was framed as essential for the rest of the course.
– Practice **finding primary sources inside news articles** and **distinguishing between different kinds of sources**:
– Who is actually providing the information (e.g., a general, a government official, an eyewitness, a news agency, etc.)?
– How those sources are reported or filtered by the news outlet.
– Take a **critical look at students’ previously prepared “factsheets/situation reportsâ€�** (this is mentioned as an intention, but the transcript focuses mostly on the source‑analysis exercise).
– If time allowed, **begin synthesizing a strong, professional paragraph**:
– Emphasis on writing in **neutral, professional terms** instead of unconsciously inserting personal opinions.
– Acknowledged that “accidentally baking in our opinionsâ€� is a common, honest mistake the course aims to reduce.
### 2. Attendance and Quick Logistics
– The instructor took attendance by name.
– Confirmed presence of: Azamat, Inazik, Idina, Adam, Zoe, Inon, Elena, Sophie, Bekmazar; noted Albedo had appeared and then left; Hermine expected to be very late.
– The instructor referenced:
– A **Google Doc** containing the previously collected articles.
– The **Telegram group** as the central place where students had shared their news articles earlier.
– Some students reported difficulty accessing older messages or shared content:
– Instructor attempted to adjust Telegram settings so that new members could see prior messages.
– For students unable to access Telegram or the Google Doc, the instructor:
– Sent the Google Doc link directly into the Telegram chat again.
– For one student who lacked functional institutional email access, recommended visiting the **IT Center** to resolve AUC email issues, emphasizing that most professors rely heavily on email.
### 3. Setting Up the Core Exercise: Identifying Sources in a News Article
**Task framing:**
– Students were asked to **return to the list of news articles** they had prepared for previous classes (found in the Telegram group / Google Doc).
– Instructions:
1. **Choose one article** from the Telegram group:
– It must **not** be the article they personally contributed.
– Ideally, it should also be **on a different topic** from the one they had previously chosen (to keep the exercise “freshâ€� and minimize prior bias).
2. Once they have chosen an article, they should **identify and list the sources inside that article**, akin to a rough, informal bibliography.
**Conceptual clarification with examples:**
– The instructor clarified that a news article does *not* present a standard academic **bibliography**, but it still contains **embedded sources**:
– Example: “If CNN is quoting a general saying that we just bombed Iran, the *source* is the general, not CNN.â€�
– Distinction emphasized:
– The **news outlet** (e.g., CNN, BBC, Reuters) is often an *intermediary*.
– The **ultimate source** is the person/organization being quoted or paraphrased.
– Students’ job in this exercise:
– For **each factual claim** or important statement in the article:
– Note **what the claim is** (briefly).
– Identify **who is being cited** as the source:
– A named official (e.g., general, minister, party leader).
– A government institution.
– An eyewitness “on the ground.â€�
– A news agency (e.g., Reuters, AP) being quoted by another outlet.
– Another news outlet (e.g., “local broadcaster X,â€� “newspaper Yâ€�).
– Or unclear/unspecified (“authorities said,â€� “it was reported that…â€�).
– Mark cases where the source is **anonymous** or **ambiguous**.
– Identify whether a **direct quote** or a **paraphrase** is being used.
– Special attention:
– “More troublingâ€� were places where the article **makes a claim without specifying any source at all** (just “left in the airâ€� or labeled “undeterminedâ€�).
– Optional extension (acknowledging time constraints):
– Students could, if they wished, **follow the trail back** from their article to the **original** referenced outlet and see who *that* piece quotes.
– At minimum, though, if an article says “according to X news agency,â€� students should at least note that **news agency X** is being cited.
### 4. Transition to Whole-Class Review: Projecting Articles and Putting Students “On the Spot�
– Once students had selected articles and begun noting sources, the instructor:
– Logged in to a classroom computer (after a brief minor confusion with wrong account).
– Prepared to **project selected articles** on the board.
– Explained that they would:
– Call on students to **present their findings**.
– Ask them to explain:
– What facts they identified.
– Who the sources of those facts were.
– How clearly or unclearly those sources were identified.
– Students were warned they might be briefly “put on the spotâ€� to share, and asked to forgive the instructor for that.
### 5. Student Example 1: Elena – Article Relying Heavily on Reuters and Secondary Outlets
**Article context (inferred from discussion):**
– The piece seems to be about a **coalition government** and political party negotiations, likely in a European or North Atlantic context.
– One key political figure mentioned: **John Frederick Nielsen**.
– The article apparently cites:
– **Reuters**.
– A local newspaper (possibly “Sermitsiaqâ€� or something similar—audio unclear in transcript).
– A local broadcaster (e.g., KNR).
**Elena’s analysis (as discussed):**
– She identified that the article:
– Cites **Reuters** as a source.
– Cites at least one **anonymous source** stating that the government would be led by John Frederick Nielsen.
– Includes statements such as:
– “Nielsen urged the party to set aside disagreements and form a broad coalition.â€�
– Here, the article is **quoting or paraphrasing Nielsen**, but Elena was unsure:
– Does Nielsen count as a “sourceâ€� in this context or is he just being described?
– The instructor implicitly affirmed that **Nielsen is indeed a source** when his statements are reported.
– Also refers to:
– A particular party (NADRAC / “so‑called independence partyâ€�) not being part of the coalition.
– This claim is **attributed to other news outlets**:
– A broadcaster (KNR).
– A newspaper (Sermitsiaq or a similar name).
– At the bottom of the article, it indicates that the *only* external source used is Reuters.
– The class speculated that this likely means:
– The article they are reading is **repackaging a wire-service story**.
– The author might be largely rephrasing Reuters content, possibly adding references to local news outlets.
**Instructor’s commentary:**
– The instructor noted:
– This pattern—**a small outlet rephrasing a Reuters piece and crediting Reuters as the main source**—is **very common** and “not unusual at all.â€�
– It would be interesting, methodologically, to:
– Compare the **derivative article** to the **original Reuters article**.
– Check whether mentions of the local newspaper/broadcaster (e.g., Sermitsiaq, KNR) appear in the **original Reuters copy** or whether those references were **added editorially** by the secondary outlet.
– On the board, the instructor began building a **list of kinds of sources** identified so far:
– Wire services (e.g., Reuters).
– Local broadcasters/newspapers.
– Named political figures making statements.
– Anonymous sources within government or parties.
### 6. Student Example 2: Zoe – Article with Unclear Institutional Attribution
*(Exact outlet/topic not fully clear from transcript; the key pedagogical focus was on attribution quality.)*
**Key points in Zoe’s report:**
– Zoe’s article contained **numerous quotations**, which the instructor viewed as a positive:
– Quotations are generally more transparent than vague paraphrasing.
– However, the article often used vague attribution such as:
– “The Islands’ coalition government said…â€�
– Or similar formulations referencing “the governmentâ€� or institutional actors, **but without specifying how the reporter knows this**:
– Is this from a **press conference**, an **official written statement**, an **off‑the‑record briefing**, or another report?
– For several claims, Zoe identified the source as **“unspecifiedâ€� or “unclearâ€�** because:
– The article paraphrased what “the government saidâ€� or what a group intended to do, without linking those statements to a **named spokesperson**, **document**, or **verifiable recording**.
**Instructor’s commentary:**
– The instructor praised the presence of **direct quotations** but emphasized:
– Even when a quote appears, the reader should be able to trace **who said it** and **in what capacity**.
– Vague institutional attributions (“the government saidâ€�) make it difficult to:
– Assess reliability.
– Judge potential bias or political stakes.
– This type of attribution should be marked by students as **weak** or **incomplete** sourcing.
### 7. Student Example 3: Article on Iran Protests and Government Crackdown
**Article context (inferred):**
– The third example involved an article along the lines of **“Iran warns protesters…â€�**, likely concerning protests and state response in Iran.
– The student reported that the article included:
– Statements and quotes from:
– The **chief of justice of Iran**.
– **Donald Trump**.
– A **major general** of the Iranian army.
– The **supreme leader** of Iran.
– These are **named officials**, clearly identifiable as **sources**.
– Other forms of evidence and attribution:
– **Camera footage**:
– Used to support descriptions of events (e.g., size of protests, presence of security forces, or incidents of violence).
– **Death toll estimates**:
– The article gives casualty numbers, but:
– Sometimes the source of those numbers was clear (e.g., a human rights group, a government ministry, state TV).
– Other times the precise source was **ambiguous** or absent, and the student recognized this as problematic.
– **State TV** or official Iranian media:
– Possibly cited for statements on arrests, “confessions,â€� or official narratives.
– The student noted that the article was “a lot of quotes,â€� but not all of them were fully traceable to a **specific, primary context** (e.g., press conference vs. leaked information vs. second‑hand claim).
**Instructor’s commentary:**
– The instructor highlighted that this article was rich for analysis because it combined:
– Named official sources.
– Institutional sources (state TV, judiciary).
– Visual evidence (camera footage).
– Statistical claims (death tolls, arrests).
– Some **unsourced or poorly sourced paraphrases**.
– This led to reinforcement of key questions students should ask:
– Is this **first-hand evidence** (primary source), or **someone summarizing someone else**?
– Are we seeing **direct access** (e.g., raw footage, full speech transcripts) or a processed version?
– When we see numbers (casualties, arrests), **who produced those numbers** and **what interests might they have**?
### 8. Emerging Synthesis: Categories of Sources and the Meaning of “Primary Source�
Throughout the student presentations and instructor feedback, the class tacitly constructed a **taxonomy of sources** that will support later work on factsheets and analytical writing. While not explicitly enumerated in the transcript, the board list and the discussion appear to include:
– **Named individual actors**:
– Government officials (ministers, generals, presidents).
– Party leaders or politicians (e.g., John Frederick Nielsen).
– Eyewitnesses (if present; the instructor asked students to look specifically for “eyewitness sourcesâ€�).
– **Institutional and media sources**:
– International wire services (e.g., Reuters).
– Local broadcasters (e.g., KNR).
– Local newspapers (e.g., Sermitsiaq or similar).
– State television or official news agencies in authoritarian contexts.
– **Documentary or visual evidence**:
– Camera footage, recordings, official documents.
– **Statistical/organizational sources**:
– Government ministries (for official counts).
– NGOs or human rights organizations (for alternative casualty estimates).
– **Anonymous or ambiguous sources**:
– “An anonymous official said…â€�
– “Sources close to the negotiations…â€�
– “Authorities said…â€� without further specification.
– **Undetermined / no clear source**:
– Statements presented as fact with **no identifiable origin**.
– Paraphrases like “the article statedâ€� without attribution to an underlying actor.
The instructor consistently tied this back to the definition of a **primary source** in this course’s context:
– A **primary source** is the **closest available direct evidence** of an event or claim:
– The **person who said it**, **the direct recording**, **the original document**, or **unmediated data**.
– A news article is often a **secondary layer** that **selects, interprets, and sometimes rewrites** what primary sources said.
– For students’ future work (factsheets/situation reports and analytical paragraphs), the goal is:
– To **identify and, where possible, consult the primary sources** behind news coverage.
– To clearly distinguish in writing between:
– What **primary sources** say/do.
– How **news outlets** interpret and frame those sources.
### 9. Anticipated Next Steps (Mentioned but Not Fully Reached in Transcript)
– The instructor had planned (time permitting) to move from source analysis into:
– A **critical look at the students’ own factsheets/situation reports**, specifically:
– Checking whether they correctly identify and use **primary sources**.
– Evaluating whether they distinguish primary vs. secondary reports.
– Beginning to **draft a “strongly written paragraphâ€�** in **professional language**:
– Using the identified facts and sources.
– Avoiding personal opinion or value judgments.
– Demonstrating proper attribution (“According to X…â€�) rather than unsupported assertions.
– The transcript appears to end while the class is still deeply engaged in the **source‑tracing exercise**, so this writing/synthesis component may need to be taken up in a subsequent session.
—
## Actionable Items
### High Priority (Before or During Next Class)
– **Follow up on factsheet/situation report review**
– Confirm whether the planned **critical review of student factsheets/situation reports** was fully conducted in this session or needs to be scheduled/restarted next time.
– If not yet done, plan a session where students:
– Explicitly label each fact in their factsheets with its **source type** (primary/secondary, named/anonymous, institution/individual).
– Revise to strengthen reliance on **clearly identified primary sources** where possible.
– **Move to paragraph synthesis and professional writing**
– Dedicate time in an upcoming class to:
– Model a **sample analytical paragraph** based on a news event.
– Show how to:
– Attribute facts properly (“According to the Iranian judiciary…â€�).
– Keep language **neutral and professional**, limiting or removing personal opinions.
– Integrate multiple sources (e.g., government statements vs. NGO casualty figures) while maintaining clarity about who says what.
– **Compile and share the “source categoriesâ€� list**
– Convert the informal board list of **source types** into a **digital handout or slide**:
– Include examples (wire service, local broadcaster, state TV, eyewitness, anonymous official, undetermined).
– Add short notes on whether/when each can function as a **primary source**, and typical reliability issues.
– Share with students (via Telegram/Google Doc/email) as a reference for their ongoing assignments.
– **Address access issues (Telegram, Google Docs, email)**
– Check that all students:
– Can now see **past messages** and links in the Telegram group.
– Have working access to the **Google Doc** with articles.
– Have functioning **institutional email** accounts.
– Consider a short in-class confirmation (e.g., asking everyone to open the shared Doc) to verify that technical barriers have been removed.
### Medium Priority / Ongoing
– **Monitor attendance and engagement of specific students**
– Note recurring absences of:
– Mukadas, Necrona, and Altenai in this session.
– Track whether **Albedo** and **Hermine** continue to arrive late or miss parts of activities.
– Consider brief check‑ins to ensure they:
– Understand primary vs. secondary sources.
– Are on track with their **factsheets/situation reports**.
– **Encourage deeper source‑tracing for advanced students**
– For more advanced or motivated students, suggest:
– Tracing their chosen article **back to the original wire service article** (e.g., Reuters) to:
– Compare framing.
– See whether local outlets added or removed important details.
– Noting divergences between **primary statements** and how secondary outlets **rephrase** or **interpret** them.
– **Reinforce critical reading habits**
– In future sessions, periodically return to:
– The habit of asking, for any claim: “Who actually said this?â€� and “How do we know?â€�
– Marking in their own notes where sources are **explicit**, **anonymous**, or **undetermined**.
– Questioning vague attributions like “authorities saidâ€� or “it is believedâ€� and treating them cautiously in their own writing.
These steps will help solidify students’ understanding of primary sources, improve the rigor of their situation reports, and prepare them to write clear, professional analytical paragraphs in subsequent classes.
Homework Instructions:
NO HOMEWORK
The transcript only describes in-class activities (e.g., “here’s what I’d like you to do I’d like you to go into our Telegram group and I’d like you to select one article… Take maybe just one two minutes to choose an article…â€� and “what we’re going to be doing is I’m going to be displaying the article that you’ve selected on the boardâ€�), and references to prior work (“that list of articles that you guys prepared for the previous set of classesâ€�) clearly refer to past assignments, with no explicit instructions given for work to complete after this lesson.