Term: Summer – 2020-2021
Instructor: David McKie
Email:
Phone: 613-290-7380
Social Media: @mckiedavid
Office Hours: For the hour directly after class
Location: Zoom
Dates: June 3, 2021 to August 10, 2021
Days and times: Tuesdays and Thursdays, 10:35-12:05 AT
Delivery Mode: Virtual, Synchronous and Asynchronous using Brightspace, Zoom
Territorial Acknowledgement:
The University of King’s College is located in Mi’kma’ki, the ancestral and unceded territory of the Mi’kmaq. We are all Treaty people.
Course Description
The professional project is an online course in the summer months in which MJ students pitch a story and a research plan for their final professional project.
After sessions in which we cover the elements that comprise successful projects — such as newsworthiness, the development of central characters, the use of public records, incorporating elements of solutions journalism and accountability — students will work through stages to research, write and produce their professional project.
In the summer term, students will conduct research on the subject matter of their professional project and come up with a story and research plan under the supervision of David McKie.
In the fall term, students will continue with their projects based on their summer research, and receive further instruction in the development and writing of large journalistic projects.
In the winter term, students will complete the production with the aim of publishing their projects.
Who I am:
I am an Ottawa-based, award-winning journalist who spent 26 years honing his skills at the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation as an investigative producer.
I am now the National Observer’s deputy managing editor.
I teach at the schools of journalism at Carleton University, the University of King’s College, and Ryerson University, and have co-authored three journalism textbooks and two user guides on freedom-of-information laws and privacy, respectively.
In addition to my teaching, I’m a data-journalism trainer who has conducted workshops for the Canadian Association of Journalists, the U.S.-based National Institute for Computer-Assisted Reporting, the Humber Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning, and the Canadian Association of Community Television Users and Stations. I also continue to offer data-journalism training to the CBC.
I have a Bachelor of Journalism degree and a Master of Journalism degree from Carleton.
You can find more information about me on my online cv.
Learning Objectives
Building on the courses they have already taken, upon completion of the course, students should be able to:
- Assessing topics that make good projects;
- Understand the elements of a successful project, including investigative; enterprise; explanatory;
- Develop a workflow and long-term strategy for gathering, characterizing and archiving the necessary material;
- How to evaluate what to keep and what to discard;
- How to evaluate multimedia elements to enhance your storytelling, including data-visualizations, mapping, and analyzing datasets;
- How to file formal and informal federal access-to-information and provincial freedom-of-information requests;
- Build on the public-record research techniques you have learned in previous classes.
Expected time commitment
You should expect to put in 4 to 6 sustained hours into this course weekly, but this is just an
estimate. By sustained hours, we mean hours on task, not including breaks. How much time it takes will depend on your own working habits and will also vary weekly with the content, hence the wide estimate. You’ll need to put in the time needed to develop a solid story pitch and detailed research plan, which will be the foundation of your work in the fall and winter.
Texts/Learning Materials
Vallance-Jones, Fred, David Mckie, (2016) The Data Journalist, Toronto: Oxford
University Press. The simplest way to obtain this book is to buy the e-book version
available at https://www.chapters.indigo.ca/en-ca/books/the-data-journalist-gettingthe/
9780199020089-item.html. You can view it in the free Kobo app on a smartphone,
tablet or your computer. You can also buy a physical copy of the book from the King’s
bookstore and from Amazon.
Another option is to order an electronic copy of The Data Journalist through the Carleton University bookstore’s website.
You will also need a copy of the third edition of Digging Deeper which can also be purchased online if you don’t already have one.
Your Right To Know is a handy guide for making access-to-information requests. It provides a step-by-step process for filing requests using the correct methodology and wording.
Students must either subscribe to the digital version or own a
hard copy of the Canadian Press Stylebook 18th edition and Caps and Spelling 22nd
edition. (There are no assigned readings in the Stylebook, but marks will be deducted from
assignments for style errors.)
Students must have a computer and internet connection that is sufficient to attend classes
on Zoom. Students are strongly encouraged to use an ethernet (wired) connection to attend class. Students must have a mobile phone and they must have a recording device. (Your phone can be your recording device.) Students must also have a method of recording phone calls.
This is the Zoom link for both Tuesday and Thursday classes, in addition to office hours:
https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZUkdOigrj0qH9cJ0Hr9JpKZNkM9CUjj1t39
Brightspace is the online platform where class material will also be posted. Zoom is the platform for live classes.
Course focus
Because you already possess knowledge from previous courses covering topics such as data and public records, we will review areas in which you need a refresher or further your knowledge through brief in-class discussions and tutorials.
Questionnaires will be used at the beginning of the course and at the mid-way point to track of progress of the learning objectives described in the section above.
The emphasis will be pitching a viable project, which means selecting a topic, public records that will need to be mined, access-to-information requests that will need to be filed, the strategic use of open-data sites and the key interviews that will need to be conducted and lined up.
The aim is set the students up to eventually produce a publishable piece of work using the appropriate format.
Please note the minimum technical requirements for computers and software (Microsoft Excel, DataWrapper, ArcGIS Online) that have been emphasized in previous courses hold true here.
Office Hours/Instructor Availability
I will make myself available for an hour after each class on Zoom. If you have questions outside this time period, we can communicate by email, or set up one-on-one Zoom sessions at convenient times.
As the course progresses, and you make more progress with your project development, we may not need to meet formally during the allotted times. However, I will will still be available at those periods for one-on-one meetings.
Ground Rules/Protocol
This course is built to culminate in a viable pitch, or roadmap, which will guide your continued research in the fall, and work towards a final product in the winter. As noted above, the aim is to produce a publishable piece of work.
As such, you be expected to choose a top that is newsworthy, either because it advances a well-known story by exploring an unexplained area, or a solution that has yet to be discussed, but perhaps should be.
For example, a story about the possible perils of transitioning from fossil fuels to renewable or carbon-neutral sources of energy might explore unexplored challenges companies face through a deep dive into their financial records, lawsuits, lobbying activities, as well as government briefing notes and emailed correspondence obtained through federal and provincial access-to-information requests.
However, the pitch must go beyond identifying problems. Typically, projects have a solutions component. So, you will be encouraged to explore possible solutions by learning about success stories. Not to cheerlead, but to shed light on realistics paths to success that have a proven track record — warts and all.
So, the project might have elements that are investigative, explanatory and solutions-driven. We will study examples of projects that hit these marks, discuss how they succeeded and areas where they needed to improve.
Assessment
1. Assessing how the project was done. Choose a project from a media outlet and assess the use of public records (freely available or obtained through access-to-information requests) including documents and data; the voices it consulted, including victims, experts, lawmakers; the use of multimedia elements. You will be graded on your ability to not only identify the elements described above, but to assess their effectivenesses. You will also be required to appraise the quality of the storytelling and its potential impact. Please see the grading rubric for more details about how this mark breaks down.
Word length: 600 (assignments 20 or more words above or below this mark will be lose half a grade)
Percentage of course mark: 10%
Amended due date: June 14, midnight.
2. Completing a Watchdog: Storyboarding worksheet (developed by the Investigative Reporters and Editors). The worksheet contains questions, including the maximum and minimum stories you hope to tell; an inventory of the kinds of records you hope to obtain; whether the story has been pursued, and if so, what new elements will you introduce. You’ll be marked on the completeness of your answers to the questions, the quality of the records identified, and the newsworthiness of the story idea. Please see the grading rubric for more details about how this mark breaks down.
Percentage of course mark: 10%
Due date: June 17, midnight
3. Access-to-information requests. Not all of the records you’ll need will be publicly available, which means filing formal requests at the municipal, provincial and federal levels. You will be required to file at least five requests, preferably covering as many levels of government as possible. You’ll be marked on the precision and time frame of the wording based on the examples we have studied; the types of records you have requested; whether the requests have been directed to the correct department or agency; and whether you have been thorough in determining all the government institutions that should have been targeted. Please see the grading rubric for more details about how this mark breaks down.
Percentage of course mark: 10%
Due date: June 24, midnight
4. Project assessment. You will be required to provide a critical appraisal of your progress so far, including area in which you have made substantial progress, and areas where you have not. Strategically, this assignment comes at about the halfway point in the course with the aim of helping to establish a clear roadmap that might require tweaking your focus or changing it substantially. You will be assessed on the depth and honesty of your assessment, which may be a rationale for switching directions based on the criteria we have established in the previous weeks. Making a slight change, or a more drastic switch is not necessarily a sign of weakness and will not be penalized or marked down. Rather, a tweak or change of direction can be evidence of the critical thinking needed to assess a project’s strengths and areas that need to be shored up. Please see the grading rubric for more details about how this mark breaks down.
Word length: 600
Percentage of course mark: 20%
Due date: July 6, midnight
5. Draft pitch: This pitch is based on the information you’ve been able to assemble thus far. The pitch must be no longer than 200 words, with the following sections: A draft lead; a nutgraph summarizing your findings and explaining what is new; a description of the public records you will be using; the voices you’ll be consulting and the multimedia elements you’ll be using. I’ll be looking for evidence of lessons learned from the previous project assessment assignment, which includes building on weaknesses that had been identified, resulting in a narrower, sharper focus. Please see the grading rubric for more details about how this mark breaks down.
Word length: 600
Percentage of course mark: 20%
Due date: July 20, midnight
6. Final pitch: This will be the road map used to guide your work for the following two terms. This pitch should be similar length to the previous assignment and contain the same sections. It’s important to keep pitches brief and to the point. Editors and producers do not like wading through pitches that go on for pages. Get to the point right away.
Unlike the previous assignment, the lead and nutgraph must be sharper, more precise, and based on the additional information you’ve obtained as you continued to research. Here, what I’m looking for is evidence of progress: What additional records have you obtained? Have you received any access-to-information request responses, followed-up with amended wording to ensure success and avoid delays? Have you identified additional experts who can shed new light on your topic? And how has this additional information influenced the multimedia elements you’ll be using? In short, the final pitch MUST show clear evidence of progress from the previous assignment. Please see the grading rubric for more details about how this mark breaks down.
Word length: 600
Percentage of course mark: 20%
Due date: August 10, midnight
Professionalism: This mark will be based on your attendance, responding quickly to emailed queries, completing regular workflow questionnaires, including updates on the Google alerts you have received, and participation in group discussion and overall conduct. Please see the grading rubric for more details about how this mark breaks down.
Percentage of course mark: 10%
Submission of Assignments
All assignments must be submitted to Brightspace in WORD format.
Deadlines & Late Penalties
Assignments are marked down one grade step each day past deadline and receive a zero if filed more than 72 hours past the original deadline. (An excellent assignment filed before a 9 a.m. Monday deadline would receive an A+. The same assignment filed at 10 a.m. on Monday would receive an A. The same assignment filed at 10 a.m. on Tuesday would receive an A-. The same assignment filed at 10 a.m. on Wednesday would receive a B+. The assignment would receive an F and zero points if filed after 9 a.m. on Thursday.
Sometimes life gets in the way of assignments. If you have a personal situation that interferes with your school responsibilities, please contact me immediately, and in all cases before the deadline has passed. In general, extensions will only be granted for serious issues that are beyond a student’s control, but each situation is different and will be dealt with on a case-by-case basis.
Details and Grading
Each assignment has a rubric that will be used for grading. You are encouraged to review the grading rubric before beginning each assignment.
Absences
Student who are absent for up to three consecutive calendar days and miss a graded assignment must contact the course instructor in advance of the date of the academic requirement. They must then complete and submit a Student Declaration of Absence Form (Journalism) to the instructor via email or through Brightspace no later than three calendar days after the last day of the absence.
For absences of more than three consecutive days, student should follow the same procedure and contact their course instructor within five calendar days after the last day of the absence. Documentation from an on-campus or other health care professional is required to support a long-term absence and should describe how the medical condition affects the student’s ability to fulfill academic requirements.
Student experiencing longer-term absences, or more than two short-term absences, are encouraged to meet with the journalism school’s undergraduate or graduate coordinator, or the school director.
Grade Scale
| Grade | Grade Point Value | % | Definition |
| A+ | 4.30 | 90-100 | Excellent and above expectations |
| A | 4.00 | 85-89 | Excellent |
| A- | 3.70 | 80-84 | Very good |
| B+ | 3.30 | 77-79 | Good |
| B | 3.00 | 73-76 | Decent effort but needs improvement. |
| B- | 2.70 | 70-72 | Below expectations. |
| F | 0.00 | 0-69 | Fail |
|
INC
|
0.00
|
Incomplete | |
| ILL |
Neutral and no credit
obtained |
Compassionate reasons, illness |
Rubrics
Grading rubric for assignment one: an assessment of a media outlet’s project
| Excellent (A- to A+) |
Good (B- to B+) |
Below expectations (C+ and below) |
|
|
Research and understanding
(33.33%)
|
Has a clear understanding of the story’s focus and is able to identify the major players. | Has a good, general understanding of the story and its main characters, but has some gaps in the explanation. | Has a poor understanding of the story and its focus and is unable to explain it clearly. |
|
Analysis and thinking
(33.33%) |
Shows an excellent understanding of the types of records that were used and whether they were employed effectively. | Shows a good understanding of the types of records used and whether they were employed effectively. | Shows a poor understanding of the types of records used and whether they were employed effectively. |
|
Writing and presentation
(33.33%) |
Writing is crisp and clear. Words are carefully chosen and spelled correctly. Follows CP style. | Writing is generally sound, but may contain a few poorly crafted sentences. Minor spelling mistakes and/or problems with CP style. |
Writing is unclear or word choice not ideal, or major problems with punctuation. Several spelling mistakes and/or major problems with CP style.
F: misspelled name |
Grading rubric for second assignment: Completing a Watchdog: Storyboarding worksheet
| Excellent (A- to A+) |
Good (B- to B+) |
Below expectations (C+ and below) |
|
|
Quality of the story idea
(33.3%) |
It is a brand new story or novel treatment of a well-known story. | It contains some new elements, but needs work. | Focus is old, irrelevant or unclear. |
|
The quality of the records
(33.3%) |
The public records shed new light on the story and advance our knowledge and will be an integral part of the story. | The records cover some new ground and can be used sparingly. | The records are of little to no use. |
|
The quality of the multimedia elements.
(33.3%) |
The multimedia elements add value to the public records in the story you are pitching because they are up to date, and provide a level of detail not contained in the records. | The elements provide valued-added content, but mostly are repetitions of what we already know in the proposed story. | The elements are unclear and provide no new information. |
Grading rubric for assignment three: filing access-to-information requests
| Excellent (A- to A+) |
Good (B- to B+) |
Below expectations (C+ and below) |
|
|
Filing of a federal request
(33.3%) |
Has conducted the legwork necessary to file at least two requests at this level. | Has done the legwork, but has only filed one request. | Has done the legwork, but neglected to file a request. |
|
Filing at the provincial level
(33.3%) |
Has conducted the legwork necessary to file at least two requests at this level. | Has done the legwork, but has only filed one request. | Has done the legwork, but neglected to file a request. |
|
Filing af the municipal level
(33.3%) |
Has conducted the legwork necessary to file at least one request at this level. | Has conducted the legwork necessary and shows evidence that a request will be filed. | Has conducted some research and has not demonstrated a request has been filed. |
Grading rubric for assignment four: project assessment
| Excellent (A- to A+) |
Good (B- to B+) |
Below expectations (C+ and below) |
|
|
News judgment and focus
(25%)
|
Shows a solid understanding of the project’s progress, its newsworthy components, and areas that need beefing up. | Shows a decent understanding of the project’s progress, its newsworthy components, and areas that need beefing up | Shows a poor understanding of the project’s progress, its newsworthy components, and areas that need beefing up |
|
Research and context
(25%) |
You have identified the records and assessed how they were used to shed new light on the subject. | You have identified the records but failed to explain how they helped to advance the story. | Have identified very few of the records and were unable to assess how they advanced the story. |
|
An assessment of your progress
(25%) |
You have mapped out a plan and a timetable for addressing the shortcomings. | You have not mapped out a complete plan and a timetable for addressing the shortcomings. | You have not mapped out a plan and a timetable for addressing the shortcomings. |
| (25%) | Writing is crisp and clear. Words are carefully chosen and spelled correctly. Generally follows CP style. | Writing is generally sound, but the assignment may contain a few poorly crafted sentences. Minor spelling mistakes and/or problems with CP style. |
Writing is unclear or word choice not ideal, or major problems with punctuation. Several spelling mistakes and/or major problems with CP style.
|
Grading rubric for assignment five: draft pitch
| Excellent (A- to A+) |
Good (B- to B+) |
Below expectations (C+ and below) |
|
|
Quality of your assessment
(25%)
|
Does an excellent job of identifying the strengths and weaknesses and areas and creating a viable to-do list to acquire the missing elements for the final pitch. | Does a decent job of identifying the project’s strengths, but struggles to assess weaknesses and identify areas for improvement. | Is unable to identify the strengths and weaknesses and areas that need improving. |
|
Research and context
(25%) |
Has done an excellent job of digging up records such as court documents, datasets and corporate filings and has almost everything the story needs. Has shown evidence of follow-up from the previous assignment. | Has done a decent job of finding public records, but still needs to locate a substantial number of resources. Has shown some evidence of follow-up from previous assignment. | Has done little background research and has very few records. Has shown no evidence of follow-up from previous assignment. |
|
Access to information
(25%) |
Has shown evidence of following up on the requests (through contacting the atip offices to assess progress, for instance) once the acknowledgement letters have been received. | Has filed the initial requests, but showed little evidence of follow-up to track their progress. | Has yet to file all the requests and showed no evidence of follow-up. |
|
Professionalism and safety
(25%) |
Writing is crisp and clear. Words are carefully chosen and spelled correctly. Generally follows CP style.
|
Writing is generally sound, but pitch may contain a few poorly crafted sentences. Minor spelling mistakes and/or problems with CP style. |
Writing is unclear or word choice not ideal, or major problems with punctuation. Several spelling mistakes and/or major problems with CP style.
|
Grading rubric for assignment six: final pitch
| Excellent (A- to A+) |
Good (B- to B+) |
Below expectations (C+ and below) |
|
|
News judgment and originality
(25%)
|
Story idea is original and/or brings something new to an ongoing discussion. Clear and ideal focus (ie. timely, newsworthy, interesting).
|
Story idea is acceptable but does not make clear what is original or new. May have been covered by national or international media but is new to a local audience. Focus may be a bit unclear. | Story idea lacks depth or freshness or understanding of the assigned task. May have been covered by other local media and offers no fresh angle. Unfocused or doesn’t identify the best angle or focus. |
|
Research and context
(25%) |
Relevant and authoritative statistics and background info. Identifies diverse human, document/data sources. Clear and strong connection between research and story idea, and solid evidence of a research plan. | Some statistics, background info, and discovered facts but not fully developed and/or not entirely relevant or authoritative. Predictable human, document/data sources. Generally, research supports story idea. | Few statistics, little background info, and/or discovered facts. Human/data sources are irrelevant or not ideal. None or little explanation of relevance or research to support story idea, and no evidence of a research plan. |
|
Multimedia
(25%) |
Clear and creative possibilities. Clearly tied to story focus. Shows significant effort. | Predictable possibilities. Tied to story focus, but may not be ideal or creative. Shows some effort. | Suggestions may be ill-suited to story focus. Minimum effort. |
|
Professionalism and safety
(25%) |
Timeline is clear and achievable. Clear and suitable description of safety protocols. Shows deep understanding of the rigours and demands of reporting work. | Timeline is generally achievable, but needs a minor tweak. Description of safety protocols may lack a key element and/or one element is ill-suited. Overall, shows an adequate understanding of reporting work. | Timeline is off or unachievable. Unclear description of safety protocols and/or protocols irrelevant or not well-developed. Overall, shows a lack of understanding of the rigours of reporting work. |
Grading rubric for professionalism
| Excellent (A- to A+) |
Good (B- to B+) |
Below expectations (C+ and below) |
|
|
Attendance and participation
(33.3%)
|
Attends all scheduled classes.
|
Attends 75 per cent of scheduled classes. | Attends less than 50 per cent of scheduled classes. |
|
Workflow
(33.3%) |
Completes ALL the assigned workflow questionnaires and the surveys at the beginning and mid-way point of class. | Completes 70 per cent of the assigned workflow questionnaires and the surveys at the beginning and mid-way point of class. | Completes less than 50 per cent of the assigned workflow questionnaires and none of the surveys at the beginning and mid-way point of class. |
|
Participation and overall conduct
(33.3%) |
Participates fully in discussions, is respectful of classmates opinions and responds promptly to instructor’s emailed correspondence. | Participates in some discussions, is respectful of classmates opinions and fails to respond promptly to instructor’s emailed correspondence. | Participates in few discussions, is disrespectful of classmates opinions and fails to respond promptly to instructor’s emailed correspondence. |
Course Schedule
| WELCOME |
Course overview: Who we are, what we’re setting out to do and why.
Read: Course syllabus |
|
WEEK 1
(June 3) Discussing the course |
What is project?: Studying examples in The Globe and Mail
Class recording Links: Completed Access to Information Requests Search Briefing Note Titles and Numbers |
|
WEEK 2
(June 8,10) Evaluating a project
|
The elements of a successful project: Identifying what’s new, relevant and/or interesting, solutions. What goes into a piece (e.g. quotes, background). What goes where. Guest: On June 8, The Globe and Mail’s Tom Cardoso will discuss his data-driven projects about how some publicly traded companies misused the federal wage-subsidy program, and his stories about systemic bias in the risk assessments used by Correctional Service of Canada on Black and Indigenous inmates.On June 10, we will continue to discuss the essential elements of projects in setting the foundation for pitches that we began on June 8.Links: National Newswatch https://www.nationalnewswatch.com/ Here’s what Ottawa has said, and done, about Islamophobia and attacks on Muslim Canadians Conservative, Bloc MPs opposed a motion to condemn Islamophobia in 2017. After the London hate crime, advocates say their condolences ring hollow M-103 SYSTEMIC RACISM AND RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION CHPC COMMITTEE REPORT StatCan release schedules Statistics Canada Tables Population estimates, July 1, by census metropolitan area and census agglomeration, 2016 boundaries Population estimates on July 1st, by age and sex Building a Foundation for Change: Canada’s Anti-Racism Strategy 2019–2022 Canadian Heritage House of Commons House of Commons – order and notice paper, June 8, 2021 Sessional papers tabled as response to written questions House of Commons Publication Search Instructions for accessing House of Commons publications.pdf Historical Hansard Library and Archives Canada Public Opinion Research Reports (PORR) Canlii |
|
WEEK 3
(June 15, 17) Access to information |
Finding stories: Examples of stories that have used access-to-information.
Learning the law: What basic knowledge do you need to file a request. Filing requests: We will review examples of successful request have yielded records and then begin writing our own requests. We will use follow-up one-on-one sessions to complete the requests. |
|
(June 22,24) Choosing the best elements for your projects |
A review of public records and multimedia elements: Will review open-data websites and public records |
|
WEEK 5
(June 29) elements of storytelling |
Leads: How to write gripping leads for news reports and news features.
Nutgraphs: The elements that comprise successful ones. Studying nutgraphs that work and ones that don’t.
|
|
WEEK 6
(July 6,8) TBD |
|
|
WEEK 7
(July 13,15) TBD |
|
|
WEEK 8
(July 20, 22) TBD |
|
|
WEEK 9
(July 27, 29) TBD |
|
|
WEEK 10
(August 3,5) TBD
|
|
|
WEEK 11
(August 10) TBD |
|
Stories
TWENTY YEARS OF THE POWER GAP: HOW 15 ONTARIO UNIVERSITIES COMPARE
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-twenty-years-of-the-power-gap-how-15-ontario-universities-compare/
Inside L6P – The Globe and Mail
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/topics/l6p/
CBC: The Big Spend
https://www.cbc.ca/news/topic/Tag/The%20Big%20Spend
Chrystia Freeland defends wage subsidy as opposition accuses Liberals of ‘showering their rich Bay Street friends’
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-chrystia-freeland-defends-wage-subsidy-as-opposition-accuses-liberals/
Flexible reporting standards mean investors know little about when companies used emergency wage subsidies
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-when-companies-quietly-use-cews-investors-lose/
Wealthy hedge funds, money managers received Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-wealthy-hedge-funds-money-managers-received-canada-emergency-wage/
Wage subsidies were meant to preserve jobs. In many cases, the $110.6-billion response padded bottom lines
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-canada-emergency-wage-subsidy-data-analysis/
A tale of two neighbourhoods: Jane and Finch with the lowest vaccination rate, Moore Park with the highest
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2021/04/11/a-tale-of-two-neighbourhoods-jane-and-finch-with-the-lowest-vaccination-rate-moore-park-with-the-highest.html
The Toronto and Peel neighbourhoods that need the COVID vaccine the most aren’t getting it, new data reveals
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2021/04/06/the-toronto-and-peel-neighbourhoods-that-need-the-covid-vaccine-the-most-arent-getting-it-new-data-reveals.html
Clean Water, Broken Promises
https://www.nationalobserver.com/tags/clean-water-broken-promises
How we did it: How The Globe uncovered systemic bias in prisoners’ risk assessments
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-investigation-racial-bias-in-canadian-prisons-methodology/
Zoning out: Doug Ford’s special land-use orders
https://www.nationalobserver.com/special-reports/zoning-out-doug-fords-special-land-use-orders
Solutions Journalism
The Top 10 Takeaways from the Newest Solutions Journalism Research
https://bit.ly/3x3TADV
Complicating the Narratives:
What if journalists covered controversial issues differently — based on how humans actually behave when they are polarized and suspicious?
https://bit.ly/3v7Kxkc
SOLUTIONS STORY TRACKER
https://storytracker.solutionsjournalism.org/
Watch Now: Using Solutions Journalism to Report on Climate
https://coveringclimatenow.org/climate-beat-story/watch-now-using-solutions-journalism-to-report-on-climate/
Solutions Journalism presentation
Learning & Support Resources
In addition to resources at King’s, many are available to you at Dalhousie University. These include the Student Health & Wellness Centre, the Indigenous Student Centre, the Black Student Advising Centre, the International Centre and the South House Sexual and Gender Resource Centre, among others.
Ethical Conduct
All students are expected to familiarize themselves with the School’s Handbook of Professional Practice and abide by its ethical standards.
Fair, Inclusive and Safe Conduct
All students in the School of Journalism should feel they are participants in a respectful, fair and safe learning environment. Classrooms, newsrooms and online course delivery systems are spaces where everyone should feel welcomed and supported. The School expects students, staff and faculty to abide by the highest standards of collegial learning. The University has policies, procedures and resources to guide students’ experience, whether in a class or as part of a reporting assignment. If you are concerned about your learning environment you may take a range of steps to initiate a discussion or a process:
Meet with the course instructor: You are encouraged to discuss concerns about a particular course first with the instructor. This instructor may be able to address concerns informally. Such concerns may relate to grading, course content, interpersonal issues with other students, or any other issue. The instructor may also direct you to other resources within the University. If you have an unresolved issue with an instructor, you can also:
- Appeal a final grade in a course by filing a Request for Reassessment of a Final Grade
- Provide written comment on an instructor in the Student Ratings of Instruction, distributed near the end of the course. Evaluations are reviewed by the Director each year and used in tenure and promotion decisions for Faculty.
Meet with the Journalism School Director: The Director welcomes any comment on the experiences of students within the School. Concerns may be addressed informally — especially as they relate to the curriculum, academic environment and interpersonal issues. The Director may refer students with more specific or serious concerns to individual policies, procedures and resources of the University. Inclusion and respect for others are key values of the School. An experience of racism, intolerance or inequitable treatment will typically prompt cooperation between the Director and the Equity Officer in working toward immediate and longer-term resolutions.
- Write a letter to the School Director to express a strong concern about an experience in the School. The Director may bring it to a meeting of Journalism Faculty and will keep the letter on file.
Meet with the Equity Officer: King’s Equity Officer is available for consultation on any issue concerning equity, diversity, inclusion, discrimination and harassment. The officer administers the Policy and Procedures for Prevention of Discrimination and Harassment, found in the Yellow Book. If you have concerns about your experience in the School, you are encouraged to seek advice and assistance from the officer, who also receives complaints and administers the process for resolution under the policy. This policy is part of the University Code of Conduct, also found in the Yellow Book, which governs conduct by all members of the University community.
January 2021 Note: King’s is currently searching to fill a full-time vacancy in the position of Equity Officer. The results of the search will be announced as soon as they are available. In the meantime, inquiries and concerns may be directed to the University’s Human Resources Officer, Dolly McIntyre <dolly.mcintyre@ukings.ca>, who will ensure the matter is brought to the attention for action by the appropriate member of the University.
Meet with the Sexualized Violence Prevention and Response Officer: The SVPRO provides support around experiences of sexualized violence and administers King’s Sexualized Violence Policy. This support is confidential and can include informal discussion, academic accommodations, and assistance with disclosures and reports. All decisions regarding disclosure of sexualized violence are in the hands of the individual disclosing. Academic accommodations may be available to those who do not wish to make a formal report. The SVPRO is also available if you are supporting someone who has experienced sexualized violence. The SVPRO is Jordan Roberts <>, 902 229-6123.
Review the School’s safety guidelines: The School’s Handbook of Professional Practice contains safety guidelines for physical safety while reporting. To do journalism well, you must sometimes be uncomfortable, but you should never be unsafe. If you run into trouble or if you feel a situation might put your or others’ personal safety at risk, call your instructor right away.
Contacting the Police
Journalism students must talk to their instructor before they contact Halifax Regional Police or RCMP. On approval of their request, they must send the police an email from their official school account that is cc’d to their instructor.
Academic Integrity
At King’s and Dalhousie, we are guided in all of our work by the values of academic integrity:
honesty, trust, fairness, responsibility and respect. As a student, you are required to
demonstrate these values in all of the work you do. Plagiarism — stealing someone else’s work and presenting it as your own — is a form of academic fraud and unethical journalism. The most common instance involves copying material from the Internet without attributing it. If you have any doubt about proper citation for an academic paper or proper attribution in a piece of journalism, contact your instructor. For more information, consult the section on Intellectual Honesty on p. 19 of Dalhousie’s Graduate Studies Calendar (Find “PDF Versions” at the top of that page) or p. 34 of King’s academic calendar.
Accessibility
Students may request accommodation as a result of barriers to inclusion related to disability, religious obligation, or any characteristic under the Nova Scotia Human Rights Act. If you experience barriers related to the design, instruction, and/or experiences within this course please contact the Student Accessibility Centre. Please note that a classroom may contain specialized furniture and equipment. It is important that these items remain in the classroom, untouched, so that students who require them will be able to participate in the class.
Appeals
Disputes over academic performance and assessment will be dealt with according to the Academic Regulations of the School of Journalism. Students may appeal decisions of the Journalism Studies Committee to the Faculty of Graduate Studies. For more information, see p. 42 of King’s Academic Calendar.