This course introduces students to the empathetic approach to the study of world religions, which requires that we strive to “get into the shoes” of members of the world’s religions through dialogue.

This course introduces students to the empathetic approach to the study of world religions, which requires that we strive to “get into the shoes” of members of the world’s religions through dialogue. In order to help students understand and become familiar with the life of some members of world’s religions, students in the course are asked to visit a religious institution or VRI in their local city. You will then write what is called a VRI paper that captures your experience in detail. Think of the paper as a report on the institution combined with your reflections on the experience. In this paper you are asked to describe the institution, and its relation to the various traditions that you study, among other things (for example, identify whether the institution is a church in the Protestant or Catholic tradition; whether the institution is a Jewish synagogue in the Reform tradition; or if it is a Buddhist temple, whether it is Theravada). Be sure to read the Rubric for the VRI paper assignment for further details.

NOTE: The religious institution that I picked was a Chapel Annex to speak with Chaplain Elias J. Paulk of the Roman Catholic religion. SOLID EVIDENCE PARTIAL EVIDENCE NO EVIDENCE CRITERIA 1: USE OF SOURCES Does the paper use credible sources ? Accurate information from the institution’s “insiders,” especially interviews of leaders and/or members; then group’s website & other public ations. Anything they say about themselves should take priority. Also important is information from students’ personal observations during visit (things you would say or point out). RSL1.1; CC1.2 Information is accurate; resources are legitimate; resources include interviews of insiders and are varied. Information is accurate with only a few minor errors; resources good but not varied enough . Information does not include interviews is unreliable, based on second -hand account, or inaccurate; resources are generally not valid CRITERIA 2: BROAD CONTENT (8 dimensions) Does the paper cover a broad spectrum of content about the institution? Information collected on the institution must include the following eight dimensions: 1) description of geographical l ocation and history of group in Tampa; 2) the particular religious tradition the group claims to represent; 3) defining beliefs and practice (according to them) ; 4) meeting times, common forms of worship and prayer; 5) leadership of the group , and number o f members; 6) “outsider” and “insider” views of the group’s relationship to local community); 7) and an “insider” answer to this question: “What are some things you wish others knew about your tradition?” DO NOT LEAVE OUT #7; 8) general reflection on your overall experience and how it illuminates or challenges readings in class. RSL1.2 Paper includes all eight dimensions. Leaves out one to three dimension s (not #7). Includes five or less dimensions. Is there a substantive and meaningful use of informatio n? Information is complete and helpful; notes any convergence and divergence among sources. Information is only mostly complete and simplistic. Incomplete, incorrect, and/or irrelevant information. CRITERIA 3: WRITING EFFECTIVELY COMMUNICATES BROAD CO NTENT CC1.2 Creative? Paper tells a story about your experience of this place. Experiences of the institution described vividly , clearly relevant, and help reader feel as if they had visited the religious group. For the most part creative additions are helpful in telling the story but distract from the “broad content ” from criteria 2 . Creative narrative has little to do with the institution and broad content of the paper. Coherent? Does the paper have a logical flow? Paper is coherent, with clear int roduction, language use, and conclusion; demonstrates extensive and intimate knowledge of the subject as well as all criteria of the rubric. Paper is coherent for the most part but missing important elements from the broad content criteria. Few spelling a nd grammatical errors Paper lacks coherence . S pelling and grammar errors are frequent and distract from content. REL 223 World Religions in Dialogue – VRI Paper Rubric . This assignment is worth 30 points. For each item, Solid Evidence = 7-10 ; Partial Evidence = 3-7; Little to N o Evidence = 0 -2