The genesis of what is now a full-blow course, with hopes of it being accredited by Northwestern University, came from a leadership initiative for queer students based out of my office, the Gender and Sexuality Resource Center. It began this year as a program description, and has turned into a syllabus. Creating this program, and the ensuing syllabus challenged my efficacy primarily because I have not worked with a community partner before and it challenged my efficacy in creating a learning center class. What helped frame the course were many different significant learning experiences I had stemming back to my undergraduate classes at Roosevelt University, activities, assignments, and pedagogies from different Loyola Professors, and important readings that provided a theoretical framework for my pedagogy. The class has outcomes to fuse theory, personal narratives, leadership, and community service. Originally though of as just a community service program, I wanted to insert readings and class activities so students can make meaning out of their community service experiences. The program is specifically catered to first and second year students who are looking for involvement in Queer orientated programs outside of student organizations and other community group based programs. Students at Northwestern rarely venture outside of Evanston due to heavy course and involvement loads, and a partnership with the Chicago House would provide these opportunities for them. Additionally, little to no leadership based programs exist at Northwestern outside of the old paradigm of skill building and positionally. The first significant learning experiences I reflected on were two specific courses in my undergrad at Roosevelt University. The first was an anthropology class I took my first semester, the other a social justice writing class, which was a university prerequisite. The anthropology class comes to mind as a significant learning experience because of the course readings. I have a reading comprehension learning disability; so reading theoretical material (especially if I do not have a schema created for prior work with the subject) is difficult, especially if there are no concrete examples of how it is practical to life. Almost all of our anthropology readings were ethnographies, narratives of researchers working with people, primarily (at least in all our readings) to discuss differences from stereotyped thoughts. Additionally, the instructor provided assignments, activities, and discussions that taught us how to incorporate ethnography into other writings across disciplines as well. One activity in particular sticks out, were the instructor played a song where the lyrics described a womans (who was a prostitute) story of how she was mistreated by her father. We were required to write a speed ethnography in class, and discuss our thoughts on what an ethnography of her life would be from point a to point b. The anthropological term of cultural relativism is a term and thinking I still use today, and is almost an educational terminology twin to empathy. The other class was my social justice writing class. The entire class was surrounded around the subject of trauma, the 9/11 attacks in the United States, and socially responsible ways to respond to the pain of others. It was an epic course, because it challenged our thoughts and feelings around a touchy issue, exposed us to a variety of issues stemming post-9/11 that we were unaware of, and provided a critical aspect of what we view as legitimate writing. The course literature we read was a mix of pain in literature form, and analysis of those methods of literature. In particular, Art Spiegelmans comic In the Shadow of No Towers and Susan Sontags Regarding the Pain of Others were our two main course readings with a slew of supplemental readings as well. This course created a dialectical setting in our classroom, where there were many challenges, and may triggers. The course readings were also in critical conversation with each other, requiring us to make meaning of our understandings through reflection papers. The course was most effective because it centered course subjects around a paradigm shifting event in our life, allowing us to make a lot of meaning of the course work. Along with the meaning made of the course, my writing stemming from the course notably developed as I learned how to become a critical researcher by not relying on a single sources argument, and to become a critical writer, a skill I still use to this day. Most importantly however was the support the instructor gave. Many of us had not created a large research project (which ended up being 10 pages, daunting for a 2nd year), and the professor recognized this by creating multiple benchmarks and meetings with students. Many of the same feelings of the classes I mentioned above can be transferred to the classes I have had a Loyola. Important to point out here is the particular activities and assignments that I have incorporated into my course. Other activities and assignments from Roosevelt will be incorporated as well. This course frames many different social justice based topics into the course, but begin with the premise of exploring personal identities, and understanding power, privilege, and oppression. This framework was explored in our multiculturalism for social justice class, which I took with Dr. Kelly. Although I explored many social justice based topics at Roosevelt, all of which weave into our personal lives in one way or another, none had our lives and identities as the primary targets or agents as the course material. Multiple personal identity activities are utilized in the beginning of the class to meet this objective. Personal identity actives and discussions across difference have a humanizing effect, especially if it is coupled with community service. This is a leadership paradigm introduced to us in John Dugan's leadership class, coming from his multi-institute study of leadership programs. Of that study discussion and dialogue, and community service were seen as the two highest impact practices that facilitate leadership development. As was stated before, not many leadership programs at Northwestern use this paradigm, and it is my hope it becomes a high impact practice. The use of reflection, social media platforms, and writing as a form of activism is also present in this course. Reflection as meaning making tool was using sparingly in my undergraduate student affairs and academic, and I have only begun to see its impact on my life (as I employ it in many different facets now). Reflection will be used as an activity when students meet in person bi-weekly, answering a prompt and though responses posted in tumblr in weeks where the group does not meet in person. I choose tumblr as a social media platform for a few reasons: to introduce students to a blog concept of writing, and for students to see the power of writing as a form of activism. Writing and research were two mediums I only ventured in because it was a course requirement, primarily because my low efficacy as it relates to creating academic work in the form of writing. Research is the partner of writing, which is difficult because of my reading comprehension learning disability, and my poor executive functioning related to my ADHD hamper the planning associated with the paper. Yet, my writing has improved since I began the higher education program. I credit most of this as a shift in my mind by seeing writing and research as a form of activism. Particularly in the form of queer and trans* students in higher education, where there are a multitude of gaps. This subject of research is understudied and underfunded, but is essential to proving the differences and needs for queer students on college campuses. My hope is students in the stonewall society will see the narratives of the people they are working with in the Chicago House (i.e. trans* homeless people, low-income queer and trans people, etc.) as missing in academic discourse and blogging venues, prompting their engagement. All of these significant learning activities and assignments come from a deep love of teaching and learning, but my pedagogy comes from the narrative of a great teachers who introduced a new paradigm of teaching. The text providing a paradigm shift for how I viewed education was Paulo Freires Pedagogy of the Oppressed, and particularly the concept of the banking model of education. It provided a theoretical explanation for what I knew my whole life; many of my teachers only wanted to know how much I knew something out of a source, not the meaning it has to my life. All my educational life, as a student with ADHD and a reading comprehension learning disability, the grades I received reflected my interest in particular subjects. Science and Social Studies were always my strong points because they involved a number of activities for me to participate in, prompting my excitement for their tangibility. Other classes, such as spelling, math, and other subject that only required regurgitation were classes I struggled in. This was the narrative throughout my high school and beginning of college experience as well. College was not an exciting time for me academically until courses at Roosevelt tested me how to think about how I think, and think about how I learn. Freire also cautions the oppressed, for when they gain liberation, they have only ever have been in a system where they have seen those with power oppressing those without power. The oppressed therefore can take on the role of the oppressors in their own liberation, without meaningful dialogue and reflection to make meaning of the world. The same holds true for educators, for they have primarily seen the banking model of education and are socialized to practice that power over students. Unlearning the banking method in theory and practice has been difficult and uncomfortable at times, but I hope is reflected well in my course syllabus. The last assignment is the epitome of what I hope this course seeks to teach, the efficacy for students to build their own project. There are a variety of examples that can be provided to them, but ultimately they will be deciding what the project is and how they will be graded on the project. This course will not solve societies issue or rapidly accelerate students social justice development, but rather will lay the sod and plant seeds to be grown over the years. As I reflected on classes I took at Roosevelt, I e-mailed the professors of those classes to thank them, and told them I was using their classes as examples for building my own. I did this because I know they took a effort that went above and beyond what they were expected to teach, and created high impact learning from me. I recognize now the hard work it takes to build a course that has good outcomes for high impact learning, and hope the syllabus is a good foundation for that course.