This chapter moves from inquiry design to the hands-on work of gathering and analyzing the “traces of learning” that can answer a SoTL question. It clarifies terminology—contrasting the field’s common use of data and evidence with the authors’ preferred term, artifacts, as described by the scholar Karen Manarin—to keep students’ authorship and context at the center of analysis. The chapter urges scholarly humility and openness to surprise: systematic, transparent collection of artifacts should seek what is actually present in student work, not merely confirmation of expectations. The chapter outlines four principles for using artifacts as traces of learning: align tightly to the question; make student thinking visible (especially intermediate, developmental moments); use what is already available ethically (coursework, LMS data, institutional records); and, where possible, use a complementary variety of artifacts. Illustrative cases—difficulty papers that surface reading struggles, concept maps that externalize evolving understanding, routine formative tasks repurposed for analysis, and blended digital/qualitative traces—show how fewer, well-chosen artifacts can yield deeper insight than broad but unfocused data.