Orientation to Gordon Rule Writing Assignments CTD300 Reference 413948.
-
Upload
isaac-hodge -
Category
Documents
-
view
212 -
download
0
Transcript of Orientation to Gordon Rule Writing Assignments CTD300 Reference 413948.
Orientation to Gordon Rule Writing Assignments
CTD300Reference 413948
Gordon Rule Orientation
This online workshop is an orientation to the new
Gordon Rule Writing State requirements for all
faculty teaching a Gordon Rule Course.
Each participant needs to complete a sample writing
assignment that meets the Gordon Rule criteria.
Objectives
As a result of completing this workshop,participants will be able to:
– Describe the new State-mandated Gordon Rule Writing Requirements at Miami Dade College.
– Explain how standard criteria for college level writing assignments will lead to consistency in assuring that students complete writing assignments at the college level.
– Embed the descriptors for the Gordon Rule Rubric into a variety of college level writing assignments.
– Delineate writing assignments that would normally not fulfill the Gordon Rule and explain why they don’t.
Gordon Rule Criteria
The following descriptors will be used as the
MDC criteria for “college-level writing”.
The writing will:• have a clearly defined central idea or thesis;• provide adequate support for that idea;• be organized clearly and logically;• utilize the conventions of standard edited American
English;• be presented in a format appropriate to the
assignment.
Rubric
Demonstrates Emerging
College-Level Writing
1
Demonstrates Satisfactory
College-Level Writing
2
Demonstrates Proficient
College-Level Writing
3
Demonstrates Exemplary
College-Level Writing
4
Demonstrates
Effective
Development:
Thesis
Statement,
Main
points,
Supporting
information
Thesis evident but support very general and/or inconsistent.
Several factual errors
Thesis evident but supported by a mixture of generalizations and specific detail.
Some factual errors
Thesis, stated or implied, presents a plan of development that is carried out.
Effective supporting details.
Consistent development.
No factual errors.
Stated or implied thesis developed logically, coherently and extensively with convincing, specific supporting details.
Strong evidence of critical thinking.
No factual errors.
Rubric
Demonstrates Emerging
College-Level Writing
1
Demonstrates Satisfactory
College-Level Writing
2
Demonstrates Proficient
College-Level Writing
3
Demonstrates Exemplary
College-Level Writing
4
Demonstrates Effective Organization of Content
Loose focus on central idea, contains some repetition and digression.
Paragraphstructure weak.
Central idea evident.
Paragraph structure sometimes supports content.
Consistency, logic and transitions show some weaknesses.
Central idea clear.
Paragraph structure uniformly supports content.
Consistency, logic and transitions well managed
Central idea clear.
Paragraph structure consistently and effectively supports content.
Clear logic and effective transitions
Rubric
Demonstrates Emerging
College-Level Writing
1
Demonstrates Satisfactory
College-Level Writing
2
Demonstrates Proficient
College-Level Writing
3
Demonstrates Exemplary
College-Level Writing
4
Employs
Effective
Language
Frequent errors in word choice.
Sentence structure and mechanics seriously affect clarity.
Word choice correct but simple/ without variety.
Errors in mechanics and/ or usage do not obscure content of assignment.
Word choice accurate, varied.
Occasional errors in sentence structure, usage and mechanics do not hinder writer’s ability to communicate purpose.
Choice of language consistently precise, purposeful.
Nearly flawless sentence structure, usage, mechanics contribute to writer’s ability to communicate purpose.
Rubric
Demonstrates Emerging
College-Level Writing
1
Demonstrates Satisfactory
College-Level Writing
2
Demonstrates Proficient
College-Level Writing
3
Demonstrates Exemplary
College-Level Writing
4
Addresses Purpose and Audience
Wavers in purpose, incompletely addresses assigned topic or directions, shows need for more study of issues.
Style uneven.
Adheres to purpose, fulfills assignment, shows adequate understanding of key issues.
Style generally appropriate to intended audience.
Communicates purpose clearly.
Shows full understanding of issues.
Style consistently effective for intended audience.
Communicates purpose with sophistication.
Beyond understanding of issues, shows insight.
Style engages audience, establishes writer’s credibility.
Creating Effective Assignments• A detailed a writing assignment will help students write more
effective papers.
• Directions should be explicit for students because they will treat assignments as though they were step-by-step instructions.
• The following explicit directions should appear on the syllabus or
an "assignment sheet":
• type of writing expected • scope of acceptable subject matter • length requirements • formatting requirements • documentation format• amount or type of research expected (if any)
Creating Effective Assignments
Defining the writing task should include:
• Guidance about the paper's main focus
• Purpose of the assignment (e.g., inform, analyze, explain, persuade).
• Required format/ structure (e.g., essay, report, business plan)
• Mode for the assignment (e.g., description, analysis, persuasion)
Creating Effective Assignments
Defining the evaluative criteria should include the quality
of: • organization • focus • critical /original thinking • logic/ reasoning • structure and format • research and sources • grammar and mechanics • style/ tone • correct use of course concepts and terms • depth of coverage
Gordon Rule and the Course Syllabus
The MDC criteria for “college-level writing” ideally
should appear in the course syllabus, either embedded as
guidelines/directions for each “college-level writing assignment”
(criterion #1 of the MDC Gordon Rule requirements) or as
general requirements for passing the course.
Let’s look at how one MDC professor has done this.Syllabus
Gordon Rule and the Assignment Sheets
Additionally, the MDC criteria for “college-level
writing” should appear on assignment sheets that
provide directions and guidelines.
Let’s look at some examples of assignments that
provide evidence of college-level writing .
Writing assignments that normally provide evidence of college-level writing
Essays Interviews
Process Papers Reviews
Reports Journals
Project plans Case studies
Lab reports Feasibility Studies
Business plans Manuals
Written examinations Evaluated drafts
Research papers Discussion question responses
Portfolios
Writing assignments that do not provide evidence of college-level writing
Resumes Freewriting
Emails Brainstorming
Creative Writing Annotations
PowerPoint Presentation One-Minute Paper
The following types of writing assignments do not fulfill the Gordon Rule requirement because they do not meet the five criteria (central thesis; adequate support; organization; grammar/punctuation; format/style).
Review of Learning Objectives– A task force was appointed to define criteria for multiple college level
writing assignments, and to draft a rubric and guidelines.
– Students must successfully complete a minimum of three college level writing assignments
– The five criteria for college level writing used in the Gordon Rule rubric have been identified: thesis, development, organization, language, format
– Samples of a variety of writing assignments show how the criteria in the Gordon Rule Rubric can be embedded in detailed assignment sheets and course syllabi.
– Samples of some writing assignments show what types of assignments normally do not fulfill the Gordon Rule requirements.
– Overall, the use of the rubric and detailed assignment descriptions lead to consistency and uniformity in the standards of students’ college level writing assignments.
Assignment
To successfully complete the Gordon Rule Orientation workshop each
participant will need to post a writing assignment to SharePoint that
meet the Gordon Rule criteria for writing assignments.
Design or construct a writing assignment for your Gordon Rule class
that fulfills the MDC Gordon Rule Requirement using detailed
guidelines and instructions like those in the sample assignments
provided.
ReferencesEssay Assignment Gil, Teri and Laura Ciancanelli. “Unit #2 - Description and Analysis of a Remembered Person or Place.” Compu/Com: Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. 5 Dec. 2006. http://www.siu.edu/~compcomp/compucomp/Prompts/Prompts.htm
Process Paper Assignment Trella, Katherine. “English 12 – Academic Process Analysis Essay.” Tippecanoe School Corporation. http://www.wvec.k12.in.us/harrison/ktrella/Process%20Analysis%20essay.doc
Report AssignmentErnie Enchelmayer. “Creating a Report.” Compu/Com: Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. 5 Dec. 2006. http://www.siu.edu/~compcomp/compucomp/Prompts/Prompts.htm
Project Plan Assignment“CIS375 Assignment.” College of Engineering and Computer Science, University of Michigan Dearborn. 6 Dec. 2006. http://www.engin.umd.umich.edu/CIS/course.des/cis375/planproj.f01.html
Business Plan AssignmentJenquin, Kathy. “Writing 109EC: Business Plan Assignment.” Writing Program, University of California Santa Barbara. 5 Dec. 2006. http://www.writing.ucsb.edu/courses/109EC/lbas1.htm
ReferencesWritten Examinations AssignmentBeckett, Katherine. “Sociology 372: Crime, Politics & Justice Final Essay Exam Questions.” Sociology, University of Washington. 5 Dec. 2006. http://www.soc.washington.edu/users/kbeckett/final%20questions.pdf
Research Paper AssignmentBuranen, Lise. “The Research Paper Assignment.” University Writing Center. CAL State, L.A. 5 Dec. 2006. http://www.calstatela.edu/centers/write_cn/sbtermpap.htm
Portfolio AssignmentMcNeil, Kenneth. “Writing Portfolio Assignment.” Eastern Connecticut State University. 5Dec. 2006. http://www.ecsu.ctstateu.edu/personal/faculty/mcneilk/portfolio_assign.html
Interviewing Assignment Sullivan, Amy. “Informational Interview Assignment.” Queens University of Charlotte. 5 Dec. 2006. http://www.queens.edu/internships/worldofwork/II-Assignment.asp
Review AssignmentDorsey, Bruce. “Book Review Assignment. History 41: The American Colonies Swarthmore College. 5 Dec. 2006.http://www.swarthmore.edu/SocSci/bdorsey1/41syl/bkrev.html
ReferencesJournal AssignmentSoule, Molly and Andresse St. Rose. “Journal Writing :Bungee Jumping for the Brain.” Hamilton College. 5 Dec. 2006. https://my.hamilton.edu/academics/resource/wc/Journal_Writing.PDF
Case Study AssignmentRichardson, Tim. “Case Study Assignment.” University of Toronto at Scarborough. 5 Dec. 2006. http://www.witiger.com/universityoftoronto/MGTD06/assignmentsMGTD06.htm
Feasibility Study AssignmentClemens, Linda. “Rhetoric 3562 Assignment #5: Collaborative Feasibility Study— Report and Oral Presentation.” Department of Rhetoric, University of Minnesota. 5 Dec. 2006.http://www.rhetoric.umn.edu/foundation_courses/rhetoric_3562/Archive/Assignments/Clemens/Clemensreport.pdf
Manual AssignmentGoeller, Michael. “The User Manual.” Business and Technical Writing: Rutgers University. 5 Dec. 2006. http://bizntech.rutgers.edu/courses/322/user_manual.html
Discussion Question Responses AssignmentStone, Maureen and Polle Zellweger. “Reading Responses and Discussion Questions.” Information Visualization and Aesthetics, University of Washington. 5 Dec. 2006. https://courses.washington.edu/info424/Reading%20Responses.pdf
Resume AssignmentOvergaard, Nicky. “Resume Assignment.”University of Minnesota, Crookston. http://webhome.crk.umn.edu/~novergaa/Resume%20Assignment.doc
ReferencesEmail AssignmentWarnick, Quinn. “Email Assignment Constructing an Effective Email Message.” ISUComm: Iowa StateUniversity. 5 Dec. 2006. http://isucomm.iastate.edu/emailassignment
Creative Writing AssignmentsMacAuley, William. “Suggestions for Creative Writing Assignments.” Faculty Resources. The College of Wooster. 5 Dec. 2006. http://www.wooster.edu/writing_center/facassignments.html
PowerPoint Presentation AssignmentBourgeois, Christina. “Assignment Sheet: PowerPoint Presentation ECE 2301: Digital Design Lab.” Electrical and Computer Engineering, Georgia Tech. 5 Dec. 2006. http://upcp.ece.gatech.edu/classes/2031/content/design_project/assignment_sheet_powerpoint_prespdf
Freewriting AssignmentUlrich, Melanie R. “Freewriting.” University of Texas. http://www.cwrl.utexas.edu/~ulrich/rww03/freewriting.htm
Brainstorming AssignmentWallace, David. “Brainstorming.” Product Engineering Processes, MIT. 5 Dec. 2006. http://web.mit.edu/2.009/www/assignments/Brainstorming.html
Annotation/commentary AssignmentCooper, Elizabeth J. “Writing Assignment for the Annotation/commentary on a Major Article in the Field.” Virginia Commonwealth University. http://www.courses.vcu.edu/ENG636-ejc/annotation.htm
One Minute paper AssignmentPimple, Kenneth. “Using Short Writing Assignments in Teaching Research Ethics1.” Poynter Center for the Study of Ethics and American Institutions, Indiana University Bloomington. 5 Dec. 2006. http://poynter.indiana.edu/tre/kdp-writing.pdf
Web Resources • College Term Papers, Homework Help, http://www.gethomeworkhelp.com/
• Dictionary.com, http://dictionary.reference.com/
• Gordon Rule, http://www.registrar.ufl.edu/catalogarchive/00-01-catalog/academic-advising/AA_006_Gordon-Rule.htm#A006
• Gordon Rule Guidelines, http://inst.sfcc.edu/~often/e_index/gordonru.htm
• Internet Public Library, Styles and Writing Guides, http://www.ipl.org/div/subject/browse/ref73.00.00/
• Teaching and Learning Links, http://inst.sfcc.edu/~often/e_index/teachlearn.htm
• The Owl Family of Sites, Purdue University, http://owl.english.purdue.edu/
• Writing Guides @ Colorado State University, http://writing.colostate.edu/guides/index.cfm?guides_active=starting&category1=21