Orientation to Gordon Rule Writing Assignments CTD300 Reference 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 1 2 3 4 Demonstrates Effective Development: Thesis Statement, Demonstrates Emerging College-Level Writing 1 Demonstrates Satisfactory College-Level Writing 2 Demonstrates Proficient 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.

Rubric 1 2 3 4 Demonstrates Exemplary College-Level Writing Demonstrates Emerging College-Level Writing 1 Demonstrates Satisfactory College-Level Writing 2 Demonstrates Proficient 3 Demonstrates Exemplary College-Level Writing 4   Demonstrates Effective Organization of Content Loose focus on central idea, contains some repetition and digression. Paragraph structure 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 Paragraph structure consistently and effectively supports content. Clear logic and effective transitions

Rubric 1 2 3 4 Employs Effective Language Demonstrates Emerging College-Level Writing 1 Demonstrates Satisfactory College-Level Writing 2 Demonstrates Proficient 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 1 2 3 4 Addresses Purpose and Audience Demonstrates Emerging College-Level Writing 1 Demonstrates Satisfactory College-Level Writing 2 Demonstrates Proficient College-Level Writing 3 Demonstrates Exemplary 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 Pdf files of each sample writings will be avail via web. Test to see if we can link these items as hyperlinks

Writing assignments that do not provide evidence of college-level writing 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). Resumes Freewriting Emails Brainstorming Creative Writing Annotations PowerPoint Presentation One-Minute Paper Pdf files of each sample writings will be avail via web. Test to see if we can link these items as hyperlinks

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.

References Essay 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 Assignment Ernie Enchelmayer. “Creating a Report.” Compu/Com: Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. 5 Dec. 2006. 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 Assignment Jenquin, 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

References Written Examinations Assignment Beckett, 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 Assignment Buranen, 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 Assignment McNeil, Kenneth. “Writing Portfolio Assignment.” Eastern Connecticut State University. 5 Dec. 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 Assignment Dorsey, Bruce. “Book Review Assignment. History 41: The American Colonies Swarthmore College. 5 Dec. 2006. http://www.swarthmore.edu/SocSci/bdorsey1/41syl/bkrev.html

References Journal Assignment Soule, 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 Assignment Richardson, Tim. “Case Study Assignment.” University of Toronto at Scarborough. 5 Dec. 2006. http://www.witiger.com/universityoftoronto/MGTD06/assignmentsMGTD06.htm Feasibility Study Assignment Clemens, 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/Clem ens/Clemensreport.pdf Manual Assignment Goeller, 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 Assignment Stone, 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 Assignment Overgaard, Nicky. “Resume Assignment.”University of Minnesota, Crookston. http://webhome.crk.umn.edu/~novergaa/Resume%20Assignment.doc

References Email Assignment Warnick, Quinn. “Email Assignment Constructing an Effective Email Message.” ISUComm: Iowa State University. 5 Dec. 2006. http://isucomm.iastate.edu/emailassignment Creative Writing Assignments MacAuley, 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 Assignment Bourgeois, 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 Assignment Ulrich, Melanie R. “Freewriting.” University of Texas. http://www.cwrl.utexas.edu/~ulrich/rww03/freewriting.htm Brainstorming Assignment Wallace, David. “Brainstorming.” Product Engineering Processes, MIT. 5 Dec. 2006. http://web.mit.edu/2.009/www/assignments/Brainstorming.html Annotation/commentary Assignment Cooper, 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 Assignment Pimple, 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