CRITICAL THINKING VALUE RUBRIC for more information, please contact

Transcription

1 CRITICAL THINKING VALUE RUBRIC for more information, please contact The VALUE rubrics were developed by teams of faculty experts representing colleges and universities across the United States through a process that examined many existing campus rubrics and related documents for each learning outcome and incorporated additional feedback from faculty. The rubrics articulate fundamental criteria for each learning outcome, with performance descriptors demonstrating progressively more sophisticated levels of attainment. The rubrics are intended for institutional-level use in evaluating and discussing student learning, not for grading. The core expectations articulated in all 15 of the VALUE rubrics can and should be translated into the language of individual campuses, disciplines, and even courses. The utility of the VALUE rubrics is to position learning at all undergraduate levels within a basic framework of expectations such that evidence of learning can by shared nationally through a common dialog and understanding of student success. Definition Critical thinking is a habit of mind characterized by the comprehensive exploration of issues, ideas, artifacts, and events before accepting or formulating an opinion or conclusion. Framing Language This rubric is designed to be transdisciplinary, reflecting the recognition that success in all disciplines requires habits of inquiry and analysis that share common attributes. Further, research suggests that successful critical thinkers from all disciplines increasingly need to be able to apply those habits in various and changing situations encountered in all walks of life. This rubric is designed for use with many different types of assignments and the suggestions here are not an exhaustive list of possibilities. Critical thinking can be demonstrated in assignments that require students to complete analyses of text, data, or issues. Assignments that cut across presentation mode might be especially useful in some fields. If insight into the process components of critical thinking (e.g., how information sources were evaluated regardless of whether they were included in the product) is important, assignments focused on student reflection might be especially illuminating. Glossary The definitions that follow were developed to clarify terms and concepts used in this rubric only. Ambiguity: Information that may be interpreted in more than one way. Assumptions: Ideas, conditions, or beliefs (often implicit or unstated) that are "taken for granted or accepted as true without proof." (quoted from Context: The historical, ethical. political, cultural, environmental, or circumstantial settings or conditions that influence and complicate the consideration of any issues, ideas, artifacts, and events. Literal meaning: Interpretation of information exactly as stated. For example, "she was green with envy" would be interpreted to mean that her skin was green. Metaphor: Information that is (intended to be) interpreted in a non-literal way. For example, "she was green with envy" is intended to convey an intensity of emotion, not a skin color.

2 CRITICAL THINKING VALUE RUBRIC for more information, please contact Definition Critical thinking is a habit of mind characterized by the comprehensive exploration of issues, ideas, artifacts, and events before accepting or formulating an opinion or conclusion. Evaluators are encouraged to assign a zero to any work sample or collection of work that does not meet benchmark (cell one) level performance. Capstone 4 Milestones 3 2 Benchmark 1 Explanation of issues Evidence Selecting and using information to investigate a point of view or conclusion Influence of context and assumptions Student's position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) Conclusions and related outcomes (implications and consequences) Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated clearly and described comprehensively, delivering all relevant information necessary for full understanding. Information is taken from source(s) with enough interpretation/evaluation to develop a comprehensive analysis or synthesis. Viewpoints of experts are questioned thoroughly. Thoroughly (systematically and methodically) analyzes own and others' assumptions and carefully evaluates the relevance of contexts when presenting a position. Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) is imaginative, taking into account the complexities of an issue. Limits of position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) are acknowledged. Others' points of view are synthesized within position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis). Conclusions and related outcomes (consequences and implications) are logical and reflect student s informed evaluation and ability to place evidence and perspectives discussed in priority order. Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated, described, and clarified so that understanding is not seriously impeded by omissions. Information is taken from source(s) with enough interpretation/evaluation to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis. Viewpoints of experts are subject to questioning. Identifies own and others' assumptions and several relevant contexts when presenting a position. Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) takes into account the complexities of an issue. Others' points of view are acknowledged within position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis). Conclusion is logically tied to a range of information, including opposing viewpoints; related outcomes (consequences and implications) are identified clearly. Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated but description leaves some terms undefined, ambiguities unexplored, boundaries undetermined, and/or backgrounds unknown. Information is taken from source(s) with some interpretation/evaluation, but not enough to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis. Viewpoints of experts are taken as mostly fact, with little questioning. Questions some assumptions. Identifies several relevant contexts when presenting a position. May be more aware of others' assumptions than one's own (or vice versa). Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) acknowledges different sides of an issue. Conclusion is logically tied to information (because information is chosen to fit the desired conclusion); some related outcomes (consequences and implications) are identified clearly. Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated without clarification or description. Information is taken from source(s) without any interpretation/evaluation. Viewpoints of experts are taken as fact, without question. Shows an emerging awareness of present assumptions (sometimes labels assertions as assumptions). Begins to identify some contexts when presenting a position. Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) is stated, but is simplistic and obvious. Conclusion is inconsistently tied to some of the information discussed; related outcomes (consequences and implications) are oversimplified.

3 INQUIRY AND ANALYSIS VALUE RUBRIC for more information, please contact The VALUE rubrics were developed by teams of faculty experts representing colleges and universities across the United States through a process that examined many existing campus rubrics and related documents for each learning outcome and incorporated additional feedback from faculty. The rubrics articulate fundamental criteria for each learning outcome, with performance descriptors demonstrating progressively more sophisticated levels of attainment. The rubrics are intended for institutional-level use in evaluating and discussing student learning, not for grading. The core expectations articulated in all 15 of the VALUE rubrics can and should be translated into the language of individual campuses, disciplines, and even courses. The utility of the VALUE rubrics is to position learning at all undergraduate levels within a basic framework of expectations such that evidence of learning can by shared nationally through a common dialog and understanding of student success. Definition Inquiry is a systematic process of exploring issues, objects or works through the collection and analysis of evidence that results in informed conclusions or judgments. Analysis is the process of breaking complex topics or issues into parts to gain a better understanding of them. Framing Language This rubric is designed for use in a wide variety of disciplines. Since the terminology and process of inquiry are discipline-specific, an effort has been made to use broad language which reflects multiple approaches and assignments while addressing the fundamental elements of sound inquiry and analysis (including topic selection, existing, knowledge, design, analysis, etc.) The rubric language assumes that the inquiry and analysis process carried out by the student is appropriate for the discipline required. For example, if analysis using statistical methods is appropriate for the discipline then a student would be expected to use an appropriate statistical methodology for that analysis. If a student does not use a discipline-appropriate process for any criterion, that work should receive a performance rating of "1" or "0" for that criterion. In addition, this rubric addresses the products of analysis and inquiry, not the processes themselves. The complexity of inquiry and analysis tasks is determined in part by how much information or guidance is provided to a student and how much the student constructs. The more the student constructs, the more complex the inquiry process. For this reason, while the rubric can be used if the assignments or purposes for work are unknown, it will work most effectively when those are known. Finally, faculty are encouraged to adapt the essence and language of each rubric criterion to the disciplinary or interdisciplinary context to which it is applied. Glossary The definitions that follow were developed to clarify terms and concepts used in this rubric only. Conclusions: A synthesis of key findings drawn from research/evidence. Limitations: Critique of the process or evidence. Implications: How inquiry results apply to a larger context or the real world.

4 INQUIRY AND ANALYSIS VALUE RUBRIC for more information, please contact Definition Inquiry is a systematic process of exploring issues, objects or works through the collection and analysis of evidence that results in informed conclusions or judgments. Analysis is the process of breaking complex topics or issues into parts to gain a better understanding of them. Evaluators are encouraged to assign a zero to any work sample or collection of work that does not meet benchmark (cell one) level performance. Topic selection Existing Knowledge, Research, and/or Views Design Process Analysis Conclusions Limitations and Implications Capstone 4 Identifies a creative, focused, and manageable topic that addresses potentially significant yet previously lessexplored aspects of the topic. Synthesizes in-depth information from relevant sources representing various points of view/approaches. All elements of the methodology or theoretical framework are skillfully developed. Appropriate methodology or theoretical frameworks may be synthesized from across disciplines or from relevant subdisciplines. Organizes and synthesizes evidence to reveal insightful patterns, differences, or similarities related to focus. States a conclusion that is a logical extrapolation from the inquiry findings. Insightfully discusses in detail relevant and supported limitations and implications. Identifies a focused and manageable/doable topic that appropriately addresses relevant aspects of the topic. Presents in-depth information from relevant sources representing various points of view/approaches. Critical elements of the methodology or theoretical framework are appropriately developed, however, more subtle elements are ignored or unaccounted for. Organizes evidence to reveal important patterns, differences, or similarities related to focus. States a conclusion focused solely on the inquiry findings. The conclusion arises specifically from and responds specifically to the inquiry findings. Discusses relevant and supported limitations and implications. Milestones 3 2 Identifies a topic that while manageable/doable, is too narrowly focused and leaves out relevant aspects of the topic. Presents information from relevant sources representing limited points of view/approaches. Critical elements of the methodology or theoretical framework are missing, incorrectly developed, or unfocused. Organizes evidence, but the organization is not effective in revealing important patterns, differences, or similarities. States a general conclusion that, because it is so general, also applies beyond the scope of the inquiry findings. Presents relevant and supported limitations and implications. Benchmark 1 Identifies a topic that is far too general and wide-ranging as to be manageable and doable. Presents information from irrelevant sources representing limited points of view/approaches. Inquiry design demonstrates a misunderstanding of the methodology or theoretical framework. Lists evidence, but it is not organized and/or is unrelated to focus. States an ambiguous, illogical, or unsupportable conclusion from inquiry findings. Presents limitations and implications, but they are possibly irrelevant and unsupported.

5 ORAL COMMUNICATION VALUE RUBRIC for more information, please contact The VALUE rubrics were developed by teams of faculty experts representing colleges and universities across the United States through a process that examined many existing campus rubrics and related documents for each learning outcome and incorporated additional feedback from faculty. The rubrics articulate fundamental criteria for each learning outcome, with performance descriptors demonstrating progressively more sophisticated levels of attainment. The rubrics are intended for institutional-level use in evaluating and discussing student learning, not for grading. The core expectations articulated in all 15 of the VALUE rubrics can and should be translated into the language of individual campuses, disciplines, and even courses. The utility of the VALUE rubrics is to position learning at all undergraduate levels within a basic framework of expectations such that evidence of learning can by shared nationally through a common dialog and understanding of student success. The type of oral communication most likely to be included in a collection of student work is an oral presentation and therefore is the focus for the application of this rubric. Definition Oral communication is a prepared, purposeful presentation designed to increase knowledge, to foster understanding, or to promote change in the listeners' attitudes, values, beliefs, or behaviors. Framing Language Oral communication takes many forms. This rubric is specifically designed to evaluate oral presentations of a single speaker at a time and is best applied to live or video-recorded presentations. For panel presentations or group presentations, it is recommended that each speaker be evaluated separately. This rubric best applies to presentations of sufficient length such that a central message is conveyed, supported by one or more forms of supporting materials and includes a purposeful organization. An oral answer to a single question not designed to be structured into a presentation does not readily apply to this rubric. Glossary The definitions that follow were developed to clarify terms and concepts used in this rubric only. Central message: The main point/thesis/"bottom line"/"take-away" of a presentation. A clear central message is easy to identify; a compelling central message is also vivid and memorable. Delivery techniques: Posture, gestures, eye contact, and use of the voice. Delivery techniques enhance the effectiveness of the presentation when the speaker stands and moves with authority, looks more often at the audience than at his/her speaking materials/notes, uses the voice expressively, and uses few vocal fillers ("um," "uh," "like," "you know," etc.). Language: Vocabulary, terminology, and sentence structure. Language that supports the effectiveness of a presentation is appropriate to the topic and audience, grammatical, clear, and free from bias. Language that enhances the effectiveness of a presentation is also vivid, imaginative, and expressive. Organization: The grouping and sequencing of ideas and supporting material in a presentation. An organizational pattern that supports the effectiveness of a presentation typically includes an introduction, one or more identifiable sections in the body of the speech, and a conclusion. An organizational pattern that enhances the effectiveness of the presentation reflects a purposeful choice among possible alternatives, such as a chronological pattern, a problem-solution pattern, an analysis-of-parts pattern, etc., that makes the content of the presentation easier to follow and more likely to accomplish its purpose. Supporting material: Explanations, examples, illustrations, statistics, analogies, quotations from relevant authorities, and other kinds of information or analysis that supports the principal ideas of the presentation. Supporting material is generally credible when it is relevant and derived from reliable and appropriate sources. Supporting material is highly credible when it is also vivid and varied across the types listed above (e.g., a mix of examples, statistics, and references to authorities). Supporting material may also serve the purpose of establishing the speakers credibility. For example, in presenting a creative work such as a dramatic reading of Shakespeare, supporting evidence may not advance the ideas of Shakespeare, but rather serve to establish the speaker as a credible Shakespearean actor.

6 ORAL COMMUNICATION VALUE RUBRIC for more information, please contact Definition Oral communication is a prepared, purposeful presentation designed to increase knowledge, to foster understanding, or to promote change in the listeners' attitudes, values, beliefs, or behaviors. Evaluators are encouraged to assign a zero to any work sample or collection of work that does not meet benchmark (cell one) level performance. Organization Language Delivery Supporting Material Central Message Capstone 4 Organizational pattern (specific introduction and conclusion, sequenced material within the body, and transitions) is clearly and consistently observable and is skillful and makes the content of the presentation cohesive. Language choices are imaginative, memorable, and compelling, and enhance the effectiveness of the presentation. Language in presentation is appropriate to audience. Delivery techniques (posture, gesture, eye contact, and vocal expressiveness) make the presentation compelling, and speaker appears polished and confident. A variety of types of supporting materials (explanations, examples, illustrations, statistics, analogies, quotations from relevant authorities) make appropriate reference to information or analysis that significantly supports the presentation or establishes the presenter's credibility/authority on the topic. Central message is compelling (precisely stated, appropriately repeated, memorable, and strongly supported.) Organizational pattern (specific introduction and conclusion, sequenced material within the body, and transitions) is clearly and consistently observable within the presentation. Language choices are thoughtful and generally support the effectiveness of the presentation. Language in presentation is appropriate to audience. Delivery techniques (posture, gesture, eye contact, and vocal expressiveness) make the presentation interesting, and speaker appears comfortable. Milestones 3 2 Supporting materials (explanations, examples, illustrations, statistics, analogies, quotations from relevant authorities) make appropriate reference to information or analysis that generally supports the presentation or establishes the presenter's credibility/authority on the topic. Central message is clear and consistent with the supporting material. Organizational pattern (specific introduction and conclusion, sequenced material within the body, and transitions) is intermittently observable within the presentation. Language choices are mundane and commonplace and partially support the effectiveness of the presentation. Language in presentation is appropriate to audience. Delivery techniques (posture, gesture, eye contact, and vocal expressiveness) make the presentation understandable, and speaker appears tentative. Supporting materials (explanations, examples, illustrations, statistics, analogies, quotations from relevant authorities) make appropriate reference to information or analysis that partially supports the presentation or establishes the presenter's credibility/authority on the topic. Central message is basically understandable but is not often repeated and is not memorable. Benchmark 1 Organizational pattern (specific introduction and conclusion, sequenced material within the body, and transitions) is not observable within the presentation. Language choices are unclear and minimally support the effectiveness of the presentation. Language in presentation is not appropriate to audience. Delivery techniques (posture, gesture, eye contact, and vocal expressiveness) detract from the understandability of the presentation, and speaker appears uncomfortable. Insufficient supporting materials (explanations, examples, illustrations, statistics, analogies, quotations from relevant authorities) make reference to information or analysis that minimally supports the presentation or establishes the presenter's credibility/authority on the topic. Central message can be deduced, but is not explicitly stated in the presentation.

7 WRITTEN COMMUNICATION VALUE RUBRIC for more information, please contact The VALUE rubrics were developed by teams of faculty experts representing colleges and universities across the United States through a process that examined many existing campus rubrics and related documents for each learning outcome and incorporated additional feedback from faculty. The rubrics articulate fundamental criteria for each learning outcome, with performance descriptors demonstrating progressively more sophisticated levels of attainment. The rubrics are intended for institutional-level use in evaluating and discussing student learning, not for grading. The core expectations articulated in all 15 of the VALUE rubrics can and should be translated into the language of individual campuses, disciplines, and even courses. The utility of the VALUE rubrics is to position learning at all undergraduate levels within a basic framework of expectations such that evidence of learning can by shared nationally through a common dialog and understanding of student success. Definition Written communication is the development and expression of ideas in writing. Written communication involves learning to work in many genres and styles. It can involve working with many different writing technologies, and mixing texts, data, and images. Written communication abilities develop through iterative experiences across the curriculum. Framing Language This writing rubric is designed for use in a wide variety of educational institutions. The most clear finding to emerge from decades of research on writing assessment is that the best writing assessments are locally determined and sensitive to local context and mission. Users of this rubric should, in the end, consider making adaptations and additions that clearly link the language of the rubric to individual campus contexts. This rubric focuses assessment on how specific written work samples or collectios of work respond to specific contexts. The central question guiding the rubric is "How well does writing respond to the needs of audience(s) for the work?" In focusing on this question the rubric does not attend to other aspects of writing that are equally important: issues of writing process, writing strategies, writers' fluency with different modes of textual production or publication, or writer's growing engagement with writing and disciplinarity through the process of writing. Evaluators using this rubric must have information about the assignments or purposes for writing guiding writers' work. Also recommended is including reflective work samples of collections of work that address such questions as: What decisions did the writer make about audience, purpose, and genre as s/he compiled the work in the portfolio? How are those choices evident in the writing -- in the content, organization and structure, reasoning, evidence, mechanical and surface conventions, and citational systems used in the writing? This will enable evaluators to have a clear sense of how writers understand the assignments and take it into consideration as they evaluate The first section of this rubric addresses the context and purpose for writing. A work sample or collections of work can convey the context and purpose for the writing tasks it showcases by including the writing assignments associated with work samples. But writers may also convey the context and purpose for their writing within the texts. It is important for faculty and institutions to include directions for students about how they should represent their writing contexts and purposes. Faculty interested in the research on writing assessment that has guided our work here can consult the National Council of Teachers of English/Council of Writing Program Administrators' White Paper on Writing Assessment (2008; and the Conference on College Composition and Communication's Writing Assessment: A Position Statement (2008; Glossary The definitions that follow were developed to clarify terms and concepts used in this rubric only. Content Development: The ways in which the text explores and represents its topic in relation to its audience and purpose. Context of and purpose for writing: The context of writing is the situation surrounding a text: who is reading it? who is writing it? Under what circumstances will the text be shared or circulated? What social or political factors might affect how the text is composed or interpreted? The purpose for writing is the writer's intended effect on an audience. Writers might want to persuade or inform; they might want to report or summarize information; they might want to work through complexity or confusion; they might want to argue with other writers, or connect with other writers; they might want to convey urgency or amuse; they might write for themselves or for an assignment or to remember. Disciplinary conventions: Formal and informal rules that constitute what is seen generally as appropriate within different academic fields, e.g. introductory strategies, use of passive voice or first person point of view, expectations for thesis or hypothesis, expectations for kinds of evidence and support that are appropriate to the task at hand, use of primary and secondary sources to provide evidence and support arguments and to document critical perspectives on the topic. Writers will incorporate sources according to disciplinary and genre conventions, according to the writer's purpose for the text. Through increasingly sophisticated use of sources, writers develop an ability to differentiate between their own ideas and the ideas of others, credit and build upon work already accomplished in the field or issue they are addressing, and provide meaningful examples to readers. Evidence: Source material that is used to extend, in purposeful ways, writers' ideas in a text. Genre conventions: Formal and informal rules for particular kinds of texts and/or media that guide formatting, organization, and stylistic choices, e.g. lab reports, academic papers, poetry, webpages, or personal essays. Sources: Texts (written, oral, behavioral, visual, or other) that writers draw on as they work for a variety of purposes -- to extend, argue with, develop, define, or shape their ideas, for example.

8 WRITTEN COMMUNICATION VALUE RUBRIC for more information, please contact Definition Written communication is the development and expression of ideas in writing. Written communication involves learning to work in many genres and styles. It can involve working with many different writing technologies, and mixing texts, data, and images. Written communication abilities develop through iterative experiences across the curriculum. Context of and Purpose for Writing Includes considerations of audience, purpose, and the circumstances surrounding the writing task(s). Content Development Genre and Disciplinary Conventions Formal and informal rules inherent in the expectations for writing in particular forms and/or academic fields (please see glossary). Sources and Evidence Control of Syntax and Mechanics Evaluators are encouraged to assign a zero to any work sample or collection of work that does not meet benchmark (cell one) level performance. Capstone 4 Demonstrates a thorough understanding of context, audience, and purpose that is responsive to the assigned task(s) and focuses all elements of the work. Uses appropriate, relevant, and compelling content to illustrate mastery of the subject, conveying the writer's understanding, and shaping the whole work. Demonstrates detailed attention to and successful execution of a wide range of conventions particular to a specific discipline and/or writing task (s) including organization, content, presentation, formatting, and stylistic choices Demonstrates skillful use of highquality, credible, relevant sources to develop ideas that are appropriate for the discipline and genre of the writing Uses graceful language that skillfully communicates meaning to readers with clarity and fluency, and is virtually errorfree. Demonstrates adequate consideration of context, audience, and purpose and a clear focus on the assigned task(s) (e.g., the task aligns with audience, purpose, and context). Uses appropriate, relevant, and compelling content to explore ideas within the context of the discipline and shape the whole work. Milestones 3 2 Demonstrates consistent use of important conventions particular to a specific discipline and/or writing task(s), including organization, content, presentation, and stylistic choices Demonstrates consistent use of credible, relevant sources to support ideas that are situated within the discipline and genre of the writing. Uses straightforward language that generally conveys meaning to readers. The language in the portfolio has few errors. Demonstrates awareness of context, audience, purpose, and to the assigned tasks(s) (e.g., begins to show awareness of audience's perceptions and assumptions). Uses appropriate and relevant content to develop and explore ideas through most of the work. Follows expectations appropriate to a specific discipline and/or writing task(s) for basic organization, content, and presentation Demonstrates an attempt to use credible and/or relevant sources to support ideas that are appropriate for the discipline and genre of the writing. Uses language that generally conveys meaning to readers with clarity, although writing may include some errors. Benchmark 1 Demonstrates minimal attention to context, audience, purpose, and to the assigned tasks(s) (e.g., expectation of instructor or self as audience). Uses appropriate and relevant content to develop simple ideas in some parts of the work. Attempts to use a consistent system for basic organization and presentation. Demonstrates an attempt to use sources to support ideas in the writing. Uses language that sometimes impedes meaning because of errors in usage.

9 Sample Oral Communication Outcomes These are skills at which students can improve through class assignments and feedback. Identify disciplinary conventions of communication and presentation and employ these conventions in assignments. Analyze relevant features of the audience, which can include the students in the course or other groups as assigned. Adapt information and arguments to the appropriate audience. Argue for a particular thesis, using disciplinarily appropriate reasoning and evidences, presented clearly to the audience. Rebut relevant opposing arguments appropriately Organize presentational material for clarity and appropriateness. Develop strategies for transforming research and understanding of the course material into oral communication. Speak clearly and loudly enough, at an appropriate speed to be easily understood by the audience. Employ visual aids in a way that enhances but does not substitute for the speaker. Collaborate with other students in developing presentations Coordinate with other students in presenting arguments and information to the class Sample Written Communication Outcomes Qualifications are the same as for oral. Identify disciplinary conventions of written communication and presentation and employ these conventions in assignments. Analyze relevant features of the audience for the writing (not general or generic characteristics such as women or men ) but beliefs, attitudes, experiences, past training, etc. pertinent to the issue or task at hand. Adapt analyses, interpretations, information, or data to the arguments being made and to their contexts and relevant audience characteristics. Develop a primarily written argument that does not just defend a thesis but responds to what matters to those one is arguing with.

10 Use disciplinary appropriate reasoning and evidences when presenting the results of research or making an argument. Provide necessary context to readers such as background information, examples, definitions, etc. Integrate the ideas of others accurately and fairly through summary, paraphrase, and direct quotation. Engage in critical inquiry that goes beyond summary and uses interpretation, analysis, or critique. Develop strategies for transforming the results of research and understanding of course material through writing choices and by shaping patterns of arrangement and design. Collaborate with students to develop, carry out, and present in a composed/written form a research project.

11 Strategies for Integrating Oral Communication into an OWC-B Course Speaking-intensive courses make oral and written communication a significant means for developing course material. Speaking-intensive OWC-B courses will make oral communication part of the course methodology. In no case does reading written work aloud, by itself, satisfy the requirement for developing oral communication skills. At the same time, the speaking-intensive OWC-B course should include both preparation for oral communication activities and regular evaluation and feedback related to students oral work. As with any skill, oral communication competence is enhanced by a developmental learning strategy in which students receive guidance as they prepare for oral communication activities and are offered more than one speaking opportunity. Instructors must articulate standards for effective oral communication, evaluate oral communication performance with respect to those standards, and provide opportunities for repeating activities and improving performance. Oral communication activities in the OWC-B course can take many forms. The purpose of this document is to provide examples of oral communication activities that can be used as a series of assignments or in combination to enhance oral communication outcomes in the OWC-B course. This list is intended only to suggest alternatives; other kinds of oral communication activities or assignments are certainly possible. Oral Presentations The oral presentation encourages students to understand course material well enough to communicate it to others. In general, this category of assignment gives students an opportunity to speak to an audience from a position of expertise. Although the most familiar form of the oral presentation is the formal speech, some creative variations can make oral presentations a more feasible part of the OW- B course. In all cases, instructors should communicate expectations to students, evaluate oral presentations with respect to clearly articulated criteria, and provide multiple performance opportunities; students should have the chance to improve their performance based on feedback from a previous presentation. Hence the standards for the presentation have to substantially relate to the quality of communication, rather than the content alone. Course content presentations, short form: To start class meetings, one or two students are asked to review the theme, content, or conclusions of the previous class session. These presentations can be kept to a couple of minutes each, and they function to reorient the class for the day s meeting. They could also be done by video for an online course. Course content presentations, long form: Students, perhaps working in pairs, are assigned the task of leading the class through some of the assigned material. This activity reduces the tension between devoting time to class content and allowing oral communication opportunities. Presentations in courses at the advanced level should go beyond re-presenting course material or research (i.e. book reports or article summaries) and ask students to make arguments or defend claims in ways appropriate to the conventions of the discipline. Instructors should prepare a clear set of guidelines

12 about what they consider the best techniques and outcomes of discussion, so that students can receive usable feedback to improve their ability to lead discussions. Debates: Students (often working in groups) develop arguments for opposing positions on an issue related to course content. This assignment is particularly well-suited to illuminating different sides of complex issues. Grading criteria will often focus not only on the quality of arguments offered, but also on the ability to respond to others arguments, to create argumentative clash, and maintain a tone of civility without failing to defend one s side. Role-playing: Students are asked to adopt the perspective of a scholar, character, or other persona relevant to the course content and to represent that person s point of view on the topic within the class period devoted to the relevant material. Role-plays can be impromptu (i.e. unannounced), or many roles can be assigned, so that students don t know whose role they will be assigned until the day of class, even though they have prepared for several. Role-play assignments should make clear what counts as doing them well, and how students could improve at doing them. Task Groups Task group activities require students to work together, sometimes outside of class, to accomplish a task together. Beyond using communication with others to gain insight, the task group also creates a product that reflects their collective expertise and effort. When task groups meet outside of class time to work on projects, they can offer important opportunities for oral communication practice without competing with time devoted to class content. As with any oral communication activity, however, instructors must devote time to articulating guidelines for effective group communication and provide periodic performance evaluations. Problem-solving groups: Students work together in class (or out of class as a homework assignment) to analyze and brainstorm solutions to a problem presented by the instructor. There are many templates for in-class active learning assignments which would fit this model, but the instructor has be certain that (a) all students participate and (b) written feedback allows students to gauge their performance and improvement. Research groups: Students working in groups collaboratively prepare a research paper or case analysis. The assignment should be sufficiently complex that students can distribute parts of the task and must share responsibility for the final product. Periodic review and guidance with respect to communication and the group process is essential to keep research groups on track. Task-forces: Students working in groups design and implement a plan to accomplish some goal. One example is could be a health communication class in which student groups mount persuasion campaigns designed to influence goal healthy behavior. For these assignments, students should turn in a reflective paper in which they analyze their group communication according to a rubric provided by the instructor. Interpersonal Interactions

13 Interpersonal communication activities involve two students communicating together to convey information, explore and develop their ideas, or accomplish a goal. In other words, this venue complements the functions of oral communication activities achieved by presentations, learning groups, or task groups. Interpersonal communication learning activities are also particularly well-suited to promoting interviewing and listening skills. If opportunities for interpersonal interaction are to enhance students communication competence, instructors must articulate guidelines for effective face-to-face interaction, assess students communication performance, and provide opportunities for practice and improvement. Role-playing in dyads: Students working in pairs are assigned to particular roles and conduct a simulation relevant to class material. The activity might involve simulating an employee- employer interaction, a clinical interview, a conflict resolution episode, etc. In this way, the role-play provides opportunities both to apply course material and to practice communication skills. These role-plays can be done extemporaneously in front of the class and graded according to a rubric. Interviews: Students working in pairs interview experts or relevant stakeholders on issues related to the class. These interviews can be shared orally with the class or as a written assignment.

14 Strategies for Integrating Written Communication into the OWC-B Course OWC-B courses make written communication a significant means for developing and presenting course material. In the tradition of the writing-intensive course, OWC-B courses will make written communication part of the course methodology, rather than the primary subject matter of the course. It may be useful to remember that OWC-B courses provide the opportunity to develop such abilities as: posing worthwhile questions, shaping and evaluating arguments, giving and receiving productive criticism, articulating complex ideas, and thinking about how disciplines understand communication. The writing portion OWC-B course should include clearly articulated writing assignments and regular evaluation and feedback related to students drafts and final writings. Writing assignments are tied directly and specifically to the course goals and are fully integrated into the syllabus. They are designed to teach course content and assess students learning. As with any skill, a developmental learning strategy in which students receive guidance as they respond to writing assignments enhances written communication competence. Instructors must articulate standards for effective written communication, evaluate student writing with respect to those standards, and provide opportunities for revising and thus improving writing. The opportunity to revise written work based on instructor feedback (and, whenever possible, fellow student feedback) is essential to the goals an OWC-B requirement. See below for strategies specific to incorporating revision into writing assignments. The English 102 course that is a prerequisite for any OWC-B course has the following articulated learning outcomes: a writer will present an inquiry-based research project that has a clearly defined research question, develops knowledge, insight, or perspective about the matter being researched (i.e., goes beyond summary), makes appropriate use of sources, maintains a controlling purpose, follows appropriate writing conventions. While the learning outcomes for an OWC-B course may not present a wholly different list, they should either reinforce these or build on them by tailoring them to the specific field or subject matter of the course. For instance, the English 102 outcomes make no specific mention of making an argument that responds to what others have said or written, but an OWC-B course may choose to build such language into its outcomes. Written communication activities in the OWC-B course can take many forms. The purpose of this document is to provide strategies to help you design written communication assignments and to provide examples or suggestions for such assignments.

15 Suggestions and Examples If you don t usually ask students to do much writing in your course, here are some suggestions. You might substitute response papers for quizzes, then assign a mid-semester paper that asks students to synthesize response papers around a key concept or issue. Have students respond to each other s papers and then revise. End of semester, assign a final paper that draws from the earlier work to synthesize readings, class discussions, and course content to produce a position paper on an issue, a critical essay, a problem-solution report, etc. Substitute out-of-class essays for in-class exam essays. Make sure that each essay is relates to a specific part of the course material or that each essay treats a specific part of a larger class problem in stages. For example, the first essay may identify a topic to write about and justify the choice. A second essay might then present the research done to date, while a third essay could synthesizes the first two into a major project. These approaches also emphasize steps in the writing process (identification of topic, research, synthesis) whereas the in-class writing exam may only identify the final part of this process. If you are used to assigning writing and want to (1) assign more writing or different kinds of writing, or (2) change your assignments to include revisions opportunities, here are some suggestions. 1) Other kinds of, or approaches to, writing: Have students collaborate on writing handbooks, writing manuals, writing group proposals and papers, etc. Have students write other types of papers: ethnographies, case studies, reports, etc. and to collaborate on aspects of a research project. Use new media: wikis, web sites, blogs, etc. Have student use articles or course materials as a model for their own work. Models can be used to show how the writers approach content, consider what is evidence, shape an argument, have specific styles, conduct research, etc. 2) Ways of using revision: Include peer review sessions that allow students the opportunity to give each other constructive feedback on connections between methods and results, what matters in an argument, the arrangement and design of the presentation of results or an argument, citation, etc. Include in class activities that ask students to provide feedback on specified parts of a paper such as research to date, introductions, overall aims, etc.

16 Include presentations on work in progress and have students use the feedback is used by the writer to made adjustments to his/her work. Include collecting drafts, making comments and suggestions, and returning drafts for further work or for a higher grade than the one received on the draft. Allow time for students to write the paper in sequenced steps. Small tasks/assignments that build off one another for a larger assignment. Major writing projects done in steps that build off one another (for example, three papers: 1. recognizing a problem 2. researching a problem 3. addressing the problem). You can use oral presentations as a way to share the outline of a project, its central argument, a specific aspect of the work (where it is so far, a problem run into, what she is most proud of, etc.) in order to get peer feedback. This has to be adjusted to the size of the class and time available, but it allows students to start their projects. Genres of writing you might want to consider Here are kinds of assignment to consider when putting your OWC-B course syllabus together. This list is intended only to suggest a range of possibilities; other kinds of writing assignments are certainly possible. Annotated Bibliography An Annotated Bibliography can serve several functions and take several forms: to summarize, to record an overall argument, to perform close reading, to remember a critical response to a source, or to practice citation styles. Annotated bibliographies can seem simple, but efficient summary is a difficult, learned skill: practicing it helps students to recognize, organize, and prioritize key concepts and issues and explain them concisely. Literature Review A literature review allows students to show previous research in a given area. It is the aftermath of some research and asks students to identify relevant material they have found and organize it in some manner. It involves annotation of a sort and helps student see the overall disciplinary conversation that is shaping a research project and to identify their own possible points of entry and explain the rationale for their own research projects. Research Assignments Vary from discipline to discipline and can take different shapes even within disciplines. Generally, a research assignment is designed to integrate critical thinking with the many aspects of the college experience and to develop a solution to an open-ended, complex problem using methods and approaches appropriate to the discipline and/or project undertaken. Students might work individually or in teams to define a problem or research question, develop a set of alternatives, decide on lines of thought or action, gather information, critically examine sources, revise or complicate research questions, change lines of inquiry, develop a plan of