Content Standard 1

General statement of knowledge and/or ability

Performance Standards

 Guidelines for evaluating performance

Assessment Methods

Activities used to assess student performance

Students will be able to demonstrate understanding and analysis of the rhetorical characteristics of professional and workplace writing.

Expert Proficiency—

Students demonstrating the expert level of rhetorical analysis meet the following criteria:

• effective identification of the purpose of  the document or writing task;
• effective analysis of the audience for the document or writing task;
• effective choice for the format and/or medium used for the document or writing task; and
• effective use of  writing style and tone appropriate  the document or writing task.

Minimally Acceptable Proficiency—

Students demonstrating the minimally proficient level of rhetorical analysis  meet the following criteria:

• reasonable identification of the purpose of  the document or writing task;
• reasonable analysis of the audience for the document or writing task;
• reasonable choice for the format and/or medium used for the document or writing task; and
• reasonable use of  writing style and tone appropriate  the document or writing task.

Non-proficiency—

Students demonstrating the non-proficient level of rhetorical analysis have one of the following problems to an extraordinary degree or several of these to a lesser degree:

• poor identification of the purpose of  the document or writing task;
• poor analysis of the audience for the document or writing task;
• poor choice for the format and/or medium used for the document or writing task; and
• poor use of  writing style and tone appropriate  the document or writing task.

 Students may submit a writing sample and reflective process statement that describes the rhetorical analysis used to shape the final product.

Students may be given context-based writing tasks to complete that require students to make content and format choices based upon their assessment of the rhetorical situation.

Students may review workplace writing samples or case studies and evaluate the samples in terms of how effectively the sample addresses the rhetorical situation.

Content Standard 2

General statement of knowledge

Performance Standards

 Guidelines for evaluating performance

Assessment Methods

Activities used to assess student performance

Students will be able to edit effectively for content and format as well as for grammar, spelling, punctuation, usage, and chosen style guide.

Expert Proficiency—

Students demonstrating the expert level of editing meet the following criteria:

• the ability to clearly articulate the rhetorical and stylistic principles that justify editing changes;
• the ability to edit effectively a variety of kinds of writing, including memos, basic and specialty letters, reports, proposals, and multi-media presentations;
• a superior ability to edit for conciseness and clarity on the sentence level;
• a superior ability to edit for surface errors, including those of spelling, grammar, usage and punctuation; and
• an awareness of adapting style choices to fit that of the workplace or client.

Minimally Acceptable Proficiency—

Students demonstrating the minimally proficient level of editing meet the following criteria:

• the ability to minimally  articulate the rhetorical and stylistic principles that justify editing changes;
• the ability to edit a variety of kinds of writing, including memos, basic and specialty letters, reports, proposals, and multi-media presentations;
• a reasonable ability to edit for conciseness and clarity on the sentence level;
• a reasonable ability to edit for surface errors, including those of spelling, grammar, usage and punctuation; and
• a minimal awareness of adapting style choices to fit that of the workplace or client.

Non-proficiency—

Students demonstrating the non-proficient level of editing have one of the following problems to an extraordinary degree or several of these to a lesser degree:

• the inability to minimally  articulate the rhetorical and stylistic principles that justify editing changes;
• the inability to edit a variety of kinds of writing, including memos, basic and specialty letters, reports, proposals, and multi-media presentations;
• an inability to edit for conciseness and clarity on the sentence level;
• an inability to edit for surface errors, including spelling, grammar, usage and punctuation; and
• a lack of awareness of adapting style choices to fit that of the workplace or client.

Students may submit a writing sample and reflective process statement that describes the editing process and choices used to shape the final product.

Students may be given editing tasks to complete that require students to make editing, content, and format choices based upon their assessment of the rhetorical situation.

Students may be given an objective test that assesses their ability to recognize errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, and usage.

Content Standard 3

General statement of knowledge and/or ability

Performance Standards

 Guidelines for evaluating performance

Assessment Methods

Activities used to assess student performance

Students will be able to write in basic professional writing formats, including memos, basic and specialty letters, proposals, and multi-media presentations.

Expert Proficiency—

Students demonstrating the expert level of writing meet the following criteria:

• the ability to choose the most effective format for the writing task;
• the ability to make effective use of the features of the format to support the purpose and message;
• the ability to complete the writing task within the prescribed time frame;
• the ability to insightfully adapt the conventions of the format to suit the needs of the client or meet the requirements of the workplace; and
• the ability to produce clear, concise, and error-free writing.

Minimally Acceptable Proficiency—

Students demonstrating the minimally acceptable level of writing meet the following criteria:

• the ability to choose an appropriate format for the writing task;
• the ability to make reasonable use of the features of the format to support the purpose and message;
• the ability to complete the writing task within the prescribed time frame;
• the ability to adequately adapt the conventions of the format to suit the needs of the client or meet the requirements of the workplace; and
• the ability to produce writing that is mostly clear, reasonably concise, and with few if any errors.

Non-proficiency—

Students demonstrating the non-proficient level of writing have one of the following problems to an extraordinary degree or several of these to a lesser degree:

• the inability to choose an appropriate format for the writing task;
• the inability to make use of the features of the format to support the purpose and message;
• the inability to complete the writing task within the prescribed time frame;
• the inability to adapt the conventions of the format to suit the needs of the client or meet the requirements of the workplace; and
• the inability to produce clear, concise and error-free writing.

Students may submit a writing sample and reflective process statement that describes the format choices used to shape the final product.

Students may be given writing tasks that require students to choose an appropriate format and draft a document in the given time.

Students may be given an objective test that assesses their ability to identify and describe the conventions of various formats.

Content Standard 4

General statement of knowledge and/or ability

Performance Standards

 Guidelines for evaluating performance

Assessment Methods

Activities used to assess student performance

Students will be able to perform basic information-gathering tasks appropriate to the workplace and professional writing, including researching, observing, and interviewing.

Expert Proficiency—

Students demonstrating the expert level of information-gathering meet the following criteria:

• effective use of workplace or client sources of information, including compilations of data, interviewing, participation in meetings or briefings, and review of previous versions of documents;
• effective use of traditional library resources, including reference material, to obtain accurate biographical, historical and technical data (Who’s Who, Facts on File, encyclopedias, eg.);
• effective use of Internet resources, especially for government records and information, to obtain accurate information;
• effective use of physical public records;
• effective ability to routinely develop logical information-gathering strategies to obtain complete, accurate and balanced information; and
• rare inaccuracies.

Students may submit a writing sample and reflective process statement that describes the information-gathering choices used to shape the final product.

Students may complete writing tasks that require them to use various information sources and draft a document in a specified time period.

Students may review workplace writing samples or case studies and evaluate them in terms of how effectively the sample uses information resources.

Minimally Acceptable Proficiency--

Students with minimally acceptable research skills meet the following criteria:

• reasonable use of workplace or client sources of information, including compilations of data, interviewing, participation in meetings or briefings, and review of previous versions of documents;
• reasonable use of traditional library resources, including reference material, to obtain accurate biographical, historical and technical data (Who’s Who, Facts on File, encyclopedias, eg.);
• reasonable use of Internet resources, especially for government records and information, to obtain accurate information;
• reasonable use of physical public records;
• reasonable ability to develop logical information-gathering strategies to obtain complete, accurate and balanced information;
• few significant inaccuracies.

Non-proficiency—

Students demonstrating the non-proficient level of research skills have one of the following problems to an extraordinary degree or several of these to a lesser degree:

• inability to use workplace or client sources of information, including compilations of data, interviewing, participation in meetings or briefings, and review of previous versions of documents;
• inability to use traditional library resources, including reference material, to obtain accurate biographical, historical and technical data (Who’s Who, Facts on File, encyclopedias);
• inability to use Internet resources, especially for government records and information, to obtain accurate information;
• inability to use physical public records;
• inability to develop logical information-gathering strategies to obtain complete, accurate and balanced information;
• significant or frequent inaccuracies.

Content Standard 5

General statement of knowledge and/or ability

Performance Standards

 Guidelines for evaluating performance

Assessment Methods

Activities used to assess student performance

Students will be able to use technology appropriate to the writing task, including word processing, desktop publishing, web page tools, and presentation software.

Expert Proficiency—

Students demonstrating the expert level of technology use meet the following criteria:

• effective use of writing technologies to draft and produce a final product that meets the criteria for the assignment;
• effective ability to discern the most appropriate medium and/or technology for the assignment;
• effective ability to present the material in more than one medium or through alternate technology;
• effective ability to explain and justify format, design and technology choices in terms of user/client satisfaction or use.

Minimally Acceptable Proficiency—

Students with minimally acceptable technology skills meet the following criteria

• reasonable use of writing technologies to draft and produce a final product that meets the criteria for the assignment;
• reasonable ability to discern the most appropriate medium and/or technology for the assignment;
• reasonable ability to present the material in more than one medium or through alternate technology;
• reasonable ability to explain and justify format, design and technology choices in terms of user/client satisfaction or use.

Students may submit a writing sample and reflective process statement that describes the technology and medium choices used to shape the final product.

Students may be given writing tasks that require them to use various writing technologies and draft a document in a specified period of time.

Students may review workplace writing samples or case studies and evaluate the samples in terms of how effectively the sample uses writing technologies.

Non-proficiency—

Students demonstrating the non-proficient level of technology have one of the following problems to an extraordinary degree or several of these to a lesser degree:

• inability to use writing technologies to draft and produce a final product that meets the criteria for the assignment;
• inability to discern the most appropriate medium and/or technology for the assignment;
• inability to present the material in more than one medium or through alternate technology;
• inability to explain and justify format, design and technology choices in terms of user/client satisfaction or use.

Content Standard 6

General statement of knowledge and/or ability

Performance Standards

 Guidelines for evaluating performance

Assessment Methods

Activities used to assess student performance

Students will be able to articulate the basic ethical standards governing the profession and recognize their applicability to entry-level work.

Expert Proficiency—

Students demonstrating the expert level of knowledge of ethical standards meet the following criteria:

• a superior ability to articulate basic ethical principles governing the profession;
• a superior ability to recognize and address common ethical dilemmas in professional  writing and publishing;
• a superior ability to reason through ethical dilemmas in order to make justifiable and consistent decisions.

Minimally Acceptable Proficiency—

Students demonstrating the minimally acceptable knowledge of ethical standards meet the following criteria:

• a reasonable ability to articulate basic ethical principles governing the profession;
• a reasonable ability to recognize and address common ethical dilemmas in professional  and publishing;
• a reasonable ability to reason through ethical dilemmas (in order to make justifiable and consistent decisions).

Non-Proficiency—

Students demonstrating the non-proficient level of knowledge of ethical standards have one of the following problems to an extraordinary degree or several of these to a lesser degree:

• an inability to articulate basic ethical principles governing the profession;
• an inability to recognize and address common ethical dilemmas in professional writing  and publishing;
• an inability to reason through ethical dilemmas in order to make justifiable and consistent decisions.

Students may submit a writing sample and reflective process statement that describes the ethical choices used to shape the final product.

Students may review workplace writing samples or case studies and evaluate the samples in terms of how effectively the sample respects ethical standards.