Communication Through the Web

DCI 108

Winter 2021

Credits: 3

Requirements Met: DCI Minor Core

Class Meeting Metadata
Meets: MW 4:00 - 5:35pm Eastern
Classroom: Virtual (Zoom links in Canvas)
Instructor's Metadata
Instructor: Jason T. Mickel, Ph.D.
E-Mail: mickelj@wlu.edu How to Email a Professor
Phone: (540) 458-8653
Office: Leyburn M33
Office Hours: M 1:00-2:00
T 2:30-3:30
W 11:00-12:00
Or by appointment

Exercise #1: Putting Audience Theory to Use25 points

Due Sunday, January 24 @ 11:55pm ET

Overview

Who are you?

What do you want to be when you grow up?

Who is going to be listening to your story?

Who do you want to be listening?

As we discussed, one of the two major projects of this course is to begin developing your personal web presence that you can use to showcase yourself to employers, internships, graduate programs, or anyone else you want to pay attention. Before creating that site, you need to address some key questions:

  • What story do I want to tell about myself? How should I tell it so that my audience not only reads it but understands it?
  • Who is the primary audience I want to reach? Are there secondary audiences, as well? What type of people are in that audience? What are their expectations?
  • What personality traits should I represent on the site based on those audiences and how might I do so?

In a set of short essay-style answers, address these questions by clearly citing the theories and topics discussed in class and in the readings. Your answers will, in part, inform the design statement you will develop as part of your final portfolio site.

Expectations

Access Exercise #1 in the Canvas course. It is presented as a quiz; however, treat it like an online form where you can fill out your answers. It is not timed.

Answer each part thoroughly with 1 - 3 paragraphs.

For each part, make specific reference to the sources assigned as reading/viewing.

Grading Specifications

Grading Rubric
Sophisticated Very Competent Fairly Competent Not Yet Competent
Argument/depth of analysis
15 points total
Fully meets requirements of assignment. Explores implications of choices in thoughtful and/or original ways. Makes convincing case for why selected key ideas connect (or contradict) with the material studied thus far. (13-15 pts) Paper fully meets the requirements but does not exceed them. Makes good case for why selected key ideas connect (or contradict) material studied thus far. (10-12 pts) Paper does not address some aspects of the assignment. Makes mildly convincing case for why selected ideas connect (or contradict) material studied thus far. (6-9 pts) Paper does not address the assignment. Selects minor rather than key ideas, and/or does not show why the selected ideas connect (or contradict) material studied thus far. (0-5 pts)
Clarity
5 points total
Consistently precise and unambiguous wording, clear and lucid sentence structure. All citations are well chosen, effectively framed in the text and explicated where necessary. (5 pts) Mostly precise and unambiguous wording, mostly clear sentence structure. Mostly effective choice of citations. Mostly effective framing and explication of citations where necessary. (4 pts) Imprecise or ambiguous wording. Confusing sentence structure. Poorly chosen citations,or ineffective framing and explication of citations. (3 pts) Consistently imprecise or ambiguous wording, confusing sentence structure. Citations contradict or confuse student's text. Citations used to replace student's own ideas. (0-2 pts)
Presentation
5 points total
Paper is clean, well formatted, written in complete sentences. Citations are all properly attributed in a consistent style. Virtually no spelling or grammatical errors. (5 pts) Paper is clean, well formatted, written in complete sentences. Citations are all properly attributed in a consistent style. A few minor spelling or grammatical errors. (4 pts) Paper is clean, well formatted, written in complete sentences. Some improperly attributed citations and/or inconsistent citation style. A number of spelling or grammatical errors. (3 pts) Paper is sloppy or incorrectly formatted, not written in complete sentences. Many improperly attributed citations or inconsistent style of citation. Many spelling or grammatical errors. (0-2 pts)

Rubric adapted from https://www.cmu.edu/teaching/assessment/examples/courselevel-bycollege/cfa/tools/reflectionpaper-cfa.pdf