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

Project Deliverable #1: Choosing and Interviewing Your Client50 points

Due Sunday, February 14 @ 11:55pm ET

Overview

One of our class projects asks you to look inward to be able to tell your own story. This project asks you to look outward and find an organization on campus that has a story to tell about itself, either as a whole or about a portion of its service.

To start this process, you will need to identify that organization and glean from its leadership the information necessary to design and develop a single web page that tells its story.

Steps to Complete Deliverable #1

To complete the Deliverable #1, do the following:

  1. Schedule time to meet with various leaders of the group to learn about the organization, what services to the campus or community they offer, and what story they believe is most compelling to tell. Be sensitive to the time of each interviewee, but be thorough in your collection of information.
  2. Speak to a few members of the organization's intended audience and determine what they believe is part of the story to be told.
  3. Synthesize your findings into a document that addresses the following:
    1. What is the organization, its history, its purpose, and its leadership?
    2. What is the story to be told on the web page. Why this one?
    3. Who do they believe their audience is? Are they accurate in their assessment? Why? If not, why not and to whom should your story be targeted?
    4. What is their perceived audience's perception of the organization? What is the audience members' contribution to the story?
    5. How have all of the interviewees' responses begun to shape your design ideas?

Expectations for the Deliverable #1 Document

  • 1,500 to 2,000 words
  • Double-spaced
  • Arial or Times New Roman
  • Organize into labeled sections that clearly address each question above
  • Make clear reference to the sources assigned as reading/viewing. You should cite using the academic format you are most familiar with (APA, MLA, etc.). If you need help, refer to the University Library's guide to citation and plagiarism.
  • Include the list of questions asked to your interviewees (these do not count as part of your word count)
  • Writing should be of professional/academic quality — free of errors in spelling, grammar, and usage; well-organized; well-argued; well-supported

Grading Specifications

Grading Rubric
Sophisticated Very Competent Fairly Competent Not Yet Competent
Argument/depth of analysis
35 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. Asks probing questions of interviewee(s) and connects their answers back to the material discussed. (35 - >31 points) 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. Asks solid questions of interviewee(s) and makes some connection to the material discussed. (31 - >26 points) Paper does not address some aspects of the assignment. Makes mildly convincing case for why selected ideas connect (or contradict) material studied thus far. Asks some pertinent questions of interviewee(s) and makes only minor connection back to the material discussed. (26 - >21 points) 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. Asks basic questions of interviewee(s) and/or makes no connection to material discussed. (21 - 0 points)
Clarity
10 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. (10 - >8.5 points) Mostly precise and unambiguous wording, mostly clear sentence structure. Mostly effective choice of citations. Mostly effective framing and explication of citations where necessary. (8.5 - >7.5 points) Imprecise or ambiguous wording. Confusing sentence structure. Poorly chosen citations,or ineffective framing and explication of citations. (7.5 - >6 points) Consistently imprecise or ambiguous wording, confusing sentence structure. Citations contradict or confuse student's text. Citations used to replace student's own ideas. (6 - 0 points)
Presentation
5 points total
Paper is clean, well formatted, and written in complete sentences. Citations are all properly attributed in a consistent style. Virtually no spelling or grammatical errors. (5 - >4 points) Paper is clean, well formatted, and written in complete sentences. Citations are all properly attributed in a consistent style. A few minor spelling or grammatical errors. (4 - >3 points) Paper is clean, well formatted, and written in complete sentences. Some improperly attributed citations and/or inconsistent citation style. A number of spelling or grammatical errors. (3 - >2 points) Paper is sloppy, incorrectly formatted, and/or not written in complete sentences. Many improperly attributed citations or inconsistent style of citation. Many spelling or grammatical errors. (2 - 0 points)

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