By Friday of each online week, write a 250-word response to something that we read or discussed during any previous in-class session. Compose each response in Plain Language as a post in our class blog, blog.richmond.edu/bizprocomm with a title and chunked content (short paragraphs, bulleted lists, subheadings) in the body copy. I recommend a feature image, too, but be sure to cite it correctly.
To cite an image, add something along the lines of what I’ve added to this post. I used the “Featured Image > Set featured image” option that appears in the right sidebar. I loaded an image, then added the text at the bottom of this page as my citation.
In addition to sharing ideas, these posts are intended to focus attention on the skills of writing for the web. These should not be academic treatises, but responses or reflections that would be accessible to the general public.
Be sure to add one category to your post (you can create new categories if you need to) and one or more tags that represent keywords from the concepts you’ve presented in your post.
A — Post poses a question or a new idea that coherently integrates examples with evidence, data, and critical analysis; writer demonstrates awareness of limitations or implications of the posed standard of evaluation, question, or idea. The post reflects in-depth engagement and understanding of creation of new knowledge on the subject.
B — Post asks a question or presents an interesting standard of evaluation and assess it with appropriate evidence or data; post demonstrates critical thinking skills, identification of underlying assumptions, and evidence evaluation. The post reflects good engagement with the subject.
C — Post is reasonably focused; with a somewhat clear standard of evaluation that is well described however, may not be particularly groundbreaking or innovative; evidence or data presented may not fit the standard well or relies heavily on secondary analysis (like editorials); no alternative answers or explanations are considered. The post reflects moderate engagement with the topic.
D — The post lacks a clear standard of evaluation, features poor analysis, evidence is descriptive or based on personal experience rather than evaluative; few connections are made between ideas. The post reflects passing engagement with the topic.
F — Post is unfocused, or simply rehashes previous comments, and displays little evidence of engagement with the topic.