RH 3.  Communication, regardless of the media, requires unique skills whether communicating with individuals or with groups.

Criterion B1.  Provide a substantive critique that includes recommendations for improvements.

Primary traits:  A passing submission for this criterion must:

1.       Provide helpful/constructive criticism that gives recommendations for improvement in at least three distinct aspects of the item being critiqued.

2.       Justify recommendations.

3.       Have appropriate tone for the audience.

Potential documents:  Documents appropriate for this criterion include (but are not limited to):  Review of a dance or music performance, critique of a piece of art, review of a piece of writing or literature,  critique of an oral presentation, review of a set of PowerPoint slides.

Additional information: 

1.     The phrase “three distinct aspects of the item being critiqued” is intended to mean three separate broad areas of improvement, not three occurrences within an aspect of the item critiqued.  Correcting three individual grammatical errors would therefore not be appropriate, since only one “aspect” - grammar - would be involved.  Correcting grammatical errors, and suggesting a different flow of logic in a text, and suggesting improvements to figures in a text (aspects: grammar, logic, figures) would be acceptable.

2.     In order to make this rubric applicable to many types of assignments, we do not want to specify a particular audience.  However, in order for the rater to have an understanding of what the appropriate tone is, they will need to know what the intended audience is.  We suggest having the assignment available to reviewers (submitted by either the instructor or the student).  This would avoid artificial “make-work” things like having student essays start with sentences such as “I am writing this essay for people with a college reading level who love Austrian Shepherd dogs.”

 Criterion B2.  Describe an interaction that required you to clarify your understanding of another’s message.

Primary traits:  A passing submission for this criterion must:

1.       Identify the type of interaction (e.g., oral presentation, phone conversation, interview, electronic communication, etc.).

2.       State what required clarification.

3.       Indicate what actions were taken to achieve the desired clarification.

4.       Indicate how understanding was verified.

Potential documents:  Documents appropriate for this criterion include (but are not limited to):  Video of a student or students discussing the primary traits listed above, written reflective statement addressing the primary traits listed above.  For example, the scenario discussed could be an interview or discussion of feedback from a peer or instructor review with the reviewer.

Additional information:  None.

 Criterion B3.  Adapt technical information for a non-specialized audience.

Primary traits:  A passing submission for this criterion must:

1.       Be derived from a field of mathematics, science, or engineering.

2.       Appear free of unexplained technical jargon and acronyms.

3.       Be presented in a manner that is appropriate for the educational level of the intended audience (appropriate vocabulary levels, images, activities, etc.). 

Potential documents:  Documents appropriate for this criterion include (but are not limited to):

An outreach presentation/activity teaching science, mathematics, or engineering content to K-12 students, a description of current research in science, mathematics, or engineering written as if for submission to a “popular press” magazine or newspaper, an oral presentation to individuals skilled in disciplines other than the technical discipline of the subject matter.

Additional information: 

1.     We define “technical fields” to be science, math or engineering.  We would classify “economics” as a science.  Note that the type of science, social, physical, biological, etc., is not specified.

2.     In order to make this rubric applicable to many types of assignments, we do not want to specify a particular audience.  However, in order for the rater to have an understanding of what the appropriate tone is, they will need to know what the intended audience is.  We suggest having the assignment available to reviewers (submitted by either the instructor or the student).  This would avoid artificial “make-work” things like having student essays start with sentences such as “I am writing this essay for high school students who are entirely uninterested in majoring in engineering.”

Criterion C1.  Craft and support a coherent argument for an audience outside of your discipline.

Primary traits:  A passing submission for this criterion must:

1.       Be presented in a manner that is appropriate for the educational level and, if applicable, field of expertise of the intended audience (appropriate vocabulary, images, activities, etc.). 

2.       Include an unambiguous statement of the position or proposition (the “argument”).

3.       Support the argument with related evidence.

4.       Persuade the audience.

5.       Present the argument in a clear flow of logic/reasoning.

Potential documents:  Documents appropriate for this criterion include (but are not limited to):  Outreach presentation/activity designed to convince K-12 students of something (i.e., ‘cavemen’ did not co-exist with dinosaurs), written or oral description of a student’s position on some controversial topic, designed to convince a given audience to adopt a similar position. 

Additional information: 

1.       We welcome ideas on how to specifically and non-subjectively decide whether an argument is “crafted,” “coherent,” and effective.

2.       Educational level should be at or below that of the student (college graduate). 

Revision History: