Unit Learning Guide
School of Humanities and Communication Arts
Professional Writing and Editing
Unit Number
101929
Teaching Session
Spring 2015
Unit Weighting
10 credit points
Unit Level
Undergraduate Unit Level 2
Unit Co-ordinator(s)
Dr Ray Archee (Werrington South) and Ms Myra Gurney (Parramatta)
Other Teaching Staff
Dr Roger Dawkins
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Page 1 of 34
Student Consultation
Face-to-face consultations can be arranged by email. Email your tutor for an appointment time.
Student Communication
Students must use their UWS student e-mail address in all correspondence with the Unit Coordinator and
Tutors.
Attendance Requirements
Attendance is expected at all tutorials in which you are registered. Students are expected to attend a
minimum of 80% of classes.
Records will be taken for verification purposes.
Lectures and tutorials are an essential part of your learning.
Students have the responsibility to keep up with the unit content by viewing the unit website and by attending
tutorials.
No consideration will be made or consideration will be given to students who do not attend regularly except
in the case of illness or misadventure.
Non-attendance due to illness or misadventure or for other legitimate reasons should be documented and
submitted to the Unit Coordinator.
Changes and Improvements to the Unit as a Result of Student Feedback
The University values student feedback in order to improve the quality of its educational programs. As a
result of student feedback, the following changes and improvements to this unit have recently been made:
Revamped website, changed structure of tutorials, included new topics, improved assessment guidelines.
Expectations of Students
Students are expected to be familiar with and abide by the terms of the UWS Student Code of Conduct.
Students should be familiar with the University of Western Sydney’s Work Health and Safety Policy.
Raising Concerns
If you have a concern about this unit, please contact your lecturer or tutor in the first instance. If the matter is
not resolved, then you may contact the unit coordinator (see inside front cover). If you would prefer to speak
to someone else, you are advised to contact the Director of Academic Program, Associate Professor Kaye
Shumack, k.shumack@uws.edu.au, responsible for the unit. Please note the Director of Academic Program
may refer your concern to a delegate to review and to respond to you.
The University also has a confidential Complaints Resolution Unit (see link below). Staff in that unit can
provide you with advice on addressing your concerns within the School and, in some circumstances, they
may undertake an investigation. Concerns must be raised with the Complaints Resolution Unit within a six
month timeframe. http://www.uws.edu.au/about_uws/governance/complaints_management_and_resolution
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Page 2 of 34
Unit Details
Handbook Summary
Professional communicators require advanced writing and editing skills. This unit explores the nature of
writing and preparation of texts for use across different media platforms and in various contexts. In particular,
the unit develops skills in editing and re-purposing of writing, and further develops understanding of key
writing tools such as voice, emphasis, tone, grammar and punctuation and Plain English for professional
purposes. Through in-class workshops and time-restricted editing tasks, students will demonstrate a range of
professional writing skills from corporate communications to advanced editing.
UWS Graduate Attributes
1. Commands multiple skills and literacies to enable adaptable lifelong learning
2. Demonstrate knowledge of indigenous Australia through cultural competency and professional
capacity
3. Demonstrates comprehensive, coherent and connected knowledge
4. Applies knowledge through intellectual inquiry in professional or applied contexts
5. Brings knowledge to life through responsible engagement and appreciation of diversity in an evolving
world
Course Learning Outcomes
A Graduate of the UWS Bachelor of Arts will be able to:
1. Demonstrate skills in understanding, critically interpreting and evaluating logic and argument
2. Communicate skilfully and effectively
3. Use a range of research methods and technologies to find, order, evaluate and present information
and ideas
4. Operate with a high level of social and cultural awareness
5. Demonstrate an awareness of Indigenous Australia
6. Demonstrate a coherent body of knowledge within a recognised academic discipline
7. Use a skill set appropriate to at least one academic discipline and recognise connections and
applications to other disciplinary fields
8. Demonstrate high standards of scholarly and social values and ethics in their studies
9. Work effectively with texts of different sorts appropriate to the recognised academic discipline of their
chosen major
Unit Learning Outcomes
The Unit’s Learning Outcomes specifically support the BA Course Learning Outcomes.
At the successful completion of this unit, students will be able to:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Apply theories of writing
Re-purpose information for a variety of media platforms
Identify and remediate instances of faulty writing
Use voice, coherence, emphasis, concision and Plain English appropriately
Use basic English grammar and punctuation effectively
Edit texts for length, audience, medium and purpose
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Page 3 of 34
7. Use professional layout, design and visuals/charts to enhance readability and professional
presentation.
Student Workload
The expected workload in this unit is: 10 hours per week (for all 10 credit point units), including 2 hours in
class and 8 hours in own study time.
Note: All readings are available online via links in the Schedule and within the tutorial page of the
relevant week.
Schedule Learning and Teaching Activities
1. This unit will use a specially designed webpage to coordinate the tutorial activities. This can be
found at the following URL http://school.hca.uws.edu.au/units/wp_101929_spr/ This link can be
accessed either directly or via the unit’s vUWS homepage.
2. As participation in tutorial activities requires the use of a PC or iPad, students must come to class
with these items.
Week: Date
Week 1:
20 July
Tutorial
Introduction to professional writing and editing or
‘It’s only people like you’ who care about this stuff.
Background Reading: Petelin, R. & Durham, M.
(2003). Writing in a Business Environment in The
Professional Writing Guide: Writing well and knowing
why Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin pp. 1-13
Discussion Question: A student once told me in a
previous writing unit, that it was only ‘people like me’
who worried about the micro issues of writing and
editing. Do you agree? Is there a need for attention to
clear writing in organisations? Is attention to technical
detail still relevant in the age of digital publishing and the
internet?
Week 2:
Audience and readers
27 July
Background Reading: Schriver, K. A. (1997). How
documents engage readers’ thinking and feeling
Dynamics in Document Design (Ch 3) pp. 152-188
New York: John Wiley & Sons
Suggested older reading(s):
 Redish, J. (1993). Understanding Readers. In Barum.
C.M. & Carliner, S. (eds.) Techniques for Technical
Communicators (Ch. 1) New York, Macmillan pp. 1541 2.
 Floreak, M. (1989). Designing for the real world:
Using research to turn a target audience into 'real
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Workshop
Course outline, explanation
of assignments. Weekly
tutorials allocated to
student teams.
Exercise: Compare several
different forms of
professional writing.
Writing Genre Exercise:
Autobiography
Write a short article about
yourself as if you were a
famous celebrity. We will
showcase these next week,
so make sure to start in
class and finish by your
next class.
Writing Genre Exercise
Health Information
Critique
Audience analysis of the
drug rape or ecstasy
brochures
Revision/Editing
workshop
Page 4 of 34
people' Technical Communication 4th Quarter pp.
373-381
 Yopp, J. et al (2010). Understanding today's
audiences In Yopp, J. et al Reaching audiences: A
guide to media writing (Ch. 1) Boston: Allyn and
Bacon pp. 1-19
 Marnell, G. (2008). Measuring Readability pt. 1 in
Southern Communicator Issue 14, June 2008 pp. 1216
Discussion Question: How are audiences different?
And what influence might these differences have on how
readers engage with documents. Find examples of your
own (eg an instruction manual, brochure, report) and
using the points made by Redish and Yopp and others,
identify some the strengths/weaknesses for the intended
audiences.
Week 3:
3 August
What’s in a word? Language and professional
writing
Background Reading: Archee. R. et al (2013). Chapter
2 Language and communication practice
Communicating as professionals 3e Melbourne:
Cengage Learning pp. 28-58
Suggested older reading(s):
 Lutz, W., (1999). Language and the Interpretation of
Reality in The New Doublespeak pp.27-56  Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live
by in O'Brien, J. (ed) The Production of Reality (4th
ed.) pp. 103-114
 Orwell, G. (1949). Chapter 5 Nineteen Eighty-Four
Penguin
 Chandler, D. (1995). The Medium of Language (Ch.
2) The Act of Writing: A Media Theory Approach
Aberystwyth: University of Wales
Discussion Question: What are some of the various
perspectives about how language operates to confer
meaning? What might these perspectives tell us about
language choices in professional writing? Is it possible to
choose language which 'narrows the range of thought'?
Week 4:
Voice and tone in professional writing
10 August
Background Reading: Booth. W. (1987). Voice (Ch. 9)
In Booth. W. & Gregory, M.W. Writing as thinking,
thinking as writing pp. 258-287
Suggested older reading(s):
 Felton. G. (1988). Body copy 1: Voice (Ch. 8)
Advertising: concept and copy pp. 105-129
 James, N. (2007). Tone (Ch. 8) Writing at Work
Crows Nest: Allen and Unwin pp. 152-168
 Zinsser, W. (2006). The sound of your voice (Ch. 20)
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Writing Genre Exercise:
Postcard from
somewhere.
Write a short travel article
for the first edition of Virgin
Air’s new in-flight magazine
describing a novel
destination or activity. Write
it for two different
audiences: a young group
of inexperienced travellers,
and an older group of
people. What are the
differences in language that
you might use?
Revision/Editing
workshop
Writing Genre Exercise:
The Review
Write a film, or book, or
music concert review for
the free magazine, Sydney
Living. Rewrite it framing it
both positively or
negatively. Or write the
hippest, coolest piece you
can think of, for the craziest
free mag you can find.
Page 5 of 34
On Writing Well (7e) New York: Harper Collins pp.
231-240
Check out the Groupon
website.
Discussion Question: What do we mean by the notion
of voice and tone in written text? How important is this to
professional writing generally and genres like advertising
in particular? Give examples to support your answer.
Week 5:
17 August
Intercultural Communication
Background Reading: Archee. R. et al (2013). Chapter
4 Intercultural Communication Communicating as
professionals 3e Melbourne: Cengage Learning pp. 85109
Suggested older reading(s):
 Deutscher, G. (2011). Through the Language Glass:
Why the world looks different in other languages
[prologue] London: Arrow Books pp. 1-22
 Kirkman, J. (2005). Writing for International
Audiences In Good Style: Writing for Science &
Technology (2nd ed) (Ch. 22) London, E & FN Spon
 Horton, W. (1993). The Almost Universal Language:
Graphics for international documents Technical
Communication Quarterly Fourth quarter 1993 pp.
682-693
 Marnell, G. (2004). 'Writing English for an
International Audience' first published in Tech Talk.
Available from
http://www.abelard.com.au/writing_English_for_an_int
ernational_audience.pdf
 Language and Culture: An introduction to human
communication Available from:
http://anthro.palomar.edu/language/default.htm
 From Plain English to Global English Available from:
http://www.webpagecontent.com/arc_archive/139/5/
Writing Genre Exercise:
Check out the South
Vietnamese brochure from
the Cu Chi Tunnels, or the
War Remnants Museum in
Saigon. Analyse the
language and the political
perspective.
Revision/Editing
workshop
Discussion Question: How might international
audiences be different and how might different cultures
read differently? What strategies should be considered
for writing across cultures?
Week 6:
The Plain English debate
24 August
Background Reading: James, N. (2009). Speketh so
Pleyne: an historical approach to Plain English pts. 1 &
2 Southern Communicator, February (16), 15-20 &
June (17), 16-19.
Older reading(s):

Cutts, M. (2009). Oxford Guide to Plain English (3e)
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Writing Genre Exercise:
Plain English
Find a policy at UWS and
rewrite it using principles of
Plain English to make it
easier to understand. Any
policy at any organisation
will probably work here.
Revision/Editing
workshop
Page 6 of 34
Oxford: Oxford University Press

Eagleson, R.D. (2009). Ensnaring perceptions on
communication: Underlying obstacles to lawyers
writing plainly Clarity 62, Nov 2009 pp. 9-13

Eunson, B. (2012). Plain English in Two Australian
Organisations: Readability and Style Analysis Paper
presented at the ANZCA Communicating Change
and Changing Communication in the 21st Century,
Adelaide, South Australia.

Exercise:
500 word proposal for
your document
evaluation assignment
must be posted to the
Writing Lab for
discussion in class this
week. You may edit this
further but it must be
included with your
Document Evaluation
Report as a preamble.
History of Plain English Retrieved from
http://stc2.uws.edu.au/PWE/Assets/historyofPE.html

James, N. (2006). Plain Language developments in
Australia Clarity Plain English Foundation pp. 1-5

Kimble, J. (2003). Answering the critics of Plain
English Available from:
http://www.plainlanguagenetwork.org/kimble/critic
s.htm

Lumby, C. (2005) Political Speak: Double Talk vs
Plain English 2005 Sydney Writers’ Festival panel
session

Penman, R., (1992). Plain English: wrong solution
to an important problem Australian Journal of
Communication Vol. 19 (3) pp. 1-18

Watson, D. (2003). Death Sentence: The Decay of
Public Language [extract] Melbourne: Knopf
Discussion Question: What are the arguments and
critiques of the Plain English movement. Is it effective?
Find some of your own examples to illustrate your
view
Week 7
Visual Literacy in professional writing
31 August
Background Reading: Kress & Van Leeuwin (2006)
‘The Meaning of Composition’ Ch. 6 Reading Images:
The grammar of visual design (2e) London: Routledge
pp. 175-210
Suggested older reading(s):
 Amare, N. and Manning, A. (2007). The Language
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Writing Genre Exercise:
Writing humorously.
Try to write about a
humorous incident. Use
description, autobiography
or satire to make your
point. If there is a ‘moral’ to
the piece all the better.
Page 7 of 34

of Visuals: Text + Graphics = Visual Rhetoric IEEE
Transactions on Professional Communication Vol
50, No. 1 March 2007 pp. 57-70
Harrison, C. (2003). Visual social semiotics:
Understanding how still images make meaning
Technical Communication Vol. 50, No. 1 Feb 2003
pp. 46-60
Revision/Editing
workshop
Discussion Question: How might visual semiotics help
us understand how readers read texts? What are some
of the issues (design, readability, ethical) that need to be
considered when using graphics in professional texts?
Week 8:
Layout and Design
Writing Genre Exercise:
7 September
Background Reading: Lester, P. (2011) ‘The Sensual &
Semiotic analysis of
advertisements. What are
the rules of contemporary
layout and design in terms
of paper? Has the Web
changed them?
Perceptual Theories of Visual Communication’ Ch. 5
Visual Communication: Images with messages (5e)
Boston: Wadsworth pp. 47-61
Suggested older reading(s):

Williams, R. (1994). The Non-Designers Design
Book California: Peachprint Press [multiple copies in
UWS Library]

Revision/Editing
workshop
Winn, W. (2009). “Proof” in Pictures: Visual
Evidence and Meaning Making in the Ivory-billed
woodpecker controversy Journal of Technical
Writing and Communication Vol. 39(4) pp. 351379

Wong, I. (2007). Wong words and wisuals Southern
Communicator Issue 13, December 2007 pp. 13-18
Discussion Question: What is the difference between
visual sensation and visual perception? How do
‘gestalt’ theories of perception explain how we make
meaning from visual texts? Why do professional
writers need to be conscious of these perspectives?
Week 9:
14 Sept
Intra-Session Break
Week 10
No presentations this week
21
September
Business report writing
Background Reading:


Archee, R. (2014) Beginners’ guide to report writing
North, T. (2009). Report Writing (free sample
chapter) Perth, WA: Scribe Consulting
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Writing Genre Exercise:
Advocacy/Activism
Unions, churches, charities
and community groups all
have an axe to grind.
Imagine you are member of
an advocacy groups such
Page 8 of 34
as Amnesty, Save the
Whales or Students Union.
Write copy for a new
campaign.
Week 11:
28
September
Political correctness, taboo and non discriminatory
language
Writing Genre Exercise:
Taboo subjects
Background Reading: Allan, K. & Burridge, K. (2006).
Forbidden Words: Taboo and the Censoring of
Language. Cambridge University Press. [available as an
e-book via UWS Library. Student log in needed]
Taboo subjects in our
society relate to various
ideas which society sees as
dangerous, illegal, racist, or
downright weird. Using the
first person will probably
intensify the impact of a
taboo subject.
Suggested older reading(s):
 Advocacy for Inclusion (2006). Advocacy for Inclusion
Information Sheet – Non-discriminatory Language
 Cotter, M. (2007). The Influence and Effects of
Discriminatory Language in New Zealand The
International Journal of Language Society and Culture
Issue 22.6 pp. 52-55
 Gurney, M. (2001). The Curse: Advertising, language
and the cultural implications of the ‘Scarlet P’
Unpublished MA (Communication & Cultural Studies)
paper ‘Feminist Critiques of Language’
 Hughes, G. (1991) Swearing: a Social History of Foul
Language, Oaths and Profanity in English USA:
Blackwell
 Hunt, M. (nd). Cunt: The History of the C Word
Retrieved from
http://www.matthewhunt.com/cunt/index.html
 Miller, C & Swift, K. (1988). Handbook of non sexist
writing (2e) New York: Harper Perennial
 Poynton, C. (1989) Language and gender: Making the
difference Oxford: Oxford University Press
 Summers, A. (2012). Her Rights at Work (R-rated
version): The Political Persecution of Australia’s First
Female Prime Minister 2012 Human Rights and
Social Justice Lecture University of Newcastle
31
August 2012 Retrieved from
http://annesummers.com.au/speeches/her-rights-atwork-r-rated/
 Wajnryb, R. (2005). Language most Foul Crows Nest:
Allen and Unwin
Revision/Editing
workshop
Discussion Question: The term 'political correctness'
has become a kind of 'sneer term' in recent years. It is
often used pejoratively to hijack an argument. It often is
used to imply that the writer or speaker is overly
sensitive or has an ideological agenda and is using a
form of forced, unnatural language. Examine the
arguments as they apply to a range of different contexts
e.g. sexism and misogyny, racial discrimination, ageism
etc. What are the implications for professional writers
and editors of the difference between censorship and
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Page 9 of 34
appropriate standards?
Week 12:
5 October
(note that
Monday 5
Oct is a PH)
The impact of technologies on professional writing
and editing
Writing Genre Exercise:
Technical Writing
Background Reading: Archee. R. et al (2013). (Ch. 5)
Mediated Communication Communicating as
professionals 3e Melbourne: Cengage Learning pp. 110145
You need to explain how to
use a new piece of
hardware or software. Or
find a set of instructions
that need work, and rewrite
them. Most manuals are
poorly written.
Suggested older reading(s):
 Brockman, J. (ed.) (2011). How is the internet
changing the way you think?: The net’s impact our
minds and future London: Atlantic Books [a series of
short chapters on issues related to the topic]
 Carr, N. (2010). The Shallows: what the internet is
doing to our brains London: Norton [extract]
 Crystal, D. (2009). Txting: the gr8 db8 Oxford: Oxford
University Press [extract] See also various YouTube
clips from David Crystal
 Gregory, J., (2004). 'Writing for the Web vs. Writing
for Print: Are They Really So Different?' Technical
Communication Vol. 51, No. 2, May 2004 pp. 276(10)
 James, N. (2010). Long live the e-revolution Sydney
Morning Herald May 15-16 2010 pp. 12-13
 Keen, A. (2007). The Cult of the Amateur: How
Today's Internet Is Killing Our Culture New York:
Doubleday
 Redish, J. (2012). Letting go of the words: Writing
web content that works (2e) USA: Morgan Kaufman
Publishers
 Self, T. (2009). 'What if Your Readers Can’t Read?'
Southern Communicator i16 Feb 2009 pp.5-9
 Simons, M. (2010). Reading in an age of change
Overland198 Autumn 2010 pp. 11-16
Exercise: Ethos in
technical communication
Revision/Editing
workshop
Discussion Question: Consider the extent to which
different electronic communication technologies merely
replace traditional forms of communication. Do they
change the nature of the reading and writing
experience? How might this impact on choices made for
professional writers? What issues do they raise for
professional writers.
Week 13:
Ethics and professional writing
12 October
Background Reading: Longstaff, S. (1994). Selfinterest detracts from the lustre of the professions
Available from Sydney Morning Herald 18 April 1994
Cheney, G. et al (2010). (Re)framing ethics at work (Ch.
1) Just a job?: Communication, ethics and professional
life New York: Oxford University Press pp. 21-47
Suggested older reading(s):
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Writing Genre Exercise:
Ethical case studies
Revision/Editing
workshop
Final Evaluation Report
Page 10 of 34
 Archee, R. (1996) Ethics and the Internet
 Dragga, S. & Voss, D., Hiding Humanity: Verbal and
Visual Ethics in Accident Reports Technical
Communication Vol. 50, No 1 Feb 2003 pp. 61-79
 Heller, S.,(1997) ‘In spin we trust’: a conversation with
Stuart Ewen (media scholar and critic)' Print v51 n3
(May-June 1997) pp. 94 (7)
 Light, B. & McGrath, K. (2010). Ethics and social
networking sites: a disclosive analysis of Facebook
Information Technology & People, Vol. 23 Iss: 4, pp.
290 - 311
 Loughlan, P. (2007). “You wouldn’t steal a car …”
Intellectual property and the language of theft
European Intellectual Property Review, Vol. 29, No.
10, pp. 401-405 Available from Sydney Law School
Research Paper No. 08/35 April 2008
 Ornatowski, C.A. (2001). Ethics and the internet Lore:
Rhetoric, Writing, Culture
 Simmons, P., & Spence, E. (2006). The practice and
ethics of media release journalism Australian
Journalism Review, 28(1), pp. 167-181
 Simmons, P. (2010). Disliking public relations:
Democratic ideals and the habits of ethical
communicators ANZCA 10 Refereed conference
proceedings
due by Friday uploaded
to vUWS
Discussion Question: Ethics has many perspectives in
relation to professional writing and communication. What
are some of the main issues identified by some of the
suggested readings and what are the challenges for
professional writers remaining ethical?
Week 14:
19 October
Writing for an Online Audience
 Kosarek, J. (2013). Desktop & mobile: one content
strategy to rule them all. HubSpot. Available:
http://blog.hubspot.com/marketing/desktop-mobilecontent-strategy-var
 Nicol, M. (n.d.) 10 principles of writing for the web.
Daily Writing Tips. Available:
http://www.dailywritingtips.com/10-principles-ofwriting-for-the-web/
 Pick, M. (2013). Surveying the big screen. A List
Apart. Available:
http://alistapart.com/article/surveying-the-big-screen
 Stokes, R. (2014). eMarketing: the essential guide to
marketing in a digital world (5th ed.) (pp. 165-197).
Quirk eMarketing.
Available: http://www.redandyellow.co.za/product/te
xtbook-digital/
Writing Genre Exercise:
TBA
Revision/Editing
workshop
Discussion Question: What are some the problems
and solutions for writers when it comes to online
contexts such as writing for websites, blogs, social
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Page 11 of 34
media (Twitter, Facebook), forums and online
assessment?
Week 15
STUVAC
26 October
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Writing & Editing
Portfolio due
Page 12 of 34
Assessments
Assessment Requirements
Assessments for this unit will be based on the following components
Assessment Item
1. Critique and Seminar
Presentation
2. Document Evaluation Report
3. Writing and Editing Portfolio
Length and Due Week
Brief Online Critique: 600 words, due on Sun before
seminar = 10%
Seminar Presentation: 5-7 minute individual oral
presentation on day of seminar = 20%
In two parts:
1. Brief Proposal (500 words) posted to Writing Lab
Week 6
2. Final Report (1500 words) due Week 13
Selected exercises (see Assignment details below).
Revised exercises due Week 15
Weighting (%)
30
30
40
An overall mark of at least 50% is required to pass the unit and students must complete all assessment
tasks to receive a final grade for this unit.
Final marks and grades are subject to confirmation by the School Assessment Committee which may
scale, modify or otherwise amend the marks and grades for the unit, as may be required by University
policies.
Submission of Assessment Tasks
Students are required to keep a copy of ALL written work submitted.
DUE DATES FOR
Assessment 1 Critique and Seminar Presentation: Due in class on date to be advised/negotiated in Week
1 of semester
Assessment 2: Document Evaluation Report
1. Part 1 Brief Project Proposal due Week 6 written up and posted to the Writing Lab
2. Part 2 Final Evaluation Report due Week 13 submitted through Turnitin and hard copy if
requested by your tutor (e.g. Ray Archee’s classes)
Assessment 3: Writing and Editing Portfolio: Due Week 15 uploaded to vUWS and in hard copy if
requested by your tutor.
This unit requires online submission of all assessment tasks unless specifically requested by your tutor.
Please note: you do no need to include a cover sheet for Turnitin Submissions.
All submissions using Turnitin are presented with a declaration to students attached upload via the Turnitin
interface. The declaration is:
By submitting your work using this link you are certifying that:
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Page 13 of 34






I hold a copy of this assignment if the original is lost or damaged
I hereby certify that no part of this assignment or product has been copied for any other student’s
work or from any other source except where due acknowledgement is made in the assignment
I hereby certify that no part of this assignment or product has been submitted by me in other
(previous or current) assessment, except where appropriately referenced, and with prior permission
from the Lecturer/Tutor/Unit Coordinator for this unit
No part of the assignment/product has been written/produced for me by any other person except
where collaboration has been authorised by the unit lecturer/tutor concerned
I am aware that this work will be reproduced and submitted to plagiarism detection software
programs for the purpose of detecting possible plagiarism (which may retain a copy on its
database for future plagiarism checking)
I am aware that this work may be de-identified and reproduced in part or in full as an example for
future students.
At UWS, plagiarism falls within the framework of the UWS Student Academic Misconduct Policy. For my
information about possible penalties for plagiarism, please refer to Misconduct – Student Academic
Misconduct Policy.
Return of Assessment Material
Students will be able to view feedback and marks for their assessments once they have been released on
vUWS.
Resubmission
NO resubmission will be permitted.
Late Submission
Work submitted late without consultation with the Unit Coordinator will not be accepted.
A student who submits a late assessment without approval for an extension will be penalised by 10% per
day up to 10 days, i.e. marks equal to 10% of the assignment’s weight will be deducted as a ‘flat rate’ from
the mark awarded. For example, for an assignment that has a possible highest mark of 50, the student’s
awarded mark will have 5 marks deducted for each late day. Saturday and Sunday each count as one day.
Assessments will not be accepted after the marked assessment task has been returned to students who
submitted the task on time.
Extension of Due Date for assessment task/s



Requests for extensions, with evidence of extenuating circumstances, may be submitted before, on or
up to two days after (by 5.00pm) the due date of the assessment.
The Request for Extension Form no longer contains the instruction that it must be submitted no later
than three days before the due date, after which the student must apply for special consideration (form
available at: Request for Extension form)
If a late application is not approved the late penalty will apply from the due date.
Special Consideration for multiple assessment tasks and/or whole of the teaching session
A student may apply for Special Consideration (via online eForm) if extenuating circumstances outside their
control and sufficiently grave in nature or duration, cause significant disruption to their capacity to study
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Page 14 of 34
effectively. More information about Special Consideration can be found at Special consideration information
web page.
If you have been granted Special Consideration, when submitting your assignment please indicate on the
assignment cover sheet that it has been granted.
Please note: Lodgement of an Application for Special Consideration does not automatically result in the
granting of Special Consideration and students should make every effort to submit assessments as soon as
practicable (if possible), even though an application has been submitted.
Writing and Presentation
High quality written expression is an expectation of all UWS graduates.
All written pieces of assessment in this unit must meet the minimum writing standard required. These are
specified below. Any piece of written work that does not meet the required standard will be failed on this
basis.
Literacy Minimum Standards Level 2/3
At this level, your written expression should be clear, concise and direct, free of major structural and
presentational faults and, most importantly, not require any ‘deciphering’ on the part of the reader such. In
other words, it can be read and understood on a first read through.
Formal writing requirements










Complete sentences, typically with Subject Verb Object order.
Avoidance of minor sentences, sentence fragments and run-ons.
Conciseness, coherence and cohesion.
Grammatical agreement and consistency including the correct use of tense, syntax, word class and
lexical choices.
Correct and consistent spelling and punctuation.
Correct and consistent use of terminology relating to the unit that the student is writing for.
Correct use of phrases, clauses and conjunctions.
Consistency in the register appropriate for the unit that the student is writing for.
Correct use of cohesive devices linking sentences and paragraphs: including topic sentences and
thesis statements.
Use of formal structure: including introduction and conclusion.
Integrated use of quoted and paraphrased material: including meta-commentary and linking phrases.
The following site provides a good range of resources to help you develop your writing:
http://tdu.uws.edu.au/languagelearning/
Academic conventions
Integrated use of source material (quotes, paraphrases etc.)
Accurate and consistent use of a recognised referencing system
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Page 15 of 34
Where required, your work has been submitted through Turnitin.
Formatting and presentation








Well formatted
No handwriting
12 point Times Roman or equivalent (as approved or direct by unit learning guide)
Double-spaced
Page numbers and SID in footer or header
Stapled (if hard copy submission)
Good print quality in black ink (if hard copy submission)
Cover sheet attached (if hard copy submission)
Other elements


Accurate spelling
No txt abbreviations
Assessment details including Criteria and
Standards
Assessment 1: Seminar Presentation and Online Critique
Due Date: In class on a date to be advised/negotiated with your tutor
Aims/Objectives
The primary aim of the seminar presentation is to work, both individually and as a team, to develop critical
awareness of the various theoretical perspectives that underlie professional writing and editing practice.
Assessment Requirements
There are TWO (2) components to this assessment task:
1. A Written Online Critique (500-600 words) on an aspect of your allocated seminar topic published
in the PWE Writing Lab (found on the PWE website) = 10%
2. Group Seminar Presentation and Class Discussion on the allocated topics = 20%
Both elements of this assessment are assessable and compulsory. You will be assigned a weekly topic
during week 1.
ONLINE CRITIQUE OF A WEEKLY THEME (10%)
1. In the first session you will be asked to form teams of 2-4. Your team will select or be allocated one of
the weekly topics to research. Your team should base their presentation around the weekly theme and
discussion question and the set reading but are invited to find additional references. So, for example, if your
team selected Week 12, your team would be exploring a range of issues related to technology and
professional writing.
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Page 16 of 34
2. Each team member should then identify one sub-topic to individually research from any of the
various suggested readings. This involves choosing one key idea or issue from one of set readings to
research for their critical appraisal of the sub topic. For example if we continue the Week 12 example above,
team members might choose from sub topics such as copyright, intellectual property, privacy and censorship.
You might also wish to focus on a contentious argument e.g. the dumbing down of content or the outsourcing
of expert opinion and personal relationships.
3. Post a 500-600 word critical appraisal of that idea, issue or problem to the Writing Lab. Using their
specific sub topic, each team member must research and write a piece that briefly engages with the issue.
The post should not just summarise, but critique and evaluate, the ideas that you will be presenting. Use
your research (citing your sources in APA) to inform your piece, but write in an engaging and interesting
way. You are welcome to either agree or disagree with your proposition, but you must support your
arguments with examples and in an informed and interesting way. Place a properly formatted APA style
reference list at the end of your appraisal (not included in word count).
4. Give your online critique an interesting title. For example, you might individually choose to look at the
arguments in the Brockman (2011) text and decide to write under the controversial heading “Google is
making us stupid”. It is important that your title captures the focus of your post and that it is interesting (so it
entices your peers to read and comment on it). Your title should be concise, 12 words or less to, ensure it
can be easily found on the weekly writing lab listings.
PRESENTATION AND CLASS DISCUSSION PREPARATION (20%)
Using the information in your online critique as a basis, each team member must prepare a 5-7 presentation
for the class.
In preparation for your team presentation
1. Meet with the people assigned to your team BEFORE your set week to ensure you are looking at
different topics and to ensure you are collectively prepared to facilitate an active and lively discussion.
2. Decide on your speaking order and on who will deliver the introduction and conclusion. You
must also decide if you will use any visuals and arrange to get a laptop from the library if necessary or to
use one of your own.
3. Each team member must submit a hard copy of their online critique along with a set of at least
four questions related to their online critique at the end of their post before the team presents.
On the day of your presentation
1. Arrive early (at least 5 minutes before the tutorial) in order to have all presentations ready to go and
to ensure you are set up and prepared. If speakers are using PowerPoint or Keynote (not absolutely
necessary), we suggest placing all presentations in ONE slideshow to avoid time wasting.
2. Be prepared to speak for between 5-7 minutes per team member on your sub topic. The tutor will
strictly time these presentations.
During your presentation
1. Do not just read your critique. You should summarise it quickly and then either expand upon your
argument or focus on one element more deeply. Give interesting examples or use graphics or visuals to
engage the audience.
2. Avoid too much reading. You may use notes to guide you but eye contact and body language are
important presentation techniques.
2. Consider how you might use visuals or other media. You may wish to play some media that you
then talk around but limit this content to one minute only.
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Page 17 of 34
After the presentation
1. Each member of the team will lead a small discussion group for about 15 minutes. Have your
prepared questions on hand to help facilitate discussion.
2. At the end of this time one of you should lead everyone back into the full class discussion and
each of you should sum up key issues that arose from your small group discussions. Your discussion
plan will set out the questions you will ask and any other relevant information regarding what you will do
to engage discussion.
Assessment Criteria
You will be assessed on how well you individually, and as a team, prepare for your presentation and
lead the discussion groups, through carefully prepared questions and/or activities and by keeping time and
ensuring everyone participates through moderation (i.e. inviting people’s responses or inputs).
As a team you must:
1. Initially read the background reading and/or the recommended additional readings
2. Discuss and allocate the general topic into specific sub-topic areas or aspects of the topic. Each
team member must select a specific sub-topic area. Discuss this with your tutor if you have difficulty.
3. Work together to prepare a brief 1-2 minute introduction/overview and brief 1 minute
summary/conclusion and decide which team members will deliver these
4. Contribute to a set of questions that will guide the class discussion at the conclusion of the
presentation.
5. Lead the subsequent class discussion on your topic. Each team member must have a prepared list
of discussion questions ready to be handed to your class tutor on the day.
As an individual team member, you must:
1. Research and prepare your own segment of the presentation on one sub topic that emerges either
from the set of weekly readings or from your own research.
2. Prepare a presentation that should be 5-7 minutes in length.
3. Research and write your own 500-600 word online critique.
4. Post your individual online critique to the Writing Lab on Sun before your class so that your
classmates and tutor and can read through them before the tutorial classes.
5. Prepare your own set of PowerPoint or Prezi slides that will be integrated into the team presentation.
6. Contribute to the preparation of the questions, introduction and conclusion of the team presentation
Once scheduled, presentations cannot be rescheduled. Non-attendance presenters without documented
evidence will mean zero marks for this component for the person(s) not attending. Due to reduced class time
available, you will not be allowed to present this topic in another week and may have to present on another
topic. Pressure of other work (university or otherwise) is not considered an excuse. A formal application for
Special Consideration may be required for this to be considered. If late in the semester it may not be
possible to reschedule.
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Page 18 of 34
Marking Criteria
Assignment 1 (part 1): Online critique = 10 marks
FAIL
PASS
HIGH PASS
Research
You have not done
additional research. Your
references are missing
and/or not in APA style.
You have used only the
most basic additional
references. These are
not set out correctly in
APA style.
Content
You have either not read
the background reading or
have failed to understand its
point or themes. Your ideas
are unclear or poorly
explained. They offer
unsubstantiated opinion
rather than an informed
response. Your critique is
too brief.
Your critique is poorly
written and has too many
expression and editing
errors to be acceptable. It
may be too brief and have
been submitted late. You
merely summarise rather
than argue.
You have done only
basic preparation. Your
critique is very brief,
too general, and mostly
descriptive rather than
analytical. It may not
meet the required word
length.
You have used some
additional references
but these are more
general than academic.
They are mostly
correctly set out in APA
style.
Your critique is meets
the required word
length but is general
and more descriptive
than analytical. It
shows a general
understanding of the
topic and themes.
Your critique is written
only at a basic level.
There are numerous
editing and expression
errors. It may be too
brief and may have
been submitted late.
You attempt some
argument and critique.
Your critique is mostly
well written but may
need additional editing
for wordiness or style.
You attempt some
argument and critique.
It is the correct length.
It was submitted on
time.
Writing
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
CREDIT
DISTINCTION
HIGH DISTINCTION
You have used and
integrated other
relevant academic
sources. They are set
out correctly in APA
style.
Your have read widely
from a high level of
relevant academic and
other references. They
are set out correctly in
APA style.
You do not merely
describe the issue but
attempt to argue and
critique the main
themes and how they
answer the question.
You show an above
average understanding
of the topic and
themes.
Your critique is very
well written and is likely
to be engaging. It may
contain minor editing or
style issues. It was
submitted on time.
You show a high level
of understanding of the
topic and themes. You
argue clearly and
engagingly and use
examples that will
engage the readers.
Your background
academic references
are highly pertinent and
above the expected
level for this course.
They are set out
correctly in APA style
Your critique shows a
sophisticated
understanding of the
topic and goes beyond
the requirements to
address the main
themes.
Your critique is highly
engaging and
extremely well written.
It uses effective and
appropriate language
to engage the reader.
There are no editing
issues. It was
submitted on time.
Page 19 of 34
Your critique highly
sophisticated and
effectively written. It is
likely to be highly
engaging. There are no
editing issues. It was
submitted on time.
Marking Criteria
Assignment 1 (part 2): Seminar Presentation = 20 marks
FAIL
PASS
HIGH PASS
CREDIT
DISTINCTION
HIGH DISTINCTION
Preparation and
Structure
Poor preparation. No
apparent reading of
background resources. No
additional new references
used. Incorrect APA style.
Ideas unclear or poorly
explained. Little evidence
of teamwork. Poorly
prepared to speak.
Fairly basic preparation.
Minimal understanding of
the topic. No clear intro
or conclusion. Some
areas require further
explanation or examples.
Used only the most basic
additional refs. Only
basic evidence of
teamwork.
Good preparation and
structure. Summarises
seminal resources and
used several additional
references to explain
sub topic. Small
problems with APA
style. Evidence of
teamwork.
Presentation is clear,
logical and cohesive.
Excellent structure.
Understands the issues
of the topic well. There
is a high level of
cooperation between
team members.
Presentation is clear,
logical and cohesive.
Excellent structure, and
engaging style.
Examples are original
and highly pertinent to
the audience. Choice of
references is
outstanding. Highly
cohesive team.
Content
No understanding of the
main theme. Poor attempt
to cover sub topic. Extra
material is poorly chosen,
too simple or irrelevant.
Does not attempt to
construct an informed
response to Discussion
question.
Fairly basic attempt to
cover the sub topic or
engage with the
discussion question.
Most of the main themes
or points are referred to
but mostly in a
descriptive rather than
analytical way that only
offer generalised
insights. Supporting
material is mostly drawn
from popular or average
level academic sources.
A nervous speaker who
does not try to engage
audience. Presentation
was not rehearsed.
Speaker read from notes
or slides. Little eye contact
and poor body language.
Visual aids poorly edited,
Presentation was
delivered only at a basic
level. Speaker read from
notes or slides with
minimal eye contact.
Visual aids may have
been too cluttered, used
sentences rather than
In depth coverage of
sub topic based on
well-chosen additional
material. Critical
insights show a high
level of understanding
of the issue and
concepts. Highly
pertinent examples
Content is of a superior
quality and clearly
addresses the main
themes with excellent
supporting academic
sources.
A highly confident and
enthusiastic speaker
with confident body
language. Speaker
either spoke without
notes or used them
minimally. Visual aids
were clear, well edited
Content is of an
outstanding academic
quality and goes beyond
the requirements to
address the main
themes and sub topic.
Highly pertinent critical
insights that show an
advanced
understanding of the
subject matter.
Interesting, pertinent
and original examples.
Delivery
Reasonable attempt to
engage with the
discussion question
and reference at least
some points of the
reading(s). Good
coverage of sub topic
with good but not
necessarily original
examples. Supporting
material is adequate
and is drawn from a
reasonable variety of
popular and academic
sources.
Presentation was
delivered reasonably
well. Speaker mostly
read aloud from notes
or slides but made
some effort to use eye
contact and to vary
your voice. Visual aids
Presentation is clear
and well organised
with good structure.
Insights linked to main
themes. Shows an
above average
understanding of
specific topic. Few
main points may be
confusing or not
relevant.
Clearly discussed the
main themes and sub
topic. Supported this
with evidence from the
readings and
additional academic
sources. Attempted to
use and integrate
other relevant
academic sources and
pertinent and original
examples.
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
A confident speaker
who used notes to aid
the presentation with
minimal use of notes.
Eye contact and body
language was
effective. Voice was
audible and varied.
Page 20 of 34
A highly accomplished
and enthusiastic
speaker with confident
body language. Speaker
spoke without notes
engaged the audience
with eyes and positive
body language. Visual
hard to read or missing.
Presentation poorly
paced. Language used
difficult to follow or
inappropriate for topic or
audience. Presentation
considerably less than the
required time of 5-7
minutes. Discussion
questions either not
developed, poorly
constructed, predictable or
too simple. You did little to
engage your small group
in a developed discussion.
key points, had
insufficient information or
been poorly edited. Too
many “umms” and
“ahhs”, spoken too softly
or too loudly or in a
monotone. Presentation
less than the required
time of 5-7 minutes.
Discussion questions
very basic and did not
challenge the group.
Basic group facilitation
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
were adequate using
key points and visuals
for interest.
Presentation either
short of time or slightly
longer than required.
Discussion questions
well developed, but
fairly predictable. Good
effort at engaging
group discussion.
Visual aids were wellprepared, interesting
and used key points
and relevant.
Presentation delivered
within the allotted
time. Questions were
well developed and
challenging.
Discussion group was
run effectively with
good discussion.
Page 21 of 34
and highly relevant.
Discussion questions
well written and
challenging. Speaker’s
enthusiasm generated
good interaction within
the discussion group.
Presentation delivered
within the allotted time.
aids of professional
quality. Discussion
questions well written
and reflected a
sophisticated
understanding of the
themes. Excellent group
facilitation skills
generating excellent
interaction within the
discussion group.
Presentation delivered
within the allotted time.
Assessment 2: Document Evaluation Report 30%
Due Dates
Part 1: Brief Project Proposal written up and posted to the unit Writing Lab. You must include this as
a Preamble when you submit your Final Report. Due before your scheduled tutorial class time in
Week 6
Part 2: Final Evaluation Report uploaded to Turnitin by Week 13 Friday 16th October (at the latest)
Aims/Objectives



To evaluate a faulty professional document by using audience analysis methods and techniques
To apply the basic principles of report layout and design to produce a professional, readable and
functional report
To write clearly and professionally, with attention to the editing of spelling, grammar and format to
ensure the written document is free of errors and is successful in its purpose
Assessment Description
Much of the focus of this unit will be on workshopping how to evaluate documents that are used for different
purposes in a range of professions – e.g. brochures, technical instructions, newsletters, posters, websites
and other formal documents. Your brief is to choose one document with numerous problems to discuss,
evaluate and critique. You will write up both an initial brief Project Proposal (memo report format) and an
Evaluation Report (using long business report format) of your findings and recommendations.
Assessment Requirements
Part 1: Brief document evaluation project proposal with 2 minute class ‘show and tell’
 Locate an organisation you are familiar with or research one with which you are unfamiliar. We
suggest that you start this search as early as possible.
 Source and research one of that organisation’s documents, most probably a brochure, flyer,
newsletter or even a website.
 By week 6 you should have selected the document you are going to evaluate, and understand its
background, distribution, audience and especially its issues. You will be asked to write a brief (500
word) proposal about what you initially see as the potential problems with this document.
 You should publish your brief proposal in your Writing Lab space and other students will be able to
read and make comments and suggestions. You must include this with your Document
Evaluation Report as a Preamble (compulsory).
 You should use a few headings and subheadings to make your proposal clear and easy to read.
 You should include a scan of the document in your proposal.
 You will be asked to briefly discuss this with the class in Week 6 and so that your peers and
tutor can give you feedback.
Part 2: Final Document Evaluation Report
Using a long report format, you will write up the evaluation of your chosen document. You should write the
report as if you were a consultant and it should be addressed to your tutor as if they were the commissioning
agent. This assignment builds upon work from previous units. The broad section headings should be
supplemented with added sub-sections in the usual manner, 2.1, 2.2, 3.1, 3.2 etc.
The most difficult section is Section 3.0 where you employ audience evaluation methods. Such methods
must include one or more of the following:

a brief survey of document users
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Page 22 of 34






interviews
needs analysis
rhetorical analysis
usability testing
protocol methods, or
evaluations involving culture, plain language, or ethical considerations.
Use of tables and/or graphs is an appropriate way to summarise results of such testing, rather than “I think
that this graphic is boring …”. Use scholarly references in order to support your arguments at all times.
These must be set out in APA style.
The final Document Evaluation Report itself should use the following headings to structure your formal
evaluation for assessment:
Title Page
Table of Contents
Executive Summary
1.0
Introduction
2.0
Method
3.0
Results
4.0
Discussion (Conclusions or Recommendations),
5.0
References
6.0
Appendices.
Your Report must:
 Use long business report format (we will discuss and model this in class)
 Use appropriate sub-headings, headers/footers and page numbers throughout
 Use heading with a decimal numbering system to guide the reader through the report
 Have an introduction (use the sub-heading ‘Introduction’) which explains what the report is about
e.g. ‘I have evaluated the brochure titled …’ i.e. the reader learns what you intend to do
 As part of the introduction, give a brief overview to the (real) organization (industry, size, location,
staff numbers etc.) for whom the report is to be written. This gives the reader a background and
context by which to make sense of your report
 Include the document in the Appendix of the report
 Identify and describe the readership for the document and discuss selection of methods of
audience analysis appropriate for the report
 Provide evidence for your findings/results in the form of tables and graphs and EXPLAIN your
findings. You might also take mini screenshots of relevant extracts to place within the text of the
report to illustrate your discussion. Like all visuals, these should be labelled and titled (eg Fig. 1 The
homepage of XYZ organisation).
 Give recommendations in text and/or in terms of visuals
 Include an academic reference list in APA style
 Be around 1500 words (not inclusive of Executive Summary, tables, graphs, References and
Appendices).
 Be uploaded to Turnitin (vUWS)
 Include a copy of your original proposal published in Week 6. Label this ‘Preamble’.
NOTE: As this assignment is designed to have you learn and practice a particular genre of professional
writing, it is essential that this is your own work i.e. do not copy another student’s assignment. Collusion
will be penalised.
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Page 23 of 34
Marking criteria
Assignment 2: Document Evaluation Report
Research
Analysis &
Recommendations
FAIL
Very little, if any, primary
research necessary to
understand the needs of
your document. Methods are
based on opinion rather than
any primary research.
PASS
Only the bare minimum
amount of research. Only
a simplistic understanding
of the needs of the
document. The research
methods used to evaluate
the document are basic
and the data gathered
basic and obvious. For the
most part relies on opinion
rather than evidence
gathered from primary
research.
Analysis is either missing,
brief or unsubstantiated.
Recommendations are
either missing or
inappropriate to the specific
document and audience; for
example it may be the case
if your document is a
website your
recommendations are out of
step with industry accepted
best-practice guidelines.
Analysis is basic and
recommendations are
obvious.
Recommendations could
apply to a range of
documents - in other
words, they aren't based
on a thorough use of
specific research that
takes into account the
particularities of your
document and the
organisation that has
created it.
Recommendations are not
well argued and not
convincing.
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
CREDIT
A good amount of
research and a more than
satisfactory and an above
average understanding of
the needs of the
document. More than
satisfactory amount of
data from a good range of
sources has been
gathered. Research
contains the potential for
insights beyond the
obvious. Frequently,
however, there is not
enough research and too
much personal opinion.
Analysis is satisfactory but
overall does not
demonstrate much thought
beyond the obvious.
Mostly general
recommendations and
many things suggested
could apply to a range of
documents. Evidence
used occasionally to
support recommendations,
but still too simplistically
(i.e. potential for more
sophisticated and
innovative insights).
Recommendations are
reasonable but not
convincing.
DISTINCTION
A superior use of primary
and secondary research
overall. A sophisticated
understanding of the needs
of the document. Initiative
shown in your research and
interesting and insightful
data has been gathered.
Still some minor areas of
improvement needed such
as a minor need for
additional research, or an
additional method(s).
HIGH DISTINCTION
Outstanding primary and
secondary research. A
sophisticated
understanding of the
needs of the document.
Initiative shown in the
research and interesting
and insightful data has
been gathered. The
research contains the
potential for genuinely
innovative insights.
Analysis is detailed and
recommendations are
based on a sophisticated
use of evidence and are
appropriate to your
document. There is room
for some improvement; for
instance, perhaps some
recommendations need
some more critical thought,
or you overlook some
potential for genuine
insight, or you could be
more detailed at times. As a
result your
recommendations could still
be more convincing.
Outstanding analysis that
is detailed and
demonstrates a wellconsidered critique.
Recommendations are
both appropriate to your
document and its
audience, and also
demonstrate real insight
and an a strong ability to
'think outside the box'. A
thoroughly convincing
set of recommendations.
Page 24 of 34
Organisation & Writing
You have not written in the
report format and/or the
organisation of the report is
illogical or missing required
and important elements. The
writing is poor, hard to follow
and/or is not clear. It
contains too many
expression and editing
errors. Material not
referenced your material
using APA style.
Organisation and writing is
satisfactory. You have
satisfactorily followed the
report format with
occasional errors. It is
likely that your writing,
while readable, contains
some errors. The writing is
logical and easy enough
to follow and satisfactorily
follows the principles of
simple English outlined in
the unit. Some errors in
APA referencing.
Organisation and writing is
of a more than satisfactory
standard. There are minor
errors in the
implementation of the
report format. The writing
is mostly logical and
mostly easy to follow - with
some room for
improvement; for example,
perhaps some transitions
between paragraphs need
to be more logical, or there
are inconsistencies in your
use of voice, tone etc.
Some errors in APA
referencing.
Superior organisation and
writing. You follow the
report format very well and
your writing is clear, uses
professional style and is
mostly error free. It is
logical and easy to find all
the information needed.
Minor moments of confused
or weak expression, or one
or two minor typos or
mistakes in your
referencing. With some
work your report would be
good enough to use in a
professional context.
Outstanding organisation
and writing. Your report,
theoretically, is good
enough to be used in a
professional context.
Assessment Criteria







Identification and description of the communication needs of the organization. Remember the emphasis is on assessment and recommendations for
improvement
Use of appropriate audience analysis – clear purpose and appropriate methods likely to meet the contextual needs of the recipient and organisation
Understanding of the report format structure and inclusion of required elements (see above)
Style, clarity, appropriateness of the writing – clear, well written sentences, appropriate use of active and passive voice, minimal nominalisation, use of
parallel structures, clearly structured sentences and paragraphs, appropriate language for a professional reader
Editing – care with spelling, punctuation, grammar, consistency/appropriateness of headings/style, transitions, variety and structure of sentences and
paragraphs
Use of a clear, consistent and professional layout
Use of appropriately chosen, formatted and labeled graphics (including screenshots, tables, graphs etc. where appropriate and useful for the audience and
purpose of the report).
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Page 25 of 34
Assessment 3: Writing and Editing Exercise Portfolio (40%)
Due Date
Week 15 (Stuvac)
Aims/Objectives
 To have students engage more closely with weekly themes and issues through a series of writing lab
responses
 To practice principles of Plain English and professional writing style via a series of self-paced style
exercises
 To practice principles of Plain English and professional writing editing via a series of real world text
examples
 To practice writing in a range of different professional writing genres through a series of writing lab
responses
 To demonstrate professional writing, editing and written presentation skills in a professionally presented
document
Assessment Description
Weekly exercises will be posted on the unit’s web page. This can be accessed directly or via a link on vUWS.
These aim to consolidate its main themes and skills.
Assessment Requirements
Throughout the course, you will be drafting and revising a range of different writing tasks plus a series of
writing ‘style’ exercises. Many of these can be done in class, while others will require additional work. You
will be required to post your drafts and revisions, plus your responses to the unit’s Writing Lab. The
Writing Lab is available on our unique website. You may do as many exercises (or as few) from a particular
week as you choose but must complete a minimum number in each category overall.
You must compile your exercises into a single portfolio document. This should include a Contents page,
organised into four sections, which relate to the four types of exercises.
1. Writing genre exercises = 10 marks:
You should submit a series of up to 10 different exercises that will be posted weekly on the unit
website each week. These will require you to write in a different genre, e.g. autobiography, travel,
review, or humour. These must be submitted to the Writing Lab.
The aim of these exercises is to extend your writing creativity in terms of non-fiction, and for you to
have copy to change and edit in later weeks. These exercises MUST be posted to the Writing Lab
no later than by the following Friday of the week after the exercise is described on the
webpage tutorial.
Evidence of week-by-week posts is required in the form of Writing Lab screenshots for drafts
of all 10 (or more) exercises. This means that you cannot do all of these at the end of the
semester. Exercises not accompanied by screenshots will not be marked.
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Page 26 of 34
Students may continue to revise their original posts and to include their revisions in the final
portfolio. Revisions may either be added to the end of the original post or posted separately.
These revisions can be submitted as part of your required exercises as described below in 2.3.
2. Other writing exercises = 30 marks
In order to learn and practise fundamental principles and improve your professional writing skills,
some weeks you will be asked to complete a set of ‘style’ exercises. In each set there will be an
available set of suggested answers for some questions. These exercises will both cover some of the
main principles of Plain English and then ask you to apply these to a series of real text examples.
Constructive criticism of other work is fundamental to professional writing and collaboration. We
expect you to read and edit other students’ work, and also undertake structured Revision exercises.
Thus, you are required to complete three other types of writing exercises:
2.1 Style exercises: You should complete at least 5 sets of explanatory exercises asking you to
revise text according the specific principle in question = 10 marks
2.2 Editing exercises: You need to show a minimum of 5 instances of insightful
reading/critiquing of other students’ writing on the Writing Lab = 10 marks
2.3 Revision exercises: You will be asked to revise your own work according to specific principles.
In some weeks handouts will be used to guide the exercise. You must show a minimum of 5
examples of revision = 10 marks
Remember: The numbers of required exercises in each category are a MINIMUM. Good
students will complete as many as possible from each category for possible higher marks.
General feedback on these exercises will be given progressively in class but not all exercises
will necessarily receive individual comments. Students may use this feedback to polish work
for submission.
Assessment Criteria







Depth and appropriateness of research for the short answer/research exercises. All secondary
information must be properly referenced using APA conventions
and a reference list included at the
end of each exercises where appropriate
Depth and appropriateness of analysis of the problem/issue Writing style – clarity, language choice, appropriateness, succinctness. Appropriate use of the
professional writing style conventions studied in this unit Structure and layout – appropriate descriptive headings, professional layout, appropriate use of
white space, readable font, numbering system, page numbers Editing – punctuation, grammar, spelling. You are encouraged to have someone read through your
exercises before you submit them in the portfolio
Professional layout and formatting of final portfolio document including a contents page, labeled
content sections and page numbers.
Evidence of Writing Lab submission via inclusion of a screenshot of the initial post by the due date
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Page 27 of 34
Marking criteria
Assignment 3: Writing and Editing Portfolio
Engagement
Writing &
Presentation
FAIL
PASS
HIGH PASS
CREDIT
DISTINCTION
HIGH DISTINCTION
Fewer than the required
minimum number of
exercises submitted. Those
submitted may be too brief
and/or need more
development and/or editing.
Exercises do not
demonstrate that you have
grasped the principles
taught. Insufficient evidence
of on-time submission using
screenshots for Writing
Genre exercises.
Insufficient number of
comments on other
students’ work.
Work is poorly written and
formatted with numerous
errors. No evidence of
editing or revision. You
have not referenced your
material using APA
formatting (where
applicable).
The minimum number
of exercises submitted.
Only a basic
understanding of the
needs of exercises
and/or goals of the
writing activities.
Evidence of on-time
submission for Writing
Genre exercises.
Comments on other
students’ work only
superficial.
More than the minimum
number of exercises
submitted. You
demonstrate a
straightforward
understanding of
concepts, exercises
and writing activities.
Screenshots included
for Writing Genre
exercises. Comments
on other students’ work
reasonable
More than the minimum
number of exercises
submitted. You
demonstrate a
commendable
understanding of
concepts, exercises
and writing activities.
Screenshots included
for Writing Genre
exercises. Thoughtful
comments on other
students’ work.
More than the minimum
number of exercises
submitted. You
demonstrate a
sophisticated
understanding of
concepts, exercises
and writing activities.
Screenshots included
for Writing Genre
exercises. Highly
constructive comments
on other students’
work.
You have submitted
nearly all the available
exercises and writing
activities. You
demonstrate a
sophisticated
understanding of the
needs of the writing
activities and
exercises. Screenshots
included for Writing
Genre exercises.
Insightful and valuable
comments on other
students’ work.
Work is poorly written
and formatted with
frequent errors. Your
exercises need more
revision. It is likely that
your APA referencing
also contains frequent
errors (where
applicable).
Work is written and
formatted to a
satisfactory standard
but still contains some
errors. It is likely that
your exercises need
further revision. It is
likely too that your APA
referencing also
contains some errors
(where applicable).
Writing and formatting
is of a commendable
standard. Minor errors
in your work and there
is some room for
improvement. There
may be inconsistencies
in your use of voice,
tone etc. Some minor
errors in referencing
(where applicable).
Superior writing and
formatting that is for the
most part easy to follow
and use. There still
may be one or two
minor moments of
weak or confused
expression, or one or
two minor typos or
mistakes in your
expression. Perfectly
referenced (where
applicable).
Outstanding writing and
formatting. Your work is
of the highest standard
throughout, and is
professionally
formatted and perfectly
referenced (where
applicable).
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Page 28 of 34
Learning Resource Information
Prescribed Text
There is no prescribed text for this unit but we recommend that students purchase a copy of the McKerihan
text listed below.
Essential texts
Cutts, M. (2009). Oxford Guide to Plain English (3rd ed). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Eagleson, R.D. (1990). Writing in Plain English Canberra ACT, AGPS,
Eunson, B. (2012). Communicating in the 21st Century (3rd ed) Queensland, John Wiley & Sons Ltd
Hall, E.T. (1959). The Silent Language Anchor NY, Doubleday (an important text for the theory of non verbal
and cross cultural communication)
James, N. (2007). Writing at Work: How to write clearly, effectively and professionally. Sydney: Allen and
Unwin.
McKerihan, S. (2015). Clear and concise: Become a better business writer Melbourne, Black Inc.
Petelin, R. & Durham, M. (2003). Writing in a Business Environment in The Professional Writing Guide:
Writing well and knowing why. Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin
Snooks & Co: (2002). Style Manual for Authors, Editors and Printers (6th ed) Milton: John Wiley & Sons
Strunk, W. & White, E.B (2000). The Elements of Style (4th Ed) New York, Longman
Truss, L. (2003). Eats, Shoots and Leaves: The zero tolerance approach to punctuation! UK Profile Books
Williams, J.M. & Colomb, G.G. (2010). Style: The Basics of Clarity and Grace (4th ed). New York: Longman.
Williams, R. (2008). The Non-Designer's Design Book. Berkeley, CA: Peachprint Press.
Use of vUWS
This unit uses vUWS as a portal to access a specially designed website used for all workshop activities.
Some additional general resources will be available there. Students are expected to login to the unit’s vUWS
site at least weekly. Students are required to submit all their assignments online via Turnitin (accessed from
vUWS)
Key Weblinks
Teaching activities and research resources are located at
http://school.hca.uws.edu.au/units/wp_101929_spr/ Students can access this link either directly or via vUWS.
Literacy Resources
Links to academic literacy resources are available on both the unit website and vUWS
Referencing Requirements
The Referencing Style required for this unit is the APA. Full details of referencing systems can be found at
“Citing Resources”: http://library.uws.edu.au/citing.php A short APA style guide is provided in both the unit
reader and on the unit vUWS site.
A full range of resources for searching and citing references can be found at “Training and Support”:
http://library.uws.edu.au/training.phtml
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Page 29 of 34
Referencing and assignment writing resources are provided in vUWS and will be discussed in tutorials
Links to Key UWS Policies and Information
Affecting Students
Key Policies and Information
Affecting Students
Policies
Student Support
Course and Unit Rules
UWS Handbook
Current Students
Student Administration
Forms
E-learning Support Site
Student Support
Course and unit rules
UWS handbook
UWS Students web page
Student Central
Student Forms and Student Online Forms
E-Learning Student Support Site and vUWS Information for Students.
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Page 30 of 34
School Policy for vUWS use: Courtesy and
Respect Online
In the interests of promoting the welfare and safety of students and staff at UWS, please ensure that you
conduct yourself with courtesy and respect while in vUWS. This applies to all online communications such as
tutorials, discussion groups, chat rooms, email correspondence, blogs, journals and so on.
A unit vUWS site is an online teaching and learning environment at UWS. The rules are the same as in
lectures, tutorials and seminars. Keep in mind that vUWS is a public space and your comments in online
discussions and chat rooms can be read by other students and academic staff. Your blog and journal entries
in vUWS may be read by your lecturer or tutor. The unit coordinator may allow students to read each other’s
blog or journal entries as a way of reflecting on the learning material and process or for assessment
purposes.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
It is very easy to be polite, courteous and friendly.
Avoid bad, offensive or discriminatory language.
Respect the point of view of other students, lecturers, tutors and the unit coordinator.
Be aware of cultural differences and cultural sensitivities.
Humour or sarcasm does not translate well from the real world to the virtual world.
Avoid capitals, or it will seem like you’re SHOUTING.
No-one wants to be misunderstood. Write clearly and concisely so that you will not be
misinterpreted in terms of your intention and meaning. Keep posts and emails short and simple.
Re-read your message before you hit send.
Respect the privacy of other students, lecturers, tutors and the unit coordinator.
Respect the online literacy levels of other students.
Remember that you can communicate face-to-face with others as well (recommended if you are
not certain what you write may offend others).
The rules of copyright and plagiarism apply in vUWS. If you use someone else's ideas, cite them
appropriately. Giving other students the answers to assessment questions or online quizzes in online
discussions, chat rooms or emails risks an Academic misconduct allegation.
The rules of Academic and Non-Academic misconduct apply in vUWS.
Non-Academic misconduct in vUWS includes but is not limited to: harassing, vilifying, abusing or threatening
students or staff, bullying or disparaging students or staff, inappropriate conduct. Problems, complaints or
concerns should be directed to the unit coordinator, privately by email, telephone or in person. You can read
more about the UWS Student Non-Academic Misconduct Policy at:
http://policies.uws.edu.au/view.current.php?id=00104
Your unit coordinator, lecturer or tutor will provide more detailed guidelines for the appropriate use of vUWS
in your unit.
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Page 31 of 34
What is Academic Misconduct?
Academic Misconduct may involve one or more of the following:
Plagiarism
Plagiarism involves submitting or presenting work in a unit as if it were the student's own work done expressly
for that particular unit when, in fact, it was not. Most commonly, plagiarism exists when:
a) the work submitted or presented was done, in whole or in part, by an individual other than the one
submitting or presenting the work;
b) parts of the work are taken from another source without reference to the original author; or
c) the whole work, such as an essay, is copied from another source such as a website or another student's
essay.
Acts of plagiarism may occur deliberately or inadvertently
Inadvertent plagiarism occurs through inappropriate application or use of material without reference to the
original source or author. In these instances, it should be clear that the student did not have the intention to
deceive. The University views inadvertent plagiarism as an opportunity to educate students about the
appropriate academic conventions in their field of study.
Deliberate plagiarism occurs when a student, using material from another source and presenting it as his or
her own, has the intention to deceive. The University views a deliberate act of plagiarism as a serious breach
of academic standards of behaviour for which severe penalties will be imposed.
Collusion
Collusion includes inciting, assisting, facilitating, concealing or being involved in plagiarism, cheating or other
academic misconduct with others.
Cheating
Cheating includes, but is not limited to:
a) dishonest or attempted dishonest conduct during an examination, such as speaking to other candidates
or otherwise communicating with them;
b) bringing into the examination room any textbook, notebook, memorandum, other written material or
mechanical or electronic device (including mobile phones), or any other item, not authorised by the
examiner;
c) writing an examination or part of it, or consulting any person or materials outside the confines of the
examination room, without permission to do so;
d) leaving answer papers exposed to view, or persistent attempts to read other students' examination
papers; or
e) cheating in take-home examinations, which includes, but is not limited to:
f) making available notes, papers or answers in connection with the examination (in whatever form) to
others without the permission of the relevant lecturer;
g) receiving answers, notes or papers in connection with the examination (in whatever form) from another
student, or another source, without the permission of the relevant lecturer; and
h) unauthorised collaboration with another person or student in the formulation of an assessable
component of work.
For the full definition of academic misconduct and the consequences of such behaviour, students are advised
to read the Misconduct - Student Academic Misconduct Policy in its entirety.
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Page 32 of 34
Assignment Cover Sheet
School of Humanities and Communication Arts
Student name:
Student number:
Unit name and number:
Tutorial group:
Tutorial day and time:
Lecturer/Tutor:
Title of assignment:
Length:
Date due:
Date submitted:
Campus enrolment:
Declaration:
 I hold a copy of this assignment if the original is lost or damaged
 I hereby certify that no part of this assignment or product has been copied from any other student’s
work or from any other source except where due acknowledgement is made in the assignment
 I hereby certify that no part of this assignment or product has been submitted by me in another
(previous or current) assessment, except where appropriately referenced, and with prior permission
from the Lecturer/Tutor/ Unit Co-ordinator for this unit.
 No part of the assignment/product has been written/produced for me by any other person except
where collaboration has been authorised by the subject lecturer/tutor concerned
 I am aware that this work will be reproduced and submitted to plagiarism detection software
programs for the purpose of detecting possible plagiarism (which may retain a copy on its
database for future plagiarism checking)
Signature:______________________________________
Note: An examiner or lecturer/tutor has the right to not mark this assignment if the above declaration
has not been signed.
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Page 33 of 34
Professional Writing and Editing 101929 Spring 2015
Page 34 of 34