1
DE LA SALLE UNIVERSITY
ENGLISH COMMUNICATION SYLLABUS
COLLEGE: CED
DEPARTMENT: DEAL
COURSE CODE: ENGLCOM
CLASS DAYS AND CLASS TIME: ___________________ ROOM: __________________
INSTRUCTOR: ________________________________________________________________
(Name, contact details and consultation hours)
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
This course (ENGLCOM or ENGLISH COMMUNICATION) (Writing Component) is a foundational
course that equips freshman students with the necessary academic reading, writing, and viewing skills
needed to become multi-literate and autonomous learners, and engaged citizens in the 21st century. As the
first of two components of the English One program (the other one being ENGLCOM-RVLC or Reading,
Viewing and Language Component) and the first GE English course in the students’ curriculum,
ENGLCOM-WC is anchored on transformative as well as self-directed learning frameworks.
RUBRICS:
WC LO1: Extended Definition Essay (15%)
Modified from www.binghamminers.org, www.rcampus.com, and www.mrgleason.webs.com
0-69
70-80
81-90
Evidence
20%
There is unnecessarily
more than one definition or
the definition is too vague
to understand.
No evidence was given to
support the main idea.
The definition is personal
but lacks thorough
explanation or
exploration.
Only a little evidence
was provided. It does not
support the main idea
very well.
The definition is personal
and has multiple elements
but could be discussed or
elaborated on further.
Some evidence was given
to support the main idea
but not enough.
Style/Voice/Word Choice
15%
No distinguishable voice or
forced/unnatural voice.
Paper reads well with
developing style and
voice.
Organization
20%
The essay is very messy.
There is no clear order to
the writing.
Grammar and Mechanics
10%
Surface problems are so
frequent that they obscure
meaning. Many sentences
are poorly structured.
Citation
15%
An attempt at citation was
made.
Wordiness, clichés,
and/or vagueness
sometimes muffle the
voice. Tone is
inconsistent.
The essay is only
somewhat organized. It is
a little difficult to read
from one part to the next.
Frequent grammar,
spelling and/or
punctuation errors clutter
paper’s surface. Some
sentences may be
awkward.
An attempt at citation
was made but is missing
either in-text citations or
a works cited page.
Completion/Meaning
20%
ENGLCOM syllabus Rev8 – April 17, 2013
The essay is somewhat
organized. Most parts are
in a logical order.
Surface errors are
minimal and do not
detract from meaning and
readability.
Bibliography and in-text
citations nearly flawless.
91-100
The definition has
distinct depth and is
personal and
complicated.
Good support was given
to the main idea. Facts
and statistics were
supplied from credible
resources.
A consistent voice that is
appropriate for the
paper’s meaning and
engages the reader. The
essay has personality.
The essay is written in a
logical order that the
reader can easily follow
and understand.
Advanced traditional
grammar and mechanics,
except when irregularities
(like fragments) are used
for special effects.
Bibliography and in-text
citations are flawless.
2
WC LO2: Problem-Solution Essay (15%)
Modified from www.rcampus.com and www.mrgleason.webs.com
0-69
70-80
81-90
91-100
The problem is stated in
clear language. It is easy
to recognize and
understand.
The solution is stated in
clear language. It is easy
to recognize and
understand.
Good support was given to
the main idea. Facts and
statistics were supplied
from credible resources.
The audience (readers)
will easily recognize what
they can do to help solve
the problem.
Problem and Solution
25%
The statement of the
problem cannot be found.
The statement of the
solution cannot be found.
The problem is stated but
is difficult to find and
difficult to understand.
The solution is stated but
is difficult to find and
difficult to understand.
The problem is stated,
but it is a little difficult to
understand.
The solution is stated,
but it is a little difficult to
understand.
Evidence
15%
No evidence was given to
support the main idea.
Some evidence was
given to support the main
idea but not enough.
Call to Action
10%
No call to action was given
to tell readers what they can
do.
Style/Voice/Word Choice
15%
No distinguishable voice or
forced/unnatural voice.
Only a little evidence was
provided. It does not
support the main idea very
well.
The call to action is very
weak. Readers probably
won’t understand what
they can do to help the
problem.
Wordiness, clichés, and/or
vagueness sometimes
muffle the voice. Tone is
inconsistent.
Organization
15%
The essay is very messy.
There is no clear order to
the writing.
The essay is somewhat
organized. Most parts are
in a logical order.
Grammar and Mechanics
10%
Surface problems are so
frequent that they obscure
meaning. Many sentences
are poorly structured.
Citation
10%
An attempt at citation was
made.
The essay is only
somewhat organized. It is
a little difficult to read
from one part to the next.
Frequent grammar,
spelling and/or
punctuation errors clutter
paper’s surface. Some
sentences may be
awkward.
An attempt at citation was
made but is missing either
in-text citations or a works
cited page.
ENGLCOM syllabus Rev8 – April 17, 2013
The call to action is not
very recognizable. The
readers might not
understand what they can
do to help the problem.
Paper reads well with
developing style and
voice.
Surface errors are
minimal and do not
detract from meaning
and readability.
Bibliography and in-text
citations nearly flawless.
A consistent voice that is
appropriate for the paper’s
meaning and engages the
reader. The essay has
personality.
The essay is written in a
logical order that the
reader can easily follow
and understand.
Advanced traditional
grammar and mechanics,
except when irregularities
(like fragments) are used
for special effects.
Bibliography and in-text
citations are flawless.
3
WC LO2: Claim-Counterclaim Essay (15%)
Modified from www.rcampus.com and www.mrgleason.webs.com
0-69
70-80
81-90
91-100
States a precise claim that
is provable, grammatically
flawless, and uses a
sophisticated style and
language.
In a logical place in the
paper a counterclaim is
acknowledged. Evidence
surrounding the
counterclaim given and
refuted with more
powerful evidence.
Good support was given to
the main idea. Facts and
statistics were supplied
from credible resources.
A consistent voice that is
appropriate for the paper’s
meaning and engages the
reader. The essay has
personality.
The essay is written in a
logical order that the
reader can easily follow
and understand.
Advanced traditional
grammar and mechanics,
except when irregularities
(like fragments) are used
for special effects.
Claim and Counter Claim
30%
States a claim that is
debatable and provable.
Somewhere in the paper a
counterclaim is mentioned
or alluded to.
States a precise claim that
is debatable and provable.
In a logical place in the
paper a counterclaim is
acknowledged.
States a precise claim
that is provable and
grammatically flawless.
In a logical place in the
paper a counterclaim is
acknowledged. Evidence
surrounding the
counterclaim given.
Evidence
20%
No evidence was given to
support the main idea.
Some evidence was
given to support the main
idea but not enough.
Style/Voice/Word Choice
15%
No distinguishable voice or
forced/unnatural voice.
Only a little evidence was
provided. It does not
support the main idea very
well.
Wordiness, clichés, and/or
vagueness sometimes
muffle the voice. Tone is
inconsistent.
Organization
15%
The essay is very messy.
There is no clear order to
the writing.
The essay is somewhat
organized. Most parts are
in a logical order.
Grammar and Mechanics
10%
Surface problems are so
frequent that they obscure
meaning. Many sentences
are poorly structured.
Citation
10%
An attempt at citation was
made.
The essay is only
somewhat organized. It is
a little difficult to read
from one part to the next.
Frequent grammar,
spelling and/or
punctuation errors clutter
paper’s surface. Some
sentences may be
awkward.
An attempt at citation was
made but is missing either
in-text citations or a works
cited page.
ENGLCOM syllabus Rev8 – April 17, 2013
Paper reads well with
developing style and
voice.
Surface errors are
minimal and do not
detract from meaning
and readability.
Bibliography and in-text
citations nearly flawless.
Bibliography and in-text
citations are flawless.