Author(s): MELO 3D Project Team, 2011
License: This work is licensed under the Creative Commons
Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license,
visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/.
We have reviewed this material in accordance with U.S. Copyright Law and have tried to maximize your
ability to use, share, and adapt it. The citation key on the following slide provides information about how you
may share and adapt this material.
Copyright holders of content included in this material should contact open.michigan@umich.edu with any
questions, corrections, or clarification regarding the use of content.
For more information about how to cite these materials visit http://open.umich.edu/privacy-and-terms-use.
Any medical information in this material is intended to inform and educate and is not a tool for self-diagnosis
or a replacement for medical evaluation, advice, diagnosis or treatment by a healthcare professional. Please
speak to your physician if you have questions about your medical condition.
Viewer discretion is advised: Some medical content is graphic and may not be suitable for all viewers.
Attribution Key
for more information see: http://open.umich.edu/wiki/AttributionPolicy
Use + Share + Adapt
{ Content the copyright holder, author, or law permits you to use, share and adapt. }
Public Domain – Government: Works that are produced by the U.S. Government. (17 USC §
105)
Public Domain – Expired: Works that are no longer protected due to an expired copyright term.
Public Domain – Self Dedicated: Works that a copyright holder has dedicated to the public domain.
Creative Commons – Zero Waiver
Creative Commons – Attribution License
Creative Commons – Attribution Share Alike License
Creative Commons – Attribution Noncommercial License
Creative Commons – Attribution Noncommercial Share Alike License
GNU – Free Documentation License
Make Your Own Assessment
{ Content Open.Michigan believes can be used, shared, and adapted because it is ineligible for copyright. }
Public Domain – Ineligible: Works that are ineligible for copyright protection in the U.S. (17 USC § 102(b)) *laws in
your jurisdiction may differ
{ Content Open.Michigan has used under a Fair Use determination. }
Fair Use: Use of works that is determined to be Fair consistent with the U.S. Copyright Act. (17 USC § 107) *laws in your
jurisdiction may differ
Our determination DOES NOT mean that all uses of this 3rd-party content are Fair Uses and we DO NOT guarantee that
your use of the content is Fair.
To use this content you should do your own independent analysis to determine whether or not your use will be Fair.
LOs for Writing 100
Prepared by Christine Modey & Elizabeth Rodrigues
30 June 2011
Writing 100: Transition to
College Writing
• “The overarching goal of Writing 100 is to help students
become more prepared and confident academic writers as
they develop an e-portfolio that fosters self-reflection and
demonstrates progress in writing.”
• Specific course goals include: developing an effective writing
process, practicing thesis statement development, and
annotating texts to identify arguments, sub-arguments, and
organizational strategy.
Source: “Course Goals and Objectives”
http://www.lsa.umich.edu/sweetland/coursesminor/courses/writing100/coursegoalsandobjectives
Muddiest points
• Writing process: discovering, recording, and organizing one’s
thoughts about a topic
• LO: CUNY Write Site Assignment Key Words: Compare & Contrast
• Creating a thesis: coming up with a thesis statement that
contains an arguable point
• LO: Thesis Builder (by Tom March)
• Critical reading: summarizing another’s argument
• LO: Wisc Online’s Summary LO
• Critical reading: annotating texts: reading to uncover
rhetorical strategies and patterns
• Potential LO: Rhetorical analysis of MLK, Jr.’s Letter from
Birmingham Jail
Writing Process: CUNY Write
Site’s Compare & Contrast LO
Source:
CUNY Write Site
http://writesite.cuny.edu/
Preparation
• Introduces students to
basic patterns of
organization
• Gives the students an
example.
• Clicking generates a
correct answer and a
rationale for that
answer, prompting
students to compare
their own answer &
thought process.
Source:
CUNY Write Site
http://writesite.cuny.edu/
Application
• Walks students
through the
process of using
the organization
concepts
previously
discussed to
structure their own
essay.
• Generates an
outline that can be
printed out.
Source:
CUNY Write Site
http://writesite.cuny.edu/
Wrapping the C & C LO
• Students would need to be given specific directions about
what part of this site full of LOs to complete.
• This LO would work best when used as part of scaffolding for a
larger assignment and used as a pre-writing exercise after the
assignment has been given in class.
• Instructors might want to give students the option of
completing this task in an alternate form—e.g. written
longhand or typed on their own document. Not all students
will want to fill out forms.
Thesis creation: Thesis Builder
• Jumps directly to
application: a
form-driven
exercise in putting
together small
chunks of thought
to form a larger
argument.
Source:
Thesis Builder, Tom March
http://ozline.com/electraguide/thesis.php
The thesis Thesis Builder built…
Source:
Thesis Builder, Tom March
http://ozline.com/electraguide/thesis.php
Wrapping Thesis Builder
• Contextualize the product: not a highly sophisticated
argument, but a working model.
• Explain a couple of different potential uses: example or
starting point.
• Link to an assignment: what is a persuasive essay? What are
the goals of the persuasive essay in this course?
• Compare to other types of thesis statements to make it clear
that this is not a one-size-fits-all solution to writing papers:
how does a thesis for a persuasive essay differ from that of an
essay with a different rhetorical goal?
Critical Reading: Summary LO
• Introduces
key points of
good
summarizing
• Gives
specific tips,
such as
target
length
Source:
Summary Writing, David
Wehmeyer
http://www.wisconline.com/objects/ViewObject
.aspx?ID=TRG2603
One concern: not MERLOT LO, restricted license
Application
• Demos weak
and strong
summaries with
rationale
• Next step is 3
forms
prompting
students to
summarize 3
texts
• No direct
feedback, but
strong/weak
comparison
prompts
reflection
Source:
Summary Writing, David
Wehmeyer
http://www.wisconline.com/objects/ViewObject
.aspx?ID=TRG2603
Wrapping the Summary LO
• Might make most sense as an extra practice option for
students who are struggling, as it is pitched at a basic level. It
might not provide enough intellectual challenge to build a full
lesson around, but it could help some students get more out
of a more in-depth lesson on summary and paraphrase.
• Was written for a technical writing class, so some of the intro
slides mention technical writing specifically. Would need to be
re-contextualized for SWC 100.
Rhetorical Analysis: An LO
waiting to happen
• MERLOT
resource that
currently has a
static
presentation
but that could
be turned into
an LO
• This could be
used as a basis
for evaluating
students’ ID of
strategies in a
different online
format
Source:
Martin Luther King’s Letter
from Birmingham Jail—A
Rhetorical Analysis, Michael
O’Conner
http://www.merlot.org/merlot
/viewMaterial.htm?id=79662
Conclusions
• For the purposes of this presentation, we used existing LOs,
but we still have concerns about the adequacy of existing LOs
to meet the needs of U of M writing students.
• These LOs need extensive wrapping to be incorporated into
SWC 100.
• They might best be thought of as reinforcers or extra practice
for students who desire the structure of an online, formdriven exercise. Teaching complex and individualized
processes like coming up with ideas should leave space for
students to do equivalent exercises in other formats.