One-Shot Submission: User Documentation Revision & Reflection Memo

  • Due No Due Date
  • Points 1
  • Submitting a file upload
  • File Types pdf
  • Attempts 0
  • Allowed Attempts 2

0

Rubric

Find Rubric
Keep in mind that 16 students have already been assessed using this rubric. Changing it will affect their evaluations.
User Documentation Revision and Reflection Memo Rubric
User Documentation Revision and Reflection Memo Rubric
Criteria Ratings
Edit criterion description
Meets Assignment Basic Expectations
My project meets the basic expectations of the assignment: (1) It revises an existing piece of user documentation that someone in my intended career would use and that meets the Website Criteria included in the assignment. (2) It includes a Reflection Memo that explains the changes I made in the user documentation revision. (3) It has been submitted as a PDF with the layout and formatting
Edit rating Delete rating
Exceeds Expectations
The document thoroughly revises a relevant piece of user documentation that someone in my intended career field would use. It meets all of the website criteria. The project also includes a well-structured reflection memo. The project has been submitted as a PDF that shows the layout and formatting accurately.
Edit rating Delete rating
Yes
The document meets the core requirements of the assignment, including an appropriate user documentation revision and a reflection memo. The project has been submitted as a PDF that shows the layout and formatting accurately.
Edit rating Delete rating
Almost There
The document includes the necessary revision and reflection memo. The project has not been submitted as a PDF.
Edit rating Delete rating
Needs Work
The document includes the necessary revision and reflection memo. The user documentation is generally acceptable, but it’s not clear that someone in the intended career field would use it. The webpage does not meet the Website Criteria.
Edit rating Delete rating
Missing
The document does not revise an appropriate piece of user documentation or lacks the required reflection memo.
Edit criterion description
Revises All 6 Areas of User Documentation
My user documentation revision addresses all the required areas: (1) Plain Language (Writing), (2) Document Design, (3) Length, (4) Ethical Considerations, (5) Legal Considerations, and (6) Cultural Considerations
Edit rating Delete rating
Exceeds Expectations
The revision thoughtfully integrates principles of plain language, document design, length, and ethical, legal, and cultural considerations, demonstrating strong attention to detail and user needs.
Edit rating Delete rating
Yes
The document sufficiently addresses all six required areas, though some aspects may benefit from additional refinement or elaboration.
Edit rating Delete rating
Almost There
Most areas are addressed, but one or more may be underdeveloped or need further revision.
Edit rating Delete rating
Needs Work
The revision does not fully address multiple areas. It does not address plain language, document design, ethical, legal, or cultural considerations, or the needs of intercultural audiences.
Edit rating Delete rating
Missing
The revision does not account for the required areas or lacks depth in its approach. The original version of the user documentation is not linked to, so comparison of the revision is not possible.
Edit criterion description
Follows Reflection Memo Format & Design
My reflection memo begins with required memo headers and uses a clear and specific subject line. It uses standard memo format and document design, with appropriate spacing, headings, and page numbers.
Edit rating Delete rating
Exceeds Expectations
The memo is formatted professionally with clear memo headers and a well-defined subject line that effectively conveys its purpose.
Edit rating Delete rating
Yes
The memo includes the necessary memo headers and a subject line, though minor refinements may improve clarity or alignment with standard conventions.
Edit rating Delete rating
Almost There
The memo format is not accurate. The memo does not use appropriate line spacing. Page numbers are missing. Headings do not show adequate contrast from the rest of the text.
Edit rating Delete rating
Needs Work
The memo does not fully adhere to the expected format, with missing or unclear headers and subject lines. The memo does not use appropriate line spacing. Page numbers are missing. Headings do not show adequate contrast from the rest of the text.
Edit rating Delete rating
Missing
The required memo elements are missing. The document is not a memo. The document is missing memo headers. The memo does not include headings or expected sections. The document includes a closing, which is not appropriate for memo format.
Edit criterion description
Introduces the Reflection Memo Effectively
My reflection memo introduces the user documentation, providing a link to the original version (or attaching a copy), and ending with a purpose statement.
Edit rating Delete rating
Exceeds Expectations
The memo provides a clear, engaging introduction, including a working link to the original documentation and a concise, well-crafted purpose statement.
Edit rating Delete rating
Yes
The introduction includes the necessary elements. It includes a link to the original documentation and a purpose statement.
Edit rating Delete rating
Almost There
The introduction is present but may lack a direct link, a clear purpose statement, or smooth readability.
Edit rating Delete rating
Needs Work
The introduction is underdeveloped, missing key details such as a working link or a clear purpose statement.
Edit rating Delete rating
Missing
The introduction is missing or does not provide sufficient context.
Edit criterion description
Includes All 4 Reflection Memo Sections
My reflection memo includes the following sections, with appropriate headings, explanations (including references to readings and related footnote documentation), and examples to show the improvements I’ve made: (1) Plain Language Revision, (2) Redesign, (3) Ethical, Legal, and Cultural Considerations, and (4) Rhetorical Analysis.
Edit rating Delete rating
Exceeds Expectations
The memo is well-organized with clearly labeled sections that provide thorough explanations and concrete examples. The memo masterfully demonstrates the improvements to the original documentation.
Edit rating Delete rating
Yes
All required sections are present and sufficiently explained. Headings are present and show clear contrast with the rest of the text. Examples from the original and revised documentation show the improvements to the documentation.
Edit rating Delete rating
Almost There
Most sections include clear explanations and examples, but one or more lacks depth or specific examples that show improvements to the documentation.
Edit rating Delete rating
Needs Work
The memo does not fully develop multiple sections, making it difficult to understand the rationale behind the changes. Examples are missing or described only. The memo does not show the improvements to the documentation.
Edit rating Delete rating
Missing
Required sections are absent or extremely underdeveloped.
Edit criterion description
Concludes Reflection Memo with Summary & Contact Info
My reflection memo ends with a conclusion that reviews my evaluation of the original document, summarizes how my changes have improved the document, and provides contact information.
Edit rating Delete rating
Exceeds Expectations
The conclusion effectively synthesizes the key changes, demonstrates reflection on the revision process, and provides clear contact information.
Edit rating Delete rating
Yes
The conclusion meets expectations by summarizing the evaluation and changes made and providing contact information.
Edit rating Delete rating
Almost There
The conclusion is present but may lack a comprehensive review of changes or a clearly stated evaluation of the original document.
Edit rating Delete rating
Needs Work
The conclusion does not sufficiently review the evaluation, changes, or is missing contact information.
Edit rating Delete rating
Missing
The conclusion is missing.