EDITING THE LETTERS AND A PERSUASIVE MESSAGE

I have been asked by my professor to edit and rewrite my bad news letter and my persuasive message.  Marking Guidelines: Letter granting a claim (15 marks) Readability (3 marks) 3 The letter’s language is clear, concise, and readable. It avoids jargon, stuffy phrases, and the passive voice. Your sentences vary in length and construction. 2 Most of the letter’s language is clear, concise, and readable. Some sentences could be more direct or vivid. 1 The letter often feels opaque, wordy, or bureaucratic. 0 Many sentences are difficult to interpret. “You” attitude (3 marks) 3 The letter focuses on what Mr. Brogol cares about, in a way he can understand, while still accomplishing your store’s goals. It emphasizes the positive without sounding insincere or being deceitful. 2 The letter maintains an audience-centred approach most of the time. You may have made some points Mr. Brogol would have found irrelevant. Alternatively, by being too sensitive, you may have undermined the purpose of the message by not getting him to care for the pan. 1 The letter recognizes Mr. Brogol’s needs, but emphasizes your store’s needs more. 0 The letter ignores Mr. Brogol’s needs. Tone (2 marks) 2 The letter is courteous and polite, without being servile. 1 A few word choices could offend a sensitive reader. 0 The letter would offend many readers. Organization (3 marks) 3 Your points are arranged in an order that serves the message’s purpose and your audience’s needs. You support your major points with subpoints and evidence. You correctly select and follow the direct or indirect approach. 2 Your audience would quickly find what they need to know. Shifting a few points around would improve the message. 1 Your audience might have trouble following your message or understanding its importance. The letter takes much too long to get to the point. Unrelated ideas are grouped together. 0 The letter needs significant reorganization. Major points should be in a different order. Subpoints and evidence are grouped arbitrarily. Important information is missing. Spelling, grammar, punctuation, and formatting (2 marks) 2 The letter uses correct spelling, grammar, and punctuation. The letter correctly follows the block format. 1 The letter has some significant spelling, grammar, punctuation, or formatting errors that could be embarrassing or obscure your meaning. 0 The letter has many significant spelling, grammar, punctuation, or formatting errors. Summary of changes (2 marks) 2 You clearly and concisely summarize how this letter has changed since Assignment 3. You also explain why you decided against some advice offered by reviewers, if applicable. 1 You provide a list of changes, rather a summary. You do not explain why you decided against some advice offered by reviewers. 0 You do not summarize your changes or explain your decisions. Email delivering bad news (15 marks) Readability (3 marks) 3 The email’s language is clear, concise, and readable. It avoids jargon, stuffy phrases, and the unnecessary use of the passive voice. Your sentences vary in length and construction. 2 Most of the email’s language is clear, concise, and readable. Some sentences could be put more plainly or vividly without undermining your purpose. 1 The letter often feels opaque, wordy, or bureaucratic. 0 Many sentences are difficult to interpret. “You” attitude (3 marks) 3 The email focuses on what your audience cares about, in a way they can understand, while still accomplishing your goals. You keep your team on your side without demonizing the people who employ you. The email emphasizes the positive without sounding insincere or being deceitful. 2 The email maintains an audience-centred approach most of the time. It may neglect the secondary audience. You may have made some points your team would have found irrelevant. 1 The email recognizes your team’s needs, but emphasizes your needs more. 0 The email ignores what your team cares about. Tone (2 marks) 2 The email is courteous and friendly, without being smarmy. 1 The email is respectful, but not as supportive as it could be. It contains one or two inappropriate word choices. 0 The email is discouraging, cold, or could offend. Organization (3 marks) 3 Your points are arranged in an order that serves the message’s purpose and your audience’s needs. You support your major points with subpoints and evidence. You correctly select and follow the direct or indirect approach. You close on a positive note. 2 Shifting a few points around would improve the message. 1 The email needs significant reorganization to be successful. Perhaps the bad news is delivered without a buffer or the email rambles. Unrelated ideas are grouped together. Your audience might have trouble following your message or understanding its importance. 0 Major points should be in a different order. Subpoints and evidence are grouped arbitrarily. Important information is missing. Spelling, grammar, punctuation, and formatting (2 marks) 2 The email uses correct spelling, grammar, punctuation, and formatting. 1 The email has some significant spelling, grammar, punctuation, or formatting errors that could be embarrassing or obscure your meaning. 0 The email has many significant spelling, grammar, punctuation, or formatting errors. Summary of changes (2 marks) 2 You clearly and concisely summarize how this email has changed since Assignment 3. You also explain why you decided against some advice offered by reviewers, if applicable. 1 You provide a list of changes, rather a summary. You do not explain why you decided against some advice offered by reviewers. 0 You do not summarize your changes or explain your decisions. Part Three: Persuade people to volunteer Persuasion (4 marks) 4 You capture your audience’s attention and explain how they would benefit from the mentorship program. The blog post scrupulously maintains the “you” attitude. It balances logical and emotional appeals and anticipates objections. It explains how to volunteer, making it easy to take action. 3 You achieve most of the above goals, but not all of them. 2 The blog post expects little resistance to volunteering. The post might persuade one audience (such as potential mentors), but not the other (potential mentees). 1 The blog post struggles to find reasons to volunteer. The post talks more about the company’s needs than the audience’s. 0 The blog post provides no compelling reason to volunteer. Credibility (2 marks) 2 Your readers have a reason to trust you. You establish common ground and demonstrate you understand their concerns. You make reasonable claims and avoid the hard sell. 1 You provide one or two reasons to believe, but readers would still need to take some arguments on faith. 0 Readers would be skeptical this proposal is in their interests. Tone and word choice (2 marks) 2 The blog post has a personal style and an authentic voice. The language is vivid. 1 The blog post is friendly, but rings false in a few places. It may contain one or two inappropriate word choices. Most language is bland and unconvincing. 0 The tone completely misses the mark; the blog post is rude, cold, or presumptuous. Organization (2 marks) 2 Your points are arranged in an order that serves the message’s purpose and your audience’s needs. You start with interesting points, without asking employees to volunteer too soon. You provide the necessary information without irrelevancies. You support your major points with subpoints and evidence. 1 The blog post needs reorganization to be successful. Your audience might have trouble understanding the mentorship program or your request. 0 Major points should be in a different order. Subpoints and evidence are grouped arbitrarily. Important information is missing. Clarity (2 marks) 2 The blog post’s language is clear and concise. It avoids jargon, stuffy phrases, and the passive voice. 1 Most of the blog post’s language is clear and concise. Some sentences could be put more plainly without undermining your purpose. 0 The blog post often feels opaque, wordy, or bureaucratic. Many sentences are difficult to interpret. Spelling, grammar, and readability (3 marks) 3 The blog post uses correct spelling and grammar. You use headings, white space, lists, and other techniques to make the post easy to read. You identify three of those techniques in the accompanying note. 2 The blog post has a few spelling or grammar errors. You identify the document design techniques you used, but there were other simple formatting changes that would have helped. 1 The blog post has some significant spelling or grammar errors that could be embarrassing or obscure your meaning. You did not identify the document design techniques you used to make the post easier to read. 0 The blog post has significant spelling or grammar errors. You did not use any document design techniques to make it easier to read. Summary of changes (2 marks) 2 You clearly and concisely summarize how this blog post has changed since Assignment 3. You also explain why you decided against some advice offered by reviewers, if applicable. 1 You provide a list of changes, rather a summary. You do not explain why you decided against some advice offered by reviewers. 0 You do not summarize your changes or explain your decisions.

VivekGupta4marked_001586

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
EDITING THE LETTERS AND A PERSUASIVE MESSAGE
Just from $13/Page
Order Essay
Place Order
Grab A 14% Discount on This Paper
Pages (550 words)
Approximate price: -
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)