TECHNICAL WRITING CORRESPONDENCE CASE

Criteria

Ratings

Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOrganization

25 to >23.0 pts

Superior
Very well organized. Includes a highly personalized buffer for the bad news. Provides a coherent justification for the bad news.

23 to >20.0 pts

Strong
Well organized. Includes fairly personalized buffer for the bad news. Provides fairly coherent justification for the bad news.

20 to >18.0 pts

Competent
Decently organized. Includes a somewhat impersonal buffer for the bad news. Provides a somewhat coherent justification for the bad news.

18 to >15.0 pts

Weak
Poorly organized. Includes an impersonal buffer for the bad news. Provides an incoherent or vague justification for the bad news.

15 to >0 pts

Failing
Unorganized. Does not include a buffer for the bad news. Provides no justification for the bad news.

25 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeTone

25 to >23.0 pts

Superior
The tone is professional. The memo is positive overall and in respect to the supervisor.

23 to >20.0 pts

Strong
The tone is mostly professional. The memo is mostly positive overall and somewhat positive in respect to the supervisor.

20 to >18.0 pts

Competent
The tone is somewhat professional. The memo is somewhat positive overall, but neutral in respect to the supervisor.

18 to >15.0 pts

Weak
The tone is mostly unprofessional. The memo is not neutral overall, and is negative in respect to the supervisor.

15 to >0 pts

Failing
The tone is unprofessional. The memo is negative overall and in respect to the supervisor.

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePlan

15 to >14.0 pts

Superior
The memo offers a feasible, coherent, and creative solution to the problem.

14 to >12.0 pts

Strong
The memo offers a mostly feasible, coherent, and somewhat creative solution to the problem.

12 to >11.0 pts

Competent
The memo offers a somewhat feasible, coherent, but uncreative solution to the problem.

11 to >9.0 pts

Weak
The memo offers an infeasible, incoherent, and uncreative solution to the problem.

9 to >0 pts

Failing
The memo does NOT offer any solution to the problem.

15 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAudience

15 to >14.0 pts

Superior
The prose guarantees employee compliance.

14 to >12.0 pts

Strong
The prose likely guarantees employee compliance.

12 to >11.0 pts

Competent
The prose will likely compel some, but not all, employees to comply.

11 to >9.0 pts

Weak
The prose guarantees noncompliance from employees.

9 to >0 pts

Failing
The prose guarantees noncompliance and infuriation of employees.

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFormatting

10 to >9.0 pts

Superior
The document is perfectly formatted as a memo.

9 to >8.0 pts

Strong
It is well formatted as a memo with few formatting errors.

8 to >7.0 pts

Competent
It is decently formatted as a memo with several formatting errors, but still recognizable as a memo.

7 to >6.0 pts

Weak
It is poorly formatted as a memo with more than 5 formatting errors and is barely recognizable as a memo.

6 to >0 pts

Failing
It is not in memo format.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMechanics

10 to >9.0 pts

Superior
The memo includes nearly flawless grammar and punctuation that do not affect the memo’s readability.

9 to >8.0 pts

Strong
It includes strong grammar and punctuation; includes some minor errors that do not affect readability.

8 to >7.0 pts

Competent
It includes acceptable grammar and punctuation; errors mildly affect readability.

7 to >6.0 pts

Weak
It includes multiple grammatical and punctuation mistakes that affect readability.

6 to >0 pts

Failing
It includes so many grammar and punctuation errors that make the document fail in its goal.

Total Points: 100