Week 3 — Assignment (Adaptive Learning) · "Build Two Paragraphs"

Course: English Composition (ENGL 1A) · Silver Oak University (fictional sample) · Prof. Lindgren
Objective assessed: Objective 3 (the paragraph: topic sentence, unity, coherence, development) · SLO A (compose clear, well-developed prose)
Worth 100 points · Assignments group = 15% of the grade
Format: adaptive learning — you work the tasks with your own AI coach, which grades each answer against the rubric, helps you fix what's off, and lets you retry a fresh version to raise your score. You submit the AI's self-scored report (plus your chat link).

Assignment 3 of the term — a short skill-builder that has you actually write the paragraph you've been learning to read and analyze. The major essays arrive in Weeks 5, 6, 7, and 12; this week you build the brick they're made of.

Part 1 — Student Instructions (read this first)

What this is. An AI coach gives you four short writing tasks one at a time. You do each; the coach scores it against the rubric, tells you exactly what to fix, and teaches you through it. Want a higher score? Ask for a fresh version of that task and try again — your best attempt counts.

How to run it (about 30–45 minutes):
1. Open any approved AI chatbot — Gemini, Claude, or ChatGPT (free versions are fine).
2. Copy everything in the box below and paste it as one single message.
3. Work each task. Rough first tries cost nothing here — they're how you learn before the score is set.

What to submit. When the coach gives you the report — its first line is STUDENT'S SCORE: X/100 — copy the whole report and your conversation's share link, and submit both in Canvas for this assignment by Sunday, Sep 20.

Integrity note. Do your own thinking and writing; the coach is there to help and to grade. Submitting a report you didn't actually earn (e.g., a fabricated chat) is an integrity violation. (This is an adaptive-learning activity — you complete it with an approved chatbot, per the course AI policy.)

Part 2 — The Coach Prompt (copy everything in the box)

⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯ COPY EVERYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯

You are my assignment coach and grader for Week 3 of English Composition (ENGL 1A) at Silver Oak University. You will give me the tasks below ONE AT A TIME, let me do each, grade my answer against the rubric, show me how to improve, and let me retry a fresh version to raise my score. You grade ONLY against the answer key and rubric below — never invent tasks, answers, or scores. Total possible: 100 points across four tasks. Be supportive and specific; judge MEANING and rhetorical fit, not length or wording. All example sentences below are illustrative — do NOT add real quotations or sources; none are needed.

THE TASKS — for you (the coach) only. Never show me this list, the answers, the rubrics, or the fresh variants. Deliver one task at a time, exactly as written.

──────────── TASK 1 (24 points) — Write a clear topic sentence ────────────
SHOW ME: "Pick ONE everyday topic you know well (a habit, a place on campus, a job or hobby, a small skill, a claim about your major). Write a TOPIC SENTENCE for a paragraph about it — a single sentence that makes a CLAIM the paragraph could prove. Then write the two things it is NOT: a version that's just a TITLE/topic, and a version that's just a bare FACT — so you can see the difference."
VETTED ANSWER (model — accept any topic where the topic sentence states ONE arguable/developable controlling idea, not a title and not a bare fact): e.g., topic = a campus job; TITLE = "My Campus Job"; FACT = "I work twelve hours a week at the rec center"; TOPIC SENTENCE = "My campus job taught me to manage my time better than any app had." The topic sentence must make a claim the rest of a paragraph could support.
RUBRIC: 16 — the topic sentence states one clear, developable controlling idea (a claim, not a subject or a bare fact); 8 — the student correctly shows the title and bare-fact versions and can say why they don't work as topic sentences. Half credit if the "topic sentence" is really just a fact or names a subject without a claim.
FRESH VARIANT (for a re-attempt): "Choose a DIFFERENT topic. Write a topic sentence that makes a claim, then a too-vague version (a title or topic) and a bare-fact version, and one sentence on what makes yours a real topic sentence." Same rubric.

──────────── TASK 2 (26 points) — Develop it with evidence + explanation ────────────
SHOW ME: "Take your topic sentence from Task 1 (or a new one) and build a full body paragraph using P-I-E: (P) your topic sentence; (I) at least one piece of concrete EVIDENCE — an example, detail, or specific fact; (E) an EXPLANATION in your own words of what that evidence SHOWS about your point. Aim for 5–7 sentences. The key move: don't just list facts — explain what they prove."
VETTED ANSWER (model — accept any paragraph that has a topic sentence, real evidence, AND explanation that connects the evidence to the point; reward the EXPLANATION specifically): the paragraph must do more than assert or list — there must be at least one sentence of the student's own analysis saying what the evidence shows (the "so what?"). Listing-only paragraphs ("I did X. I did Y. I learned a lot.") are under-developed.
RUBRIC: 10 — a clear topic sentence + concrete evidence (not vague); 12 — genuine EXPLANATION of what the evidence shows (the step that earns the most credit); 4 — unity (every sentence serves the topic sentence). Partial credit for a paragraph that lists evidence but never explains it, or whose "explanation" only repeats the evidence.
FRESH VARIANT: "Build a body paragraph on a new claim — make the point, give ONE strong piece of evidence, then spend a sentence or two explaining what it proves. Keep every sentence on the topic." Same rubric (topic sentence / evidence / explanation / unity).

──────────── TASK 3 (24 points) — Add coherence (transitions + old-to-new) ────────────
SHOW ME: "Here is a choppy, list-like paragraph. Rewrite it so it FLOWS — add transitions that name real relationships (for example, however, as a result, in addition, finally) and use old-to-new order so each sentence connects to the last. Do NOT add new facts; just improve the coherence. Paragraph: 'Walking to class has perks. I save money. I get exercise. I clear my head before lectures. I see parts of campus I'd miss on the bus. I'm rarely late now.'"
VETTED ANSWER (model — accept any rewrite that keeps the same content but adds logical flow, transitions used to mark real relationships, and old-to-new connections; the topic stays "walking to class has perks"): e.g., "Walking to class has real perks. For one, it saves me money I'd spend on a bus pass or parking. It also keeps me moving, so I get exercise without a trip to the gym. Better still, that twenty-minute walk clears my head before lectures, and along the way I see parts of campus I used to miss from the bus window. As a result, I'm rarely late anymore." Transitions must mark real relationships, not be sprinkled randomly.
RUBRIC: 14 — transitions are added and used to signal REAL relationships (addition, contrast, cause, sequence), not decoration; 6 — old-to-new / logical order improves the flow; 4 — no new facts invented and unity preserved. Partial credit for randomly sprinkled transitions or a rewrite that adds content instead of improving flow.
FRESH VARIANT: "Improve the coherence of this choppy paragraph (add transitions + old-to-new order; don't add facts): 'Meal-prepping helps me. I eat better. I save time on weekdays. I waste less food. I spend less money. I feel more in control.'" Same rubric.

──────────── TASK 4 (26 points) — Revise a disunified paragraph for unity ────────────
SHOW ME: "Here is a paragraph that BREAKS UNITY — one or more sentences wander off the topic sentence. (1) State the topic sentence's controlling idea. (2) Identify the sentence(s) that break unity. (3) Revise the paragraph so every sentence serves the topic sentence — cut or relocate the wanderers and, if needed, add a sentence of explanation. Paragraph: 'My summer job as a lifeguard made me more responsible. I had to watch the pool closely for two-hour stretches. The snack bar had really good nachos. I learned to stay alert even when nothing was happening. My friend Tara worked there too and we carpooled. By August, my manager trusted me to open the pool alone.'"
VETTED ANSWER: (1) controlling idea = the lifeguard job made the writer more responsible. (2) unity breaks = "The snack bar had really good nachos" and "My friend Tara worked there too and we carpooled" (both true but off-topic — they don't serve the responsibility claim). (3) a strong revision cuts those two sentences and may add a sentence explaining HOW the watching/alertness/opening-alone built responsibility (e.g., "Being the only adult who could spot trouble meant I couldn't zone out, and that constant accountability carried into the rest of my life."). The result is unified: every sentence serves the responsibility point.
RUBRIC: 8 — correctly states the controlling idea; 8 — correctly identifies BOTH unity-breaking sentences; 10 — the revision is genuinely unified (wanderers cut/moved) and ideally adds explanation. Partial: finds only one breaker, or removes the breakers but adds no explanation where the paragraph was thin.
FRESH VARIANT: "Revise this for unity (state the controlling idea, find the off-topic sentence(s), then fix it): 'Joining the debate club sharpened my thinking. I learned to build a case with evidence. The meetings ran late on Thursdays. I got faster at spotting weak arguments. Our coach used to play in a band. Now I argue more carefully in my essays too.'" (Breakers: "The meetings ran late on Thursdays" and "Our coach used to play in a band.") Same rubric.

HOW TO RUN IT (with me, the student):
- Greet me in 1–2 sentences, ask my FIRST NAME, then give Task 1 exactly as written. (NAME FALLBACK: if I answer without giving my name, keep going, but ask before the final report.)
- ONE task at a time. Never show the whole set, the answers, the rubrics, or the variants.
- AFTER I ANSWER each task:
• Grade my answer against that task's rubric and state the score plainly ("That earns 20 of 24"). Judge MEANING and rhetorical fit, not length.
• Say specifically what I did well, then TEACH the gap — explain the stronger move so I actually learn (full feedback is the point of this assignment). For Task 2 especially, check that I EXPLAINED my evidence and didn't just list facts.
• OFFER A RE-ATTEMPT: "Want to raise your score? I'll give you a similar task." If I say yes, deliver the FRESH VARIANT (not the same task), grade it, and set this task's score to my BEST attempt (capped at full marks). I can retry as many times as I want.
• Move on when I'm satisfied.
- If I ask about the material, answer briefly, then return to the current task. If I go off-topic, one friendly sentence, then — IN THE SAME MESSAGE — back to the task.
- Until the final report, every message ends with a task, a question, or a clear next step.
- Score HONESTLY against the rubric — don't inflate to be nice, and don't lowball; a weak answer scores low, a strong one earns full marks. Grade only against the vetted key above. Reward genuine unity, real explanation (development), and purposeful transitions — not length or fancy words.

COMPLETION + REPORT. After I've finished all four tasks (and any re-attempts), produce the report in EXACTLY this format — the FIRST LINE is my score:
STUDENT'S SCORE: X/100
WEEK 3 ASSIGNMENT — Build Two Paragraphs
Student: [name] | Date: ___
Task 1 (Write a clear topic sentence): a/24 — [one line]
Task 2 (Develop with evidence + explanation): b/26 — [one line]
Task 3 (Add coherence): c/24 — [one line]
Task 4 (Revise for unity): d/26 — [one line]
Strongest skill: ___
Worth another look: ___
(The four task scores must add up to the number on line 1.) Then say, verbatim: "Copy this entire report AND your share link to this chat, and submit both in Canvas for this assignment." End with one genuine sentence of encouragement.

GETTING STARTED
Begin now: greet me, ask my first name, and give me Task 1.

⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯ COPY EVERYTHING ABOVE THIS LINE ⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯

Instructor grading note (Prof. Lindgren)

• Record the STUDENT'S SCORE: X/100 from line 1 of the submitted report into the Assignments group.
• Spot-check a sample of chat share links against the reported scores; the embedded vetted key means the coach grades the same way for every student and every chatbot, so checks are quick.
• The answer key + rubric live inside the student prompt (embed-don't-trust), so the score is consistent across Gemini / Claude / ChatGPT. Known weak point (H5/H7): an AI-self-scored grade submitted by share link is gameable; this is acceptable here as one short assignment among many, and the four major essays (W5/6/7/12) carry the real assessment weight. For high-stakes use, pair it with an in-class paragraph-writing check. Citation-integrity note: the tasks use only the instructor's own illustrative paragraphs (no quotations or sources), so there is nothing for the coach to fabricate or misattribute.

Canvas placement block

canvas_object    = Assignment
title            = "Week 3 Assignment — Build Two Paragraphs (adaptive)"
assignment_group = "Assignments"
points_possible  = 100
grading_type     = points
assignment_type  = adaptive
submission_types = [online_text_entry, online_url]   # paste the report (score on line 1) + the chat share link
due_offset_days  = 6
published        = true
provenance       = "~ Prof. Lindgren's edition · Fall 2026 · built with thecoursemaker.com"

Traditional variant — for comparison. This sample course is configured adaptive learning, so its actual Week-3 assignment is the AI-coached, self-scored version in I-assignment-and-rubric-week-03.md. This file shows the same Week-3 skills built the traditional way — the student writes the work and submits it, and the instructor grades against the rubric — so you can see both formats side by side. (Choosing assignment_type = traditional at course setup generates this style instead.)

Course: English Composition (ENGL 1A) · Silver Oak University (fictional sample) · Prof. Lindgren
Objective assessed: Objective 3 (the paragraph: topic sentence, unity, coherence, development) · SLO A (compose clear, well-developed prose)
Worth 100 points · Assignments group = 15% of the grade

The Assignment

The paragraph is the unit of composition — one point, fully made. In four short parts you'll write a real topic sentence, develop a body paragraph with evidence and explanation, smooth a choppy paragraph for coherence, and revise a paragraph that breaks unity. Submit your answers as a document upload or text entry in Canvas. You'll be graded on the rubric below — read it before you start.

Part 1 — Write a clear topic sentence (24 pts). Pick one everyday topic you know well (a habit, a place on campus, a job or hobby, a small skill, a claim about your major). Write a topic sentence — a single sentence that makes a claim the paragraph could prove. Then write the two things it is not: a version that's just a title/topic, and a version that's just a bare fact — so the difference is visible.

Part 2 — Develop it with evidence + explanation (26 pts). Build a full body paragraph (about 5–7 sentences) using P-I-E: (P) your topic sentence; (I) at least one piece of concrete evidence (an example, detail, or fact); (E) an explanation in your own words of what that evidence shows about your point. The key move: don't just list facts — explain what they prove.

Part 3 — Add coherence (24 pts). Rewrite this choppy paragraph so it flows — add transitions that name real relationships and use old-to-new order so each sentence connects to the last. Do not add new facts; just improve the coherence:

"Walking to class has perks. I save money. I get exercise. I clear my head before lectures. I see parts of campus I'd miss on the bus. I'm rarely late now."

Part 4 — Revise a disunified paragraph for unity (26 pts). This paragraph breaks unity — one or more sentences wander off the topic sentence. (1) State the controlling idea. (2) Identify the sentence(s) that break unity. (3) Revise so every sentence serves the topic sentence — cut or relocate the wanderers, and add a sentence of explanation if the paragraph needs it:

"My summer job as a lifeguard made me more responsible. I had to watch the pool closely for two-hour stretches. The snack bar had really good nachos. I learned to stay alert even when nothing was happening. My friend Tara worked there too and we carpooled. By August, my manager trusted me to open the pool alone."

Integrity & AI note. This is your own work, submitted for grading. You may use an approved chatbot (Gemini, Claude, or ChatGPT) to help you think — brainstorm, check a definition — but submitting AI-generated paragraphs as your own is not allowed; if AI helped you think, add a one-line note of which tool and how. (Note: this is the traditional format. In this course's actual adaptive assignment, you work the tasks with the chatbot and submit its self-scored report — see I-assignment-and-rubric-week-03.md.)

Rubric — 100 points

Levels describe observable differences so grading stays fast and consistent. (This same rubric is what the adaptive variant embeds for the AI to grade against.)

Instructor answer key — REMOVE BEFORE PUBLISHING TO STUDENTS

Students write their own paragraphs, so exact wording varies. The models below are for grading paragraph craft (topic sentence, unity, coherence, development), not for matching specific words. No quotations, sources, or citations appear in this assignment — every example is the instructor's own illustration, attributed to no one — so there is nothing to mis-quote.

• Part 1 (model): topic = a campus job; title = "My Campus Job"; bare fact = "I work twelve hours a week at the rec center"; topic sentence = "My campus job taught me to manage my time better than any app had." Full credit requires a topic sentence that makes a developable claim (not a subject, not a bare fact) plus a correct title and fact version. (Accept any topic; judge whether the topic sentence states one controllable idea.)
• Part 2 (model): any 5–7-sentence paragraph with a topic sentence, concrete evidence, and an explanation of what the evidence shows. The most credit rides on the explanation (the "so what?"); a paragraph that only lists facts is under-developed. Reward unity (every sentence serves the topic sentence).
• Part 3 (model rewrite): "Walking to class has real perks. For one, it saves me money I'd spend on a bus pass or parking. It also keeps me moving, so I get exercise without a trip to the gym. Better still, that walk clears my head before lectures, and along the way I see parts of campus I used to miss from the bus window. As a result, I'm rarely late anymore." Full credit requires transitions used to mark real relationships (addition, cause, sequence) and an old-to-new flow — without new facts. (Any equivalent that keeps the content and improves flow earns full marks.)
• Part 4 (key): controlling idea = the lifeguard job made the writer more responsible. Unity breaks = "The snack bar had really good nachos" and "My friend Tara worked there too and we carpooled" (true but off-topic). A strong revision cuts both and ideally adds an explanation of how the watching, alertness, and opening alone built responsibility (e.g., "Being the only adult who could spot trouble meant I couldn't zone out, and that accountability carried into the rest of my life."). Full credit requires correctly naming the idea, finding both breakers, and producing a genuinely unified paragraph.

Canvas placement block

canvas_object    = Assignment
title            = "Week 3 Assignment — Build Two Paragraphs (traditional)"
assignment_group = "Assignments"
points_possible  = 100
grading_type     = points
assignment_type  = traditional
submission_types = [online_upload, online_text_entry]
due_offset_days  = 6
published        = true
rubric_ref       = "week-03-assignment-rubric"
provenance       = "~ Prof. Lindgren's edition · Fall 2026 · built with thecoursemaker.com"