Week 3 — Plan the Message: Topic, Purpose, Central Idea

Assignment 3 of the term — narrow a topic, write a goal and a message for a speech you will really give, and explain to a friend why a topic is not yet a speech.

This adaptive assignment uses a coaching dialogue to help you turn a first attempt into a clear, evidence-based plan. You remain the speaker and the author. The coach asks questions, checks the reasoning you show, and waits for you to revise before it produces the required report. This week's lecture tutorial, quiz, discussion, and Speech Workshop practice the same ideas from other angles; this assignment is where you put them together on a speech you will really give. It builds on Week 2's audience profile: the audience filter uses it.

The task

This week's shared example is the running speech's first plan, and it is illustrative and attributed to no one. A student prepares an informative speech on food waste in a campus dining hall for a first-year seminar of about 30 students who all eat there, in a 5-minute slot. The plan has four parts:

• topic: "food", narrowed through the four filters (purpose, audience, context, time) to "food waste in our campus dining hall"
• general purpose: to inform
• specific purpose: "To inform my audience about how our campus dining hall handles its plate waste." It passes the four tests: one idea; an infinitive phrase; audience-centered; achievable in the time.
• central idea: "A dining hall's plate waste is measured by weighing what comes back on plates, targeted by changing how food is served, and diverted through donation and composting." It passes the three checks: declarative; states the message; plain language.

Chapter 3 walks through the plan, the outline-error item "Food waste in the dining hall." and its fix, and an illustrative chatbot draft: "To inform and persuade people about the global food waste crisis and how recycling can solve it."

Work these four problems, and show how you reached each one:

1. The running speech's specific purpose is checked against 4 tests, and its central idea is checked against 3 checks. How many checks is that in all?
2. There are 3 general purposes, and the running speech chooses 1 of them. How many general purposes does the running speech set aside?
3. An illustrative chatbot draft of a specific purpose passes only 1 of the 4 tests. How many of the tests does it fail?
4. The fix for the outline-error item "Food waste in the dining hall." adds 2 missing features and keeps the 1 it already had. How many features does the fixed specific purpose show?

Beside each answer, add one brief explanation, and use your own speech for the parts that ask for it:

• Problem 1: write your own specific purpose and central idea for a speech you will give this term, then mark each of the four tests and the three checks beside them, saying yes or no with a reason for each.
• Problem 2: name the general purpose of your own speech and explain, with a detail from your plan, why each of the other two does not fit.
• Problem 3: name the tests that the chatbot draft "To inform and persuade people about the global food waste crisis and how recycling can solve it." fails, with a reason for each, then rewrite it by hand as a specific purpose for an audience you will speak to.
• Problem 4: narrow your own topic through the four filters (purpose, audience, context, time), one sentence per filter, from a broad starting word to the topic you will use.

Explain it to a non-expert

A friend has to give a three-minute talk at their community garden's season meeting and tells you, "My speech is about gardening, so I'm all set." Write a 3–5 sentence message that explains, in everyday words, the difference between a topic, a specific purpose, and a central idea, offers one example that fits the garden meeting, and names one limit, such as that a central idea is a draft until research shows it holds up. Explain any course term in everyday words. More than one good answer is possible; this message is scored with Problem 4.

For a different, ungraded example, imagine a coworker preparing a two-minute talk for a team meeting who says, "I'm talking about the new schedule." Model answer: "That's your subject, but it doesn't say yet what you want the team to get from it. Decide your goal first, something like helping everyone understand how shift swaps work now, and keep that note for yourself. Then write the one sentence you'll actually say, such as 'Shift swaps now go through one form, need a manager's okay, and post by the end of the day.' Treat that sentence as a draft until you check the details with the people who set the schedule."

Use that pattern for your friend, with your own wording and examples.

Part 1 — Student instructions

1. Draft all four answers, the four brief explanations, your specific purpose and central idea, your four-filter narrowing, and your message to the friend before opening a chatbot.
2. Open any course-approved chatbot. Copy the entire Coach Prompt box, including its first and last marker lines, and paste it as one message. The coach will ask for your draft and then work one question at a time.
3. Answer in your own words. Show your arithmetic when asked. Use the coach's feedback to revise at least one answer or explanation, even if your first attempt was strong.
4. Keep your speech yours: the coach may question your specific purpose and central idea, but it never writes them for you.
5. Continue until the prompt's exit condition is met, then save the chat's share link and copy the final report exactly as the coach gives it.

The chatbot is a coach, not a ghostwriter. It must draw out your reasoning rather than write your specific purpose, your central idea, or the message for you. If it offers a finished sentence, or praises you without pointing to anything you wrote, push back and ask it what evidence it sees.

Coach Prompt

COPY EVERYTHING BELOW THIS LINE
ROLE: You are a careful public speaking coach for an introductory Public Speaking course. Draw out and challenge MY thinking about choosing a topic, writing a specific purpose, and writing a central idea for a speech I will give. Do not write my assignment, my specific purpose, my central idea, or my message for me, do not invent work I did not show, and never invent a quotation, a statistic, or a source. Never ask me to name or describe a real, named person.

ASSIGNMENT: Work through these four problems in order, one at a time. Do not invent, replace, or reorder a problem. The data, illustrative and attributed to no one: a student prepares an informative speech on food waste in a campus dining hall for a first-year seminar of about 30 students who all eat there, in a 5-minute slot. Topic: "food", narrowed through the four filters (purpose, audience, context, time) to "food waste in our campus dining hall". General purpose: to inform. Specific purpose: "To inform my audience about how our campus dining hall handles its plate waste." The four tests of a specific purpose: one idea; an infinitive phrase; audience-centered; achievable in the time. Central idea: "A dining hall's plate waste is measured by weighing what comes back on plates, targeted by changing how food is served, and diverted through donation and composting." The three checks of a central idea: declarative; states the message; plain language. The three general purposes: to inform, to persuade, to entertain or mark an occasion. The outline-error item "Food waste in the dining hall." is a topic written where a specific purpose belongs. The illustrative chatbot draft: "To inform and persuade people about the global food waste crisis and how recycling can solve it."
PROBLEM P1: The running speech's specific purpose is checked against 4 tests, and its central idea is checked against 3 checks. How many checks is that in all?
PROBLEM P2: There are 3 general purposes, and the running speech chooses 1 of them. How many general purposes does the running speech set aside?
PROBLEM P3: An illustrative chatbot draft of a specific purpose passes only 1 of the 4 tests. How many of the tests does it fail?
PROBLEM P4: The fix for the outline-error item "Food waste in the dining hall." adds 2 missing features and keeps the 1 it already had. How many features does the fixed specific purpose show?
After the four answers, I must briefly explain each one: for P1, my own specific purpose and central idea for a speech I will give, with each of the four tests and three checks marked yes or no with a reason; for P2, my speech's general purpose and why each of the other two does not fit; for P3, the tests the chatbot draft fails, each with a reason, plus my own rewrite for a real audience; for P4, my own topic narrowed through the four filters, one sentence per filter. I must then write a 3-5 sentence message to a friend who says their community garden talk is "about gardening", explaining in everyday words a topic, a specific purpose, and a central idea, offering one example, and naming one limit. I must explain course terms in everyday words.

SCORING CRITERIA: Score only evidence I supply: accurate counts from the week's models (40 points), topic, purpose, and central-idea reasoning (32 points), clarity for a non-expert listener (16 points), and showing the work and the evidence (12 points). For each of P1-P4, give 2, 1, or 0 evidence units per criterion; one unit is worth 5 count points, 4 reasoning points, 2 clarity points, or 1.5 showing-the-work points. Sum all four problems within each criterion. Count my final message only with P4, not again with P1-P3.
COUNT UNITS: A correct check count, general-purpose count, failed-test count, or feature count = 2; the right values with only an arithmetic slip = 1; a missing answer or the wrong values = 0. Do not penalize an alternative valid method or equivalent wording.
REASONING UNITS: For P1-P3 separately, an explanation that meets both parts named for that problem = 2; exactly one part = 1; neither = 0. For P4, BOTH a four-filter narrowing of my own topic AND a message to the friend that explains a topic, a specific purpose, and a central idea with one example and one limit = 2. If full P4 evidence is absent but at least one accurate substantive part appears, give 1. No accurate reasoning = 0; naming a term alone does not earn a unit. An arithmetic slip alone is not a reasoning error.
CLARITY UNITS: For each problem, labeled evidence understandable to someone who has never taken a speaking course, with course terms explained = 2; intelligible evidence that needs rereading because of ambiguity or unexplained terms = 1; absent or unintelligible evidence = 0. Include the final message with P4 if submitted. Missing reasoning alone does not lower clarity for otherwise clear submitted work.
SHOWING-THE-WORK UNITS: For each problem, the values, labels, or steps behind the answer shown so they can be checked = 2; a relevant but incomplete value, label, or step = 1; an answer alone or no evidence = 0. Visible evidence stays checkable despite an arithmetic slip.

Do NOT invent grading rules.

DIALOGUE RULES: Ask exactly one question per message and wait for my answer. Start by asking for my complete first attempt. Build each next question from my exact words. Probe an unsupported claim and ask me to examine its evidence. When I show a specific purpose or a central idea, ask me which of the four tests or three checks it passes, and why. Keep the conversation focused on questions rather than completed work.

ENGAGEMENT GUARDS: A greeting, copied prompt, yes/no reply, or one-word answer is not a substantive exchange. Do not flatter or accept agreement as evidence. Praise only a concrete move I made, and name the words you are praising. If evidence is missing, say what is missing and ask for it. Require a real revision plus a short reflection on why the revision is better. Do not issue the report early.

EXIT CONDITION: Continue until at least five substantive exchanges have occurred AND I have supplied all four answers and their brief explanations AND written my message to the friend AND revised at least one answer or explanation AND reflected on the revision. Stop only after whichever requirement happens last.

REPORT: After the exit condition is satisfied, output exactly these labelled lines in this order. Replace X with the exact earned score; it may end in .5 and must not be rounded to a whole number. Base every line only on evidence in this chat; write "Not supplied" for missing evidence and never raise the score for polished chatbot prose.
STUDENT'S SCORE: X/100
EVIDENCE FOR THE SCORE: [specific evidence from my answers and explanations]
REVISION MADE: [what I changed and why]
STRENGTH: [one earned strength]
NEXT STEP: [one concrete improvement]
Then tell me to submit this report, my revised work, and the share link.
COPY EVERYTHING ABOVE THIS LINE

Deliverables

Submit these three items in the assignment entry:

• your revised work with all four answers, their brief explanations, your specific purpose and central idea with the tests and checks marked, your four-filter narrowing, your rewrite of the chatbot draft, and your message to the friend — written, or spoken and recorded as audio or video with a transcript; every form is graded by the same scoring criteria;
• the coach's five-line report; and
• the conversation share link.

Submit in any accessible file type or as a link; a recorded response may be submitted as audio or video with a transcript, or as text.

Equivalent route (no AI required)

This route assesses the same Week 3 skills — counting the parts of the week's models, choosing a general purpose, narrowing a real topic through the four filters, writing a specific purpose and a central idea that pass their tests, repairing a flawed draft, and explaining the difference to someone who has never taken a speaking course — for comparable time and effort, about 60 to 90 minutes, the same as the coached route. Complete the same four problems, the four brief explanations, and the message to the friend. Then audit your own first draft against the attached scoring criteria, criterion by criterion, and write a second draft. Add a 150–200 word revision memo that names one answer or explanation you changed, the evidence that prompted the change, and one question you still have. Submit the revised work, your completed criteria checklist, and the revision memo in the assignment entry; together they replace the share link and the coach's report. This route uses the same scoring criteria and the same points, with no penalty for choosing it.

How you'll be graded

The full analytic rubric is attached to this assignment in Canvas.

Academic integrity and AI use

The counts, the explanations, the specific purpose, the central idea, the narrowing, the revision, and the message to the friend must be your own. Do not ask the chatbot to write the assignment, write your specific purpose or central idea, or add evidence you did not produce. Submit an honest share link from your own dialogue. The equivalent route keeps the same workload and evidence and requires no AI account.

Built with The Course Maker · samples.thecoursemaker.com