Week 3 — Assignment (Adaptive Learning) · Topic, Purpose & Thesis Builder

Course: Public Speaking — Fundamentals of Oral Communication (COMM 1) · Silver Oak University (fictional sample) · Prof. Marchetti
Objective assessed: Objective 2 (selecting and narrowing a topic; the three general purposes; writing a specific purpose and a thesis; evaluating well-formed vs. flawed specific purpose statements) · SLO A (compose & plan a speech)
Worth 100 points · Speeches (Assignments) group = 25% of the grade
Format: adaptive learning — an AI assignment coach walks you through writing complete purpose-thesis progressions for two topics and classifying and fixing a flawed specific purpose statement, then helps you score your own work against the rubric. You submit the coach's self-scored report (plus your chat link).

Assignment 3 of the term — a building-block task. This week's work lays the planning foundation for every speech you will write from here forward. There is no recorded speech this week; the deliverable is written planning documents.

Part 1 — Student Instructions (read this first)

What this is. An AI coach helps you write and assess three planning documents: (1) a complete topic-narrowing + purpose + thesis progression for Topic A (your own choice), (2) a complete progression for Topic B (also your choice, different general purpose from A), and (3) a classify-and-fix task: you are given a flawed specific purpose statement, identify which test it fails, and write an improved version. The coach helps you check your work against the rubric and improve it if needed.

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 through it with the coach: write your progressions, get feedback, classify and fix the flawed specific purpose, then self-assess against the rubric.

What to submit (two things):
1. The coach's report — its first line is STUDENT'S SCORE: X/100.
2. Your conversation's share link.

Integrity note. Do your own thinking; the coach helps you check and improve your work. Submitting a report the coach wrote for you without your own reasoning 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 for Week 3 of Public Speaking (COMM 1) at Silver Oak University. You will guide me through building and assessing three planning documents for speech topics of my own choice, then help me score my own work against the rubric below. You grade ONLY against the rubric below — never invent criteria or inflate scores. Total possible: 100 points.

WHAT I AM BUILDING

PART A — Topic A Progression (40 pts):
For a topic of my choosing, I will write: (1) a broad subject; (2) a narrowed topic (with at least one of the four narrowing filters explained); (3) a general purpose; (4) a specific purpose (tested against all four criteria); (5) a thesis.

PART B — Topic B Progression (30 pts):
Same five steps for a second topic, with a DIFFERENT general purpose from Topic A.

PART C — Classify and Fix (30 pts):
You will give me a flawed specific purpose statement. I will: (1) identify which of the four tests it fails; (2) explain why; (3) write a corrected version.

THE RUBRIC (100 points) — grade against THIS. Reveal each part as we work on it.

Part A — Topic A Progression (40 points):
- Narrowing with filter(s) (10): narrowed topic is genuinely focused (not still broad); at least one of the four filters (purpose / audience / context / time) is named and applied
- Specific purpose — form and tests (15): single infinitive phrase; one idea; audience-centered; appears achievable
- Thesis — form and content (15): full declarative sentence; states a clear main message; plain language

Part B — Topic B Progression (30 points):
- Different general purpose from A (5): general purpose is explicitly named and is different from A's
- Specific purpose — form and tests (12): same criteria as A
- Thesis — form and content (13): same criteria as A

Part C — Classify and Fix (30 points):
- Correct identification of the failing test (10): names the right test (one idea / infinitive phrase / audience-centered / achievable in time)
- Explanation (10): explains clearly why the statement fails
- Corrected version (10): the corrected specific purpose passes all four tests

HOW TO RUN IT (with me, the student) — go in STAGES:

1. Greet + name. Greet me warmly in 1–2 sentences, ask my FIRST NAME and my major/interest. (If I skip my name, continue, but ask before the final report.)

2. Stage A — Topic A Progression. Ask me to pick a broad subject for an informative or persuasive speech. Walk me through the five steps one at a time: broad subject → narrowed topic (ask me to name which filter(s) helped) → general purpose → specific purpose (have me write it, then help me check all four tests) → thesis (have me write it, then check it together). Give ONE targeted suggestion per step if something needs fixing; do not rewrite my statements for me.

3. Stage B — Topic B Progression. Ask me to pick a second broad subject with a DIFFERENT general purpose from Topic A. Repeat the five-step process. Remind me the general purpose must differ.

4. Stage C — Classify and Fix. Give me this flawed specific purpose statement exactly as written:
   "To inform my audience about the history of renewable energy AND the economics of solar panels AND the politics of climate policy AND the future of wind farms."
   Ask me to: (a) identify which test(s) it fails, (b) explain why, and (c) write a corrected version that passes all four tests. Give ONE specific nudge if they are stuck; do not write the fix for me.

5. Stage D — Self-assess against the rubric. Go criterion by criterion for each part. For each, ask me what I observe in my own work, help me assign honest points, and give specific, kind feedback and one concrete fix if needed.

6. Offer a revision. Ask if I want to revise anything to raise my score; if yes, coach the fix and re-assess. My BEST work counts (capped at full marks).

• If I ask about the material, answer briefly, then return to the stage.
• Until the final report, every message ends with a question or a clear next step.
• Score HONESTLY against the rubric — encourage me, but do not hand out points I did not earn.

IMPORTANT — NO FABRICATION: do not invent topics, specific purposes, or theses for me — this is my planning work in my own words. Do not invent any statistics, quotations, or facts. (We build the habit now: the tool helps; it never fabricates.)

COMPLETION + REPORT. After I have assessed my best work, produce the report in EXACTLY this format — the FIRST LINE is my score:
STUDENT'S SCORE: X/100
WEEK 3 ASSIGNMENT — Topic, Purpose & Thesis Builder
Student: [name] | Date: ___
Part A — Topic A Progression (a/40): [one line each on narrowing, specific purpose, thesis]
Part B — Topic B Progression (b/30): [one line each on different purpose, specific purpose, thesis]
Part C — Classify and Fix (c/30): [one line each on identification, explanation, corrected version]
Strongest moment: ___
One thing to carry forward into your next speech: ___
(The three section 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 major/interest, and start Stage A.

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

The Assignment Rubric — 100 points (what the coach grades, and what Prof. Marchetti confirms)

Rubric total: 10+15+15+5+12+13+10+10+10 = 100. Levels describe observable characteristics so grading stays fast and consistent.

Instructor grading note (Prof. Marchetti)

• Record the STUDENT'S SCORE: X/100 from line 1 of the submitted report into the Speeches (Assignments) group.
• Spot-check the chat share link against the report — the planning work should be in the chat. The AI-coached, self-scored format is gameable; requiring the chat share link is the primary check.
• The rubric lives inside the coach prompt, so scores stay consistent across Gemini / Claude / ChatGPT.

Canvas placement block

canvas_object    = Assignment
title            = "Week 3 Assignment — Topic, Purpose & Thesis Builder (adaptive)"
assignment_group = "Speeches (Assignments)"
points_possible  = 100
grading_type     = points
assignment_type  = adaptive
submission_types = [online_text_entry, online_url]   # report (score on line 1) + chat link
due_offset_days  = 6
published        = true
provenance       = "~ Prof. Marchetti'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 task built the traditional way — the student completes the planning documents and submits them, 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.)

— REMOVE BEFORE PUBLISHING TO STUDENTS —
This is the traditional-format file. The active adaptive version is I-assignment-and-rubric-week-03.md. Remove this banner before deploying to a class section configured for traditional assignments.

Course: Public Speaking — Fundamentals of Oral Communication (COMM 1) · Silver Oak University (fictional sample) · Prof. Marchetti
Objective assessed: Objective 2 (selecting and narrowing a topic; the three general purposes; writing a specific purpose and a thesis; evaluating well-formed vs. flawed specific purpose statements) · SLO A (compose & plan a speech)
Worth 100 points · Speeches (Assignments) group = 25% of the grade

The Assignment

This week's task is the planning layer that underlies every speech you will give this term: a general purpose, a specific purpose, and a thesis. You will write those three things for two topics, plus classify and fix a flawed specific purpose statement.

Three parts — complete all three:

Part A — Topic A Progression (40 points)

Choose any topic you find genuinely interesting or that you already know something about.

Complete the narrowing-and-planning progression in writing:

1. Broad subject — name the broad subject area you started with.
2. Narrowed topic — name the focused, specific aspect you landed on after narrowing. State which of the four filters (purpose / audience / context / time) most helped you narrow, and briefly explain.
3. General purpose — state the general purpose in one word or phrase: to inform, to persuade, or to entertain/mark an occasion.
4. Specific purpose — write the specific purpose as a single infinitive phrase. Then check it against all four tests and confirm it passes: (a) one idea? (b) infinitive phrase? (c) audience-centered? (d) achievable in the time limit?*
5. Thesis — write the thesis as a full declarative sentence. Confirm it is a complete sentence with a clear main message in plain language.

Part B — Topic B Progression (30 points)

Choose a second topic, different from Topic A. This topic must have a different general purpose from Part A — if Part A was informative, Part B should be persuasive, or vice versa.

Complete the same five-step progression: broad subject → narrowed topic (with filter) → general purpose → specific purpose (checked against four tests) → thesis.

Part C — Classify and Fix (30 points)

Read this specific purpose statement:

"To inform my audience about the history of renewable energy AND the economics of solar panels AND the politics of climate policy AND the future of wind farms."

Answer these three questions:

1. Which of the four tests does this specific purpose fail? Name the test(s).
2. Why does it fail? Explain in one or two sentences.
3. Write a corrected version — a specific purpose for a narrowed aspect of this topic that passes all four tests. Your corrected version does not have to cover the same angle; choose the most interesting one.

Rubric — 100 points

Rubric total: 10+15+15+5+12+13+10+10+10 = 100.

Instructor answer key & model — REMOVE BEFORE PUBLISHING TO STUDENTS

The topic progressions are student-chosen, so there is no single correct content for Parts A and B. Grade against the form and the four tests, not against a specific topic. The model below shows what a full-marks progression looks like in form; adjust the topic to fit what the student submitted.

Model Part A (illustrative — full marks for form):
- Broad subject: sleep
- Narrowed topic: the effect of consistent sleep schedules on academic performance in college students (time filter: 5-minute speech can cover one focused effect; audience filter: college students are the audience)
- General purpose: to inform
- Specific purpose: "To inform my audience about three strategies for improving sleep consistency and academic performance." (one idea ✓ · infinitive phrase ✓ · audience-centered ✓ · achievable in 5 min ✓)
- Thesis: "Consistent sleep patterns — fixed bedtimes, avoiding late-night screens, and short naps when needed — are linked to better focus and grades." (full sentence ✓ · clear message ✓ · plain language ✓)

Model Part C answer (for the given flawed statement):
1. Failing test: the one-idea test (also fails the achievable-in-time test)
2. Why: the statement contains at least four separate, large topics — history, economics, politics, and future of different energy types. Each could be its own multi-week course; no single speech can cover all four meaningfully.
3. Corrected version (example): "To inform my audience about how solar panel costs have changed over the past decade." (one idea ✓ · infinitive phrase ✓ · audience-centered ✓ · achievable ✓)

Common ways students lose points (watch for these):
- Thesis written as a question — "What are the best strategies for sleep?" → not a thesis. Fix: write an assertion.
- Specific purpose covers two ideas — "To inform my audience about sleep AND nutrition." → fix: split or pick one.
- Specific purpose written as a declarative sentence (mixing it up with the thesis) → fix: rewrite as an infinitive phrase.
- No filter named in the narrowing step → deduct from the narrowing criterion.
- Part C correction still fails a test — most often still too broad → one more narrowing pass needed.

Integrity & AI note. Students may use an approved chatbot (Gemini, Claude, or ChatGPT) to brainstorm topics or check a definition, but the planning documents submitted must be their own work and their own topics; if AI helped, a one-line note saying which tool and how is required. (Note: this is the traditional format. In this course's actual adaptive assignment, the student works through the planning with a chatbot coach and submits its self-scored report — see I-assignment-and-rubric-week-03.md.)

Canvas placement block

canvas_object    = Assignment
title            = "Week 3 Assignment — Topic, Purpose & Thesis Builder (traditional)"
assignment_group = "Speeches (Assignments)"
points_possible  = 100
grading_type     = points
assignment_type  = traditional
submission_types = [online_text_entry, online_upload]
due_offset_days  = 6
published        = true
rubric_ref       = "week-03-purpose-thesis-rubric"
provenance       = "~ Prof. Marchetti's edition · Fall 2026 · built with thecoursemaker.com"