Week 4 — Assignment (Adaptive Learning) · Source Evaluation & Oral Citation

Course: Public Speaking — Fundamentals of Oral Communication (COMM 1) · Silver Oak University (fictional sample) · Prof. Marchetti
Objective assessed: Objective 3 (research, source credibility, oral citation, avoiding fabrication/plagiarism) · SLO A (compose — write and verify oral citations) · SLO B (analysis — evaluate source credibility)
Worth 100 points · Speeches (Assignments) group = 25% of the grade
Format: adaptive learning — an AI research coach helps you find, evaluate, and cite 2–3 real sources; the coach then helps you score your own work against the rubric. You submit the coach's self-scored report (plus your chat link) and your completed source-evaluation table and oral citations.

Assignment 4 — a building-block task. This week's assignment is not a recorded speech; it's the foundational research work that every future speech depends on. The research habits you build here carry directly into your informative speech (Week 11), your persuasive speech (Week 12), and every piece of evidence you ever cite.

Part 1 — Student Instructions (read this first)

What this is. You will find 2–3 real, verifiable sources on a topic connected to a speech you're planning (or one assigned by your instructor), evaluate each source using the CRAAP criteria, and write a complete oral citation for each. An AI coach guides the process and then helps you score your work honestly against the rubric.

The non-negotiable rule this week: every source you evaluate and cite must be a source you have actually located at its original URL or in a library database. If you cannot find it and verify it exists, you may not use it. The AI coach will instruct you to verify each source yourself — it will not invent sources for you.

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: choose a topic, find sources, evaluate them using CRAAP, write oral citations, and then self-assess against the rubric.

What to submit (three things):
1. The coach's report — its first line is STUDENT'S SCORE: X/100.
2. Your conversation's share link.
3. Your completed source-evaluation table and oral citations (you can type these in the submission or attach a document).

Integrity note. Do your own research and find your own sources. The coach helps you evaluate and cite; it does not find sources for you or verify them on your behalf — that is your work. Submitting fabricated sources is an academic 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 research coach and grader for Week 4 of Public Speaking (COMM 1) at Silver Oak University. You will coach me through finding, evaluating, and citing 2–3 real sources for a speech, 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.

CRITICAL RULE — NO FABRICATION:
Do NOT invent sources, suggest titles of articles, supply statistics, or tell me what any specific source says. If I ask you to find sources for me, respond: "I can't do that — part of this assignment is finding and verifying sources yourself. I can help you evaluate a source once you've found it, but locating and verifying it is your job." Then offer to explain where to look (library databases, government sites, reputable organizations). You must instruct me at every stage to verify each source at the original URL or database. A source I cannot locate does not count.

ABOUT THE ASSIGNMENT
- I am finding 2–3 real, verified sources on a topic for a planned speech.
- For each source, I need to: (a) record the basic source information (author, title, organization/publication, URL or database, date accessed); (b) evaluate it using the CRAAP criteria; (c) write a complete oral citation.
- A complete oral citation = "According to [source/author identity] — [qualification/why credible] — [date] …"

THE RUBRIC (100 points) — grade against THIS. Do not show me the whole rubric at once; reveal each piece as we work on it.
- Sources located and verified (20): 2–3 sources found at verifiable URLs or library databases; each confirmed by me as accessible.
- CRAAP evaluation (30): each source evaluated on all five CRAAP criteria (Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy, Purpose) with at least one sentence per criterion explaining the source's strength or weakness on that dimension.
- Oral citation completeness (30): each source has a complete oral citation with all three parts — source identity, qualification, and date — in a sentence formatted correctly.
- Reflection (20): a two-to-three sentence reflection on what I learned about finding and evaluating sources, including one honest note about a challenge I faced or a source I had to discard.

HOW TO RUN IT — go in STAGES, one at a time:
1. Greet + topic. Greet me warmly in 1–2 sentences, ask my FIRST NAME and what topic I'm researching (or tell me to ask my instructor for one). If I don't have a topic, suggest I choose something concrete and researchable (e.g., sleep and academic performance, campus sustainability, food security at colleges, physical activity and mental health — but tell me I need to confirm with my instructor if required).
2. Stage A — Find sources. Tell me to go find 2–3 sources — library databases, government sites (.gov), institutional reports, peer-reviewed articles — and come back with the basic information for each one (author, title, publisher/organization, URL, date accessed). Remind me: do NOT use an AI chatbot's citation as a source; verify everything at the original.
3. Stage B — Evaluate. For each source I bring back, walk me through the CRAAP criteria one criterion at a time, asking me what I see for each one. After I give each answer, give brief feedback (is this evaluation sound?) before we move to the next criterion.
4. Stage C — Cite. For each source, help me write a complete oral citation in the three-part format. If I'm missing a part, ask: "Which of the three parts is missing — source identity, qualification, or date?" Guide until the citation is complete.
5. Stage D — Reflect. Ask me to write 2–3 sentences reflecting on the process: what I noticed about finding good sources, and one honest challenge or a source I had to discard.
6. Stage E — Self-assess against the rubric. Go criterion by criterion. For each, ask me what I honestly think I earned and why. Give feedback on the accuracy of my self-assessment. Be honest — do not inflate scores.
7. Offer to re-do. Ask if I want to strengthen any element before I finalize. My BEST version counts.
- Until the final report, every message ends with a question or a clear next step.

COMPLETION + REPORT. After I've assessed my work, produce the report in EXACTLY this format — the FIRST LINE is my score:
STUDENT'S SCORE: X/100
WEEK 4 ASSIGNMENT — Source Evaluation & Oral Citation
Student: [name] | Date: ___
Sources located and verified (a/20): [one line]
CRAAP evaluation (b/30): [one line]
Oral citation completeness (c/30): [one line]
Reflection (d/20): [one line]
Strongest element: ___
One thing to carry into your next speech: ___
(The four 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 — and include your source-evaluation table and oral citations." End with one genuine sentence of encouragement.

GETTING STARTED
Begin now: greet me, ask my first name and topic, and start Stage A.

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

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

Instructor grading note (Prof. Marchetti)

• Record the STUDENT'S SCORE: X/100 from line 1 of the submitted report into the Speeches group.
• Spot-check the sources submitted: verify that each URL actually leads to a real, accessible source. The most common failure mode is an AI-supplied citation that was copied without verification.
• The rubric is embedded in the coach prompt, so self-scores stay consistent across chatbots. Known challenge: students may not know how to use library databases. Consider a brief in-class demo (10 minutes) showing how to access one database — this week's assignment becomes much stronger with that scaffold.

Canvas placement block

canvas_object    = Assignment
title            = "Week 4 Assignment — Source Evaluation & Oral Citation (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 + source table
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-4 assignment is the AI-coached, self-scored version in I-assignment-and-rubric-week-04.md. This file shows the same Week-4 assignment built the traditional way — the student completes the research and citation 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: Public Speaking — Fundamentals of Oral Communication (COMM 1) · Silver Oak University (fictional sample) · Prof. Marchetti
Objective assessed: Objective 3 (research, source credibility, oral citation, avoiding fabrication/plagiarism) · SLO A (compose — write and verify oral citations) · SLO B (analysis — evaluate source credibility)
Worth 100 points · Speeches (Assignments) group = 25% of the grade

The Assignment

This week you build the research foundation for a speech. Find 2–3 real, verified sources on a topic (your own planned speech topic, or one assigned by your instructor), evaluate each using the CRAAP criteria, and write a complete oral citation for each. Then submit your work.

The one non-negotiable rule: every source you evaluate and cite must be a source you have actually located at a real URL or library database. If you cannot find it and confirm it exists, you may not use it. Do not use AI chatbot output as a source — verify everything at the original.

Build it in four steps:

Step 1 — Choose your topic and find 2–3 sources.
- Your topic should be narrow enough to research well (e.g., campus food security, the health benefits of sleep, e-waste recycling, walking as exercise).
- Find sources in at least two different places: a library database (JSTOR, EBSCO, your campus library catalog) AND a credible web source (a government agency site (.gov), a university research page, a professional association, or a well-known public health or research organization).
- For each source, record: author(s) or organization, title, publication or organization name, URL or database, date of publication, date you accessed it.

Step 2 — Evaluate each source using the CRAAP criteria.
For each source, write at least one sentence per criterion explaining how the source rates:
- Currency: is the date recent enough for this topic?
- Relevance: does it directly address your specific claim?
- Authority: who wrote or published it? What are their credentials?
- Accuracy: is the information supported by evidence? Can you verify it elsewhere?
- Purpose: why was it written — to inform, persuade, sell?

Step 3 — Write a complete oral citation for each source.
Use the three-part format: "According to [source/author identity] — [qualification/why credible] — [date] …"
All three parts are required. Write a full sentence for each.

Step 4 — Reflect.
Write 2–3 sentences on what you learned about finding and evaluating sources. Include at least one honest note about a source you had to discard or a challenge you faced.

Integrity & AI note. This is your own research work. You may use an approved chatbot (Gemini, Claude, or ChatGPT) to help you understand the CRAAP criteria or draft an oral citation format — but the sources you submit must be ones you found and verified yourself. Never use a citation from an AI without locating and verifying the original source. If an AI supplies a source and you cannot find it at the named location, do not use it. (Note: this is the traditional format. In this course's actual adaptive assignment, you work through the process with an AI coach — see I-assignment-and-rubric-week-04.md.)

Rubric — 100 points

Instructor answer key & model — REMOVE BEFORE PUBLISHING TO STUDENTS

The specific sources will vary by student and topic. Grade against the rubric structure, not against any specific source. The model below illustrates what full-marks work looks like in shape; confirm that student sources are actually accessible at the URLs they submit.

Model source evaluation (illustrative — one source on campus food security):

Source: "Basic Needs Security Report." A published institutional report from a university's student affairs division, accessible at the institution's official website, dated within the last two years.

• Currency: Published within two years — recent enough for a current policy discussion. ✓
• Relevance: Directly addresses food and housing insecurity among college students — exactly on topic. ✓
• Authority: Produced by the institution's own research and student affairs office. Not peer-reviewed, but represents a primary data source from a recognized institutional body. Acceptable with that caveat noted. ✓
• Accuracy: Contains survey methodology, sample size, and response rate. Claims are supported by the institution's own collected data; can be cross-referenced with national studies on college food insecurity. ✓
• Purpose: Produced to inform institutional decision-making and advocacy; not commercial. The institution has an interest in addressing the issue, which should be acknowledged. ✓

Model oral citation (complete — illustrative format):
"According to a report from [University Name]'s Office of Student Affairs — the institutional office responsible for tracking student basic needs at that campus — published in [year], …"

Common ways students lose points:
- Evaluating one or two CRAAP criteria and leaving the rest blank.
- An oral citation with source identity and date but no qualification.
- Submitting a URL that leads to a general homepage rather than the specific source.
- A reflection that says "it was easy" with no honest engagement.

Canvas placement block

canvas_object    = Assignment
title            = "Week 4 Assignment — Source Evaluation & Oral Citation (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-04-source-evaluation-rubric"
provenance       = "~ Prof. Marchetti's edition · Fall 2026 · built with thecoursemaker.com"