Week 7 — Write It for the Ear: Plain, Vivid, and Fitted Words

Assignment 7 of the term — revise a passage of your next speech for the ear, fix its unclear words, add one device, and explain to a friend why a speech is written for listeners rather than readers.

This adaptive assignment uses a coaching dialogue to help you turn a first attempt into clear, careful work on your own words. 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 6's preparation outline: the full sentences you wrote last week are the sentences you now rewrite for the ear.

The task

This week's shared example is the flat-to-oral pair, which is illustrative and attributed to no one. Chapter 7 measures it. The flat sentence, in written style, is "There are many challenges faced by first-year college students when it comes to the management of their time and academic responsibilities." The oral version begins:

• "First-year students are often overwhelmed — not because they are unprepared, but because college time works differently."
• "No one tells you the assignments stack."
• "No one tells you the due dates do not care about each other."

Chapter 7 also names the six devices of vividness on verified fragments of Kennedy's inaugural address (1961), Roosevelt's address to Congress (1941), and Lincoln's Gettysburg Address (1863). It then walks through an illustrative chatbot that, asked to rewrite the flat sentence "for speech," returns "Numerous challenges are encountered by first-year college students in the effective management of their time and the fulfillment of their academic obligations."

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

1. The oral version's first three sentences hold 16, 7, and 13 words. How many words do the three sentences hold together?
2. Those 36 words fall into 3 sentences. On average, how many words does each oral sentence hold?
3. The flat sentence holds 21 words, and the oral sentences average 12 words. How many words shorter is each oral sentence on average?
4. An illustrative chatbot's rewrite for speech holds 22 words, and the flat sentence it was asked to fix holds 21 words. How many words longer is the rewrite?

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

• Problem 1: choose a passage of three or more sentences from your own speech draft and revise it into oral style. Give the words in each sentence before and after. Then name the oral-style features your revision added (such as shorter sentences, "you" or "we," concrete words, or a repetition) and what the read-aloud test showed you.
• Problem 2: find two different killers of clarity in your own draft (an abstract word, jargon, a long sentence, or a vague quantifier). Quote each one and rewrite it in plain, concrete words. Then replace one vague quantifier with a sourced figure in a complete oral citation (who, what, and when, from a real source you checked) or with a plain count, or say why your draft has none.
• Problem 3: name the device in two of the verified speech fragments Chapter 7 quotes, and give the clue in the words that identifies each one. Then write one device of your own into your own speech, label it, and say in one sentence why it fits that audience and occasion.
• Problem 4: in the illustrative chatbot rewrite, name its length problem, its missing second person, and its abstract words, and explain why formal wording for a reader is not clarity for a listener.

Explain it to a non-expert

Your friend will give a two-minute welcome at a community garden's opening day and plans to read aloud the paragraph they wrote for the neighborhood newsletter. Write a 3–5 sentence message that explains, in everyday words, why to rewrite the paragraph for listeners (short sentences, "you," things people can picture); one device to try once, such as a repeated opening; and one limit, such as reading it aloud first or keeping their own voice. 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 who will say a few words at a retirement lunch and plans to read aloud the farewell email they sent the whole office. Model answer: "An email is written for people who can scroll back, but at lunch everyone hears each line once. Say it the way you would tell it across the table: short sentences, say "you" to the person retiring, and name one real moment people can picture. If you want a line people remember, repeat one opening, like "Thank you for…" three times, and stop there. Read it out loud once before lunch, and if a sentence trips you up, cut it in half."

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 before-and-after passage, your two clarity fixes, your device labels and your own device, your critique of the chatbot rewrite, 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. Never let the coach write or rewrite your passage. If it offers a "rewrite for speech," decline, then count its words and read it aloud yourself before you keep any idea from it.
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 passage, your device, or the message for you. If it quotes a famous line, check the wording against the transcript the chapter cites before you name its device.

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 oral style, clarity, the devices of vividness, and word choice. Do not write my assignment, my passage, my device, or my message for me, do not invent work I did not show, and never rewrite a sentence of mine. Never quote a real speech from memory; if I quote one, ask me where I checked the wording.

ASSIGNMENT: Work through these four problems in order, one at a time. Do not invent, replace, or reorder a problem. The data: the flat-to-oral pair is illustrative and attributed to no one. The flat sentence, in written style, holds 21 words. The oral version's first three sentences are "First-year students are often overwhelmed - not because they are unprepared, but because college time works differently.", "No one tells you the assignments stack.", and "No one tells you the due dates do not care about each other." In the illustrative chatbot exchange, asked to rewrite the flat sentence for speech, the chatbot returned "Numerous challenges are encountered by first-year college students in the effective management of their time and the fulfillment of their academic obligations."
PROBLEM P1: The oral version's first three sentences hold 16, 7, and 13 words. How many words do the three sentences hold together?
PROBLEM P2: Those 36 words fall into 3 sentences. On average, how many words does each oral sentence hold?
PROBLEM P3: The flat sentence holds 21 words, and the oral sentences average 12 words. How many words shorter is each oral sentence on average?
PROBLEM P4: An illustrative chatbot's rewrite for speech holds 22 words, and the flat sentence it was asked to fix holds 21 words. How many words longer is the rewrite?
After the four answers, I must briefly explain each one: for P1, a passage of three or more sentences from my own speech draft revised into oral style, with the words in each sentence before and after, plus the oral-style features my revision added and what the read-aloud test showed; for P2, two different killers of clarity from my own draft, each quoted and rewritten, plus one vague quantifier replaced with a sourced figure in a complete oral citation or a plain count, or a reason my draft has none; for P3, the device named in two verified speech fragments from the chapter with the clue for each, plus one device of my own written into my own speech, labelled, with a reason it fits; for P4, a critique naming the chatbot rewrite's length problem, its missing second person, and its abstract words and explaining why formal wording for a reader is not clarity for a listener. I must then write a 3-5 sentence message to a friend who will give a short welcome at a community garden's opening and plans to read a newsletter paragraph aloud, explaining in everyday words why to rewrite it for listeners, one device to try once, and one limit. I must explain course terms in everyday words.

SCORING CRITERIA: Score only evidence I supply: accurate counts from the week's language examples (40 points), language 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 sentence total, average, or difference = 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 critique naming the rewrite's length problem, missing second person, and abstract words and explaining why formal wording is not clarity AND a message to the friend that explains rewriting for listeners, one device to try once, 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 revised passage, ask me to read it aloud and tell you where I ran short of breath, which words a listener could not picture, and whether it still sounds like me. 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 before-and-after passage, your two clarity fixes, your device labels and your own device, your critique of the chatbot rewrite, 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 7 skills — measuring the week's flat-to-oral pair, revising your own words for the ear, fixing the killers of clarity, naming the devices of vividness on verified fragments, rejecting a chatbot's polished but still-written rewrite, and explaining all of it 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, your revised passage, your device, the revision, and the message to the friend must be your own. Do not ask the chatbot to write the assignment, rewrite your passage, or add a source you did not find and check yourself. 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