[Solved] 5 short clip

Assignment Prompt & Instructions

need help with draft question – ## ModuleFiveShortPaperGuidelinesandRubric.html.zip **## ModuleFiveShortPaperGuidelinesandRubric.html.zip** ## Module Five Short Paper Guidelines and Rubric.html ## ENG 220 Module Five Short Paper Guidelines and Rubric ### Overview The purpose of this assignment is to hone your presentation skills by analyzing a professional presentation. You will use these skills as you work on developing your presentation for the course project. ### Prompt Watch the video of [Steve Jobs introducing the iPad 2](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_YrHxl8c6c) and then write a short paper in review of his presentation. The captioned version of this video may be accessed in the following link: [ENG-220 Apple's Steve Jobs Introduces iPad2 (CC)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXRb3NUunLQ). As you write, include the following elements: – Analysis of Presentation: What were the strengths and weaknesses of the presentation? Be sure to support your response by citing course concepts. – Cues and Prompts: What prompts or cues were used in the presentation? Were they used well? – Organizational Process: Was the presentation organized well? What process did it follow? – Application of Analysis: What have you learned that you can apply to your own presentation? What will you be sure to do (or not do)? ### What to Submit Your short paper must be submitted as a Microsoft Word document and should not be more than 1 page in length. Use double spacing, 12-point Times New Roman font, and one-inch margins. Any sources should be cited using a discipline-appropriate citation method. ### Module Five Short Paper Rubric | Criteria | Exemplary (100%) | Proficient (85%) | Needs Improvement (55%) | Not Evident (0%) | Value | | — | — | — | — | — | — | | Analysis of Presentation | Meets “Proficient” criteria and provides exceptional details into the nuances of the presentation | Identifies strengths and weaknesses of the presentation | Identifies some strengths and weaknesses of the presentation | Does not identify any strengths or weaknesses of the presentation | 25 | | Cues and Prompts | Meets “Proficient” criteria and analysis of prompts and cues offers expert insight into the presentational flow | Identifies prompts and cues used in the presentation and reflects on whether they were used well | Identifies some prompts and cues that were used in the presentation, but response lacks detail or does not address whether the prompts and cues were used well | Does not identify prompts or cues used in the presentation | 25 | | Organizational Process | Meets “Proficient” criteria and description of the organizational process used offers greater insight into the course concepts | Discusses whether the presentation was well organized and uses course concepts to help identify which organizational process was followed | Discusses whether the presentation was well organized and identifies which organizational process was followed, but response is cursory or answers are not informed by course concepts | Does not discuss the video’s organizational process | 15 | | Application of Analysis | Meets “Proficient” criteria and expertly applies the video analysis to generalized presentation principles | Describes how the lessons learned from this video analysis will help to inform the course project presentation | Describes some of the lessons learned from the video analysis, but response lacks detail or does not discuss how the analysis will inform the course project presentation | Does not describe lessons learned | 25 | | Writing Mechanics | Submission is free of errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, and organization and is presented in a professional and easy-to-read format | Submission has no major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization | Submission has major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that negatively impact readability and articulation of main ideas | Submission has critical errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that prevent understanding of ideas | 10 | | Total: | 100% | **## ModuleFiveShortPaperGuidelinesandRubric.html.zip** ## Module Five Short Paper Guidelines and Rubric.html ## ENG 220 Module Five Short Paper Guidelines and Rubric ### Overview The purpose of this assignment is to hone your presentation skills by analyzing a professional presentation. You will use these skills as you work on developing your presentation for the course project. ### Prompt Watch the video of [Steve Jobs introducing the iPad 2](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_YrHxl8c6c) and then write a short paper in review of his presentation. The captioned version of this video may be accessed in the following link: [ENG-220 Apple's Steve Jobs Introduces iPad2 (CC)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXRb3NUunLQ). As you write, include the following elements: – Analysis of Presentation: What were the strengths and weaknesses of the presentation? Be sure to support your response by citing course concepts. – Cues and Prompts: What prompts or cues were used in the presentation? Were they used well? – Organizational Process: Was the presentation organized well? What process did it follow? – Application of Analysis: What have you learned that you can apply to your own presentation? What will you be sure to do (or not do)? ### What to Submit Your short paper must be submitted as a Microsoft Word document and should not be more than 1 page in length. Use double spacing, 12-point Times New Roman font, and one-inch margins. Any sources should be cited using a discipline-appropriate citation method. ### Module Five Short Paper Rubric | Criteria | Exemplary (100%) | Proficient (85%) | Needs Improvement (55%) | Not Evident (0%) | Value | | — | — | — | — | — | — | | Analysis of Presentation | Meets “Proficient” criteria and provides exceptional details into the nuances of the presentation | Identifies strengths and weaknesses of the presentation | Identifies some strengths and weaknesses of the presentation | Does not identify any strengths or weaknesses of the presentation | 25 | | Cues and Prompts | Meets “Proficient” criteria and analysis of prompts and cues offers expert insight into the presentational flow | Identifies prompts and cues used in the presentation and reflects on whether they were used well | Identifies some prompts and cues that were used in the presentation, but response lacks detail or does not address whether the prompts and cues were used well | Does not identify prompts or cues used in the presentation | 25 | | Organizational Process | Meets “Proficient” criteria and description of the organizational process used offers greater insight into the course concepts | Discusses whether the presentation was well organized and uses course concepts to help identify which organizational process was followed | Discusses whether the presentation was well organized and identifies which organizational process was followed, but response is cursory or answers are not informed by course concepts | Does not discuss the video’s organizational process | 15 | | Application of Analysis | Meets “Proficient” criteria and expertly applies the video analysis to generalized presentation principles | Describes how the lessons learned from this video analysis will help to inform the course project presentation | Describes some of the lessons learned from the video analysis, but response lacks detail or does not discuss how the analysis will inform the course project presentation | Does not describe lessons learned | 25 | | Writing Mechanics | Submission is free of errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, and organization and is presented in a professional and easy-to-read format | Submission has no major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization | Submission has major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that negatively impact readability and articulation of main ideas | Submission has critical errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that prevent understanding of ideas | 10 | | Total: | 100% |