Overview
Background
In order to create multimedia content, we will need to first consume multimedia content. This activity is designed to put your critical thinking skills to work by analyzing multimedia created by others.
Task
- Choose any single multimedia content that you have been exposed to recently. Examples can include:
- A video (movie, television show, advertisement, news segment, TikTok, YouTube video)
- An image or infographic (political cartoon, print advertisement, visual art piece)
- An audio clip (podcast, music album, speech).
- An interactive website or app interface.
- Analyze the media by addressing these prompts:
- Intro (one paragraph)
- Purpose of the paper; learning outcomes; what you plan to talk about in the paper.
- Cite the source of your media; include hyperlinks if necessary.
- Provide a thorough description of the media.
- What is the goal of the message?
- Audience persona:
- Demographics (age, gender, location, income bracket)
- Behaviors, interests, preferences, etc.
- Why does this media resonate with its targeted audience?
- Include any ethical and cultural impacts of the media.
- Personal evaluation:
- What is your opinion of the media?
- How could it be improved?
- Does the message achieve its intended goal/purpose?
- Conclusion (one paragraph)
- Intro (one paragraph)
- Paper must be a minimum of 850 words in length.
Remember, the objective of this assignment is to critically analyze the media you chose. This would include a detailed explanation of each prompt with examples or rationale to back up your claims. As best practice, try asking yourself "why?" after each point you make to provide the necessary information in this analysis.
Submit
- Using Microsoft Word, submit your paper on Canvas via .PDF or .DOCX file format before its according deadline.
Assignment Rubric (1)
Criteria
Points
CONTENT
view longer description
ExcellentExcels in responding to assignment. Interesting, demonstrates sophistication of thought. Central idea/thesis is clearly communicated, worth developing; limited enough to be manageable. Paper recognizes some complexity of its thesis: may acknowledge its contradictions, qualifications, or limits and follow out their logical implications. Understands and critically evaluates its sources, appropriately limits and defines terms.
16.1 to 20 pts
GoodA solid paper, responding appropriately to assignment. Clearly states a thesis/central idea, but may have minor lapses in development. Begins to acknowledge the complexity of central idea and the possibility of other points of view. Shows careful reading of sources, but may not evaluate them critically. Attempts to define terms, not always successfully.
14.1 to 16 pts
AdequateAdequate but weaker and less effective, possibly responding less well to assignment. Presents central idea in general terms, often depending on platitudes or cliches. Usually does not acknowledge other views. Shows basic comprehension of sources, perhaps with lapses in understanding. If it defines terms, often depends on dictionary definitions.
12.1 to 14 pts
WeakAdequate but weaker and less effective, possibly responding less well to assignment. Presents central idea in general terms, often depending on platitudes or cliches. Usually does not acknowledge other views. Shows basic comprehension of sources, perhaps with lapses in understanding. If it defines terms, often depends on dictionary definitions.
6.1 to 12 pts
InsufficientDoes not respond to the assignment, lacks a thesis or central idea, and may neglect to use sources where necessary.
6 pts
/20 pts
ORGANIZATION
view longer description
ExcellentUses a logical structure appropriate to paper's subject, purpose, audience, thesis, and disciplinary field. Sophisticated transitional sentences often develop one idea from the previous one or identify their logical relations. It guides the reader through the chain of reasoning or progression of ideas.
8.1 to 10 pts
GoodUses a logical structure appropriate to paper's subject, purpose, audience, thesis, and disciplinary field. Sophisticated transitional sentences often develop one idea from the previous one or identify their logical relations. It guides the reader through the chain of reasoning or progression of ideas.
7.05 to 8 pts
AdequateUses a logical structure appropriate to paper's subject, purpose, audience, thesis, and disciplinary field. Sophisticated transitional sentences often develop one idea from the previous one or identify their logical relations. It guides the reader through the chain of reasoning or progression of ideas.
6.1 to 7.04 pts
WeakMay have random organization, lacking internal paragraph coherence and using few or inappropriate transitions. Paragraphs may lack topic sentences or main ideas, or may be too general or too specific to be effective. Paragraphs may not all relate to paper's thesis.
3.05 to 6 pts
InsufficientMay have random organization, lacking internal paragraph coherence and using few or inappropriate transitions. Paragraphs may lack topic sentences or main ideas, or may be too general or too specific to be effective. Paragraphs may not all relate to paper's thesis.
3.04 pts
/10 pts
SUPPORT
view longer description
ExcellentUses evidence appropriately and effectively, providing sufficient evidence and explanation to convince.
8.1 to 10 pts
GoodUses evidence appropriately and effectively, providing sufficient evidence and explanation to convince.
7.05 to 8 pts
AdequateOften uses generalizations to support its points. May use examples, but they may be obvious or not relevant. Often depends on unsupported opinion or personal experience, or assumes that evidence speaks for itself and needs no application to the point being discussed. Often has lapses in logic.
6.1 to 7.04 pts
WeakOften uses generalizations to support its points. May use examples, but they may be obvious or not relevant. Often depends on unsupported opinion or personal experience, or assumes that evidence speaks for itself and needs no application to the point being discussed. Often has lapses in logic.
3.05 to 6 pts
InsufficientOften uses generalizations to support its points. May use examples, but they may be obvious or not relevant. Often depends on unsupported opinion or personal experience, or assumes that evidence speaks for itself and needs no application to the point being discussed. Often has lapses in logic.
3.04 pts
/10 pts
STYLE
view longer description
ExcellentChooses words for their precise meaning and uses an appropriate level of specificity. Sentence style fits paper's audience and purpose. Sentences are varied, yet clearly structured and carefully focused, not long and rambling.
4.1 to 5 pts
GoodChooses words for their precise meaning and uses an appropriate level of specificity. Sentence style fits paper's audience and purpose. Sentences are varied, yet clearly structured and carefully focused, not long and rambling.
3.53 to 4 pts
AdequateChooses words for their precise meaning and uses an appropriate level of specificity. Sentence style fits paper's audience and purpose. Sentences are varied, yet clearly structured and carefully focused, not long and rambling.
3.1 to 3.52 pts
WeakChooses words for their precise meaning and uses an appropriate level of specificity. Sentence style fits paper's audience and purpose. Sentences are varied, yet clearly structured and carefully focused, not long and rambling.
1.53 to 3 pts
InsufficientUsually contains many awkward sentences, misuses words, employs inappropriate language.
1.52 pts
/5 pts
MECHANICS
view longer description
ExcellentEntirely free of spelling, punctuation, and grammatical errors.
4.1 to 5 pts
GoodMay contain a few errors, which may annoy the reader but not impede understanding.
3.53 to 4 pts
AdequateMay contain a few errors, which may annoy the reader but not impede understanding.
3.1 to 3.52 pts
WeakMay contain a few errors, which may annoy the reader but not impede understanding.
1.53 to 3 pts
InsufficientMay contain a few errors, which may annoy the reader but not impede understanding.
1.52 pts
/5 pts