Project 1 Assignment Sheet

Writing for Experts—200 Points

Basic Guidelines

Length: To be determined by your chosen publication venue
Rough Draft: Tuesday, 10/1
Revised Draft: Tuesday, 10/22
Finalized Draft for Editing: Thursday, 10/24
Final Due Date: Tuesday, 10/29


For this project, you will take a topic you have previously written about in your major and expand and re-write it for a target audience of people knowledgeable in your field (see below for exceptions). As part of the process, you must investigate possible publication venues for writing, mostly like an academic journal that publishes undergraduate research, so that you may have a specific target for your revision.

Some of the content from your original writing may remain the same, but you will need to do substantial research on your own time to revise the paper and make it publication worthy. The analyses of academic writing from your wiki posts in Unit 1 should drive your revisions: use your knowledge about your field’s genre expectations, citation guidelines, stylistic preferences, and knowledge-building practices to produce a more rhetorically effective article.

Reflective Paper

In addition to your final article, you must submit a two-page (~500 word) reflective paper detailing your process for expanding and revising your original paper. Using specific examples from your writing, explain how you feel you addressed the rhetorical expectations from your field generally and your chosen publication venue specifically.


If you have expertise in other areas, you don’t have to choose a topic that is explicitly from your major. You do need to identify a specific audience of experts to whom to address your writing, and you do need to identify a specific mode of publication and a specific genre for your writing. Any such project alternatives must be cleared with me first.

Criteria for Evaluation

  • Articulates a clear argument following the scholarly conventions of your field. 40 points
  • Reflects a scholarly style appropriate to your field and your publication venue. 40 points
  • Uses knowledge-building practices (method sections, modality, etc.) to reflect and add to the state of knowledge in your field. 40 points
  • Uses appropriate citation practices as determined by your field and your publication venue. 30 points
  • Effective introduction and conclusion. 20 points
  • Appropriately meets the basic submission guidelines from your chosen publication venue. 10 points
  • Includes a reflective paper detailing your revision process. 10 points
  • Correct grammar, usage, and spelling. 10 points
Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License