Better writing (2cr)
Code: 9A00BX29-3004
General information
- Enrollment
- 19.04.2021 - 30.10.2021
- Registration for the implementation has ended.
- Timing
- 15.11.2021 - 22.12.2021
- Implementation has ended.
- Number of ECTS credits allocated
- 2 cr
- Local portion
- 2 cr
- Mode of delivery
- Contact learning
- Teaching languages
- Finnish
- Degree programmes
- Bachelor of Natural Resources, Agriculture and Rural Enterprises
- Teachers
- Helena Sarvikas
- Course
- 9A00BX29
Evaluation scale
1-5
Content scheduling
-Text production
-Different written task types (essay, learning diary, analysis, report, thesis)
-good writing
-referencing and using sources
-construction of texts
-The writing instructions of Seinäjoki UAS
Objective
The Student can
-construct texts according to given instructions
-use written argumentation
-analyze and evaluate the quality and content of texts
-combine their own knowledge and theory in writing
-use different sources for their text
-write and reference according to the Seinäjoki UAS writing instructions
Content
-Text production
-Different written task types (essay, learning diary, analysis, report, thesis)
-good writing
-referencing and using sources
-construction of texts
-The writing instructions of Seinäjoki UAS
Materials
Material provided by the lecturer.
Teaching methods
Lessons and practice, course work.
Assessment criteria, satisfactory (1)
The student can consider their text from their own view point: student does not consider aim, receiver or the instructions for the task enough. The construction of the text is illogical and uncoherent, the argumentation is one-sided and poor. Examples are rare and inappropriate. The student is not capable of constructing convincing text.
Assessment criteria, good (3)
When writing, the student can partly consider the aim, task and the receiver. The text is constructed mainly in a clear and coherent manner and argumentation is many-sided and believable. The student is able to use references mostly well and understands the Seinäjoki UAS written instruction partly. The examples are appropriate. The student is able to evaluate their written performance in some parts and partly realistic.
Assessment criteria, excellent (5)
The student does an excellent work in considering the aim, task and the receiver when writing. They can consider and apply the specifics of scientific writing. The text form follows the appropriate form for each task. Text is logical, clear and concise. The argumentation is many-sided, convincing and considers differents aspect and view points. Examples are effective, appropriate and well considered. The student can evaluate and develop their own writing. The student can apply the Seinäjoki UAS instructions for written work.
Qualifications
No previous studies required