SCENARIO
You have recently been hired to work in the information technology field. Your new manager has asked you to write a blog post describing a technological product, practice, or process that at least one group of employees will soon implement. I want to write about chat gpt.



After your manager approves the blog post, you will create a multimedia presentation in Task 2 that discusses the content in the blog post.

REQUIREMENTS

A.  Create an explainer blog post, as defined in the learning resource, that discusses a technological product, practice, or process that your company will soon implement. This blog post should be a maximum of 1,000 words long and must include the following:

1.  a thorough explanation of your chosen technological product, practice, or process based on your research from three distinct sources

2.  a compelling argument of how the technological product, practice, or process will benefit the employees or company when it is implemented


B.  Identify and define the employee group (the audience) for the blog post.

1.  Explain how this audience influenced your choices for the document’s etiquette, including word choice and tone.  


Note: Consult the section in the learning resource for information on business etiquette.  


C.  Acknowledge sources, using in-text citations and references, for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized.


D.  Demonstrate professional communication in the content and presentation of your submission.


An explainer blog post is not provided.  

APPROACHING COMPETENCE

The explainer blog post is more than 1,000 words, or it does not discuss a technological product, practice, or process for company implementation.  

COMPETENT

The explainer blog post is not more than 1,000 words and discusses a technological product, practice, or process for company implementation.  

A1:EXPLANATION
NOT EVIDENT

The blog post does not provide an explanation of the candidate’s chosen technological product, practice, or process.

APPROACHING COMPETENCE

The blog post does not accurately explain the chosen technological product, practice, or process or does not provide 3 research sources.

COMPETENT

The blog post accurately explains the chosen technological product, practice, or process and provides 3 research sources as the basis for that explanation.

A2:COMPELLING ARGUMENT
NOT EVIDENT

The blog post does not provide an argument of how the technological product, practice, or process could benefit the employees or company.

APPROACHING COMPETENCE

The blog post provides an argument of how the technological product, practice, or process could benefit the employees or company that is not compelling or is irrelevant. 

COMPETENT

The blog post provides a compelling argument of how the technological product, practice, or process could benefit the employees or company.   

B:EMPLOYEE GROUP
NOT EVIDENT

An employee group is not identified and defined.

APPROACHING COMPETENCE

The employee group is identified, but the group is either not defined or is not appropriate for the chosen technological product, practice, or process. 

COMPETENT

The employee group is identified and defined and is appropriate for the chosen technological product, practice, or process.   

B1:ANALYZING BUSINESS ETIQUETTE
NOT EVIDENT

An explanation of how the audience for the blog post affected the document’s word choice and tone is not provided.

APPROACHING COMPETENCE

The explanation is missing either how the audience affected word choice or how the audience affects tone.  

COMPETENT

The explanation accurately discusses how the audience for the blog post affected the document’s word choice and tone.  

C:SOURCES
NOT EVIDENT

The submission does not include both in-text citations and a reference list for sources that are quoted, paraphrased, or summarized.

APPROACHING COMPETENCE

The submission includes in-text citations for sources that are quoted, paraphrased, or summarized and a reference list; however, the citations or reference list is incomplete or inaccurate.

COMPETENT

The submission includes in-text citations for sources that are properly quoted, paraphrased, or summarized and a reference list that accurately identifies the author, date, title, and source location as available.

D:PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATION
NOT EVIDENT

Content is unstructured, is disjointed, or contains pervasive errors in mechanics, usage, or grammar. Vocabulary or tone is unprofessional or distracts from the topic.

APPROACHING COMPETENCE

Content is poorly organized, is difficult to follow, or contains errors in mechanics, usage, or grammar that cause confusion. Terminology is misused or ineffective.

COMPETENT

Content reflects attention to detail, is organized, and focuses on the main ideas as prescribed in the task or chosen by the candidate. Terminology is pertinent, is used correctly, and effectively conveys the intended meaning. Mechanics, usage, and grammar promote accurate interpretation and understanding.

This is a sample of the project:
Introducing a New Tool for Student Success
At WGU, we are student obsessed. Thus, we always want to make 
sure we are engaging in practices that best help students. One such 
practice is providing feedback to students about their written work. While a 
Word document allows for comments, depending on what version of Word 
students have and how familiar they are with Word functions, often 
students cannot see the comments. As Richards (2020) notes, such 
feedback can be more demoralizing and demotivating to students. Thus, 
another way to provide feedback is warranted. Research suggests that 
Snagit, a screen capture product by TechSmith, is a perfect tool for 
providing more direct and visually appealing feedback to students on their 
written work. Following, I will first explain what Snagit is, and then explain 
how it can benefit instructors and students at WGU.
Snagit has been around for decades now, developed early in 
TechSmith’s history (TechSmith, n.d.a). It began as a simple screen 
capture tool and has evolved into a tool that provides multiple ways to 
capture one’s screen, then add features using editing tools, and create 
content such as a GIF or enhanced image. The tool provides multiple ways 
to share one’s creations as well. In their review of the most recent version 
of Snagit (called Snagit 2022), authors Wilson and Minor give it the Editor’s 
Choice award for its utilities. While Snagit is more expensive than many of 
its competitors, Wilson and Minor prefer it because of all the features 
provided. 
These features include a screen recorder allowing one to capture an 
image, and record video, and/or audio. For an image, in the Editor, one can 
add text, shapes, stamps, comment bubbles, arrows, and more to the 
image. For video capture, the Editor feature allows one to cut sections and 
even save them as a GIF. Snagit 2022 has the added feature of capturing 
the speaker on camera. One can also splice together a series of images 
into a video. Another excellent feature is the panoramic scrolling mode and 
delay counter. This allows creators to capture longer or wider images as 
well as cascading menus (Wilson & Minor, 2022). In addition, Snagit 2022 
has the capability to move objects within one’s screen capture, meaning we 
could move a button and even delete text (TechSmith, n.d.b).
This leads me to an explanation for why WGU should purchase
Snagit for each instructor to use for providing feedback to students on 
tasks. Brick & Homes (2008) explain “The use of speech, graphics, and the 
written word seems to cater to the widest variety of learning styles, 
reaching those with a preference for auditory and visual learning who are 
less likely to benefit from standard single mode written feedback” (pg. 340). 
Currently, most instructors just use a combination of the comment feature 
in Microsoft Word and email to explain to students how to fix a task so that 
it will meet the evaluation requirements. While such comments may be 
extremely helpful, often students cannot see the comments (or do not know 
how to access them) depending on the version of MS Word that they have. 
In addition, a comment may not be obvious enough as to what it is pointing 
out. Thus, a screen capture that is edited with arrows and text comments 
pointing directly to the issue would be helpful. Such images can also be 
copied and pasted right into an email so that students never need to leave 
the email to learn how to revise a task. 
Denton (2014) discusses “undeveloped feedback” versus “developed 
feedback.” While he was referring to short comments such as “well-done” 
as being “undeveloped,” I believe that a full paragraph of comments that 
are well-developed may not be clear to the student what it is referring to. 
Or, if the student cannot see the comments at all, then even the bestdeveloped comment is of no use and could be considered “undeveloped.” 
Using a more advanced screen capture tool such as Snagit will allow 
instructors to provide students with the best “developed” comment and 
visual to go with it. 
Below is an example of a comment just using the commenting feature 
in MS Word and then a comparison of the same kind of comment and 
additional notations using the Snagit editing features. 
MS Word:
Snagit Version:
It takes a little more time to develop the Snagit image, but overall, it could 
save a lot more time for both instructor and student because there is a 
better guarantee that the student will see these comments and know 
exactly what they are pointing to.
Hopefully, the comparison above helps to make it clear why using 
Snagit for feedback will be more helpful for our students. Snagit, the screen 
capture product by TechSmith, is a perfect tool for providing more direct 
and visually appealing feedback to students on their written work. In this 
white paper, I reviewed what Snagit is, and then explained how it can help 
instructors at WGU provide more developed feedback to our students. For 
this reason, WGU leaders should consider providing a Snagit license to 
each instructor who requests it. 
Section B: Identify Employee Group
The audience for this blog post is employees at WGU who make decisions 
on software to purchase for instructors. This is likely faculty managers, 
senior managers, and directors for programs that faculty teach. It would 
also be appropriate for instructors to also read so they can better help 
make the case for adopting Snagit.
B1. Analyzing Business Etiquette 
In my blog post, I am explaining the technology of Snagit and the 
helpfulness of screen captures for giving feedback to students. For my 
audience of supervisors (and eventually instructors), I kept my tone light in 
nature and a little less formal because we tend to have a less formal way of 
engaging in communication at WGU. Given the culture at WGU, I focused 
on the idea that Snagit is a best-practice product for helping students. I 
wanted this blog post to be persuasive by focusing on the WGU leadership 
principle of student obsession. Therefore, my word choice consistently 
brought up how this product would be helpful to our students because I 
believe supervisors would react positively to the mention of helping 
students.
Section C: Sources
Brick, B. & Holmes, J. (2008). Using Screen Capture Software for Student 
Feedback: Towards a Methodology. Proceedings of the IADIS International 
Conference on Cognition & Exploratory Learning in Digital Age, 339-342.
Denton, D. (2014). Using screen capture feedback to improve academic 
performance. Tech Trends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve 
Learning, 58(6), 51-56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-014-0803-0
Richards, N. (January 1, 2020). Closing the feedback loop using screen 
capture technology. Modern English Teacher, 29(1), 34-36.
TechSmith (n.d.a). About TechSmith. 
https://www.techsmith.com/about.html
TechSmith (n.d.b). Snagit Homepage. https://www.techsmith.com/screencapture.html
Wilson, J. L. & Minor, J. (January 11, 2022). Snagit review: A powerful, 
feature-rich screen-capture app. https://www.pcmag.com/reviews/snagi