assignment brief design guidelines - plymouth … gilbert and garry maguire . assignment brief ......

1

Assignment Brief Design Guidelines Fiona Gilbert and Garry Maguire

Assignment Brief ENHANCEMENT

Assignment Brief

DESIGN

Assignment Brief TASK

Developing academic communication to enhance the student experience in assessment

2 © Fiona Gilbert & Garry Maguire 2014

Acknowledgements:

The project team would like to thank:

Oxford Brookes University for a Teaching Fellowship awards that facilitated the early stages of the project research. The HEA for an individual Teaching Development grant. Royce Sadler for consulting on the guidelines.

All those within Aske and Oxford Brookes University who supported and participated in the project:

Professor Chris Rust Berry O’Donovan Professor Margaret Price Debbie Witney Ruth Watts Abi Ball

All those who collaborated in the University of Huddersfield:

Kathrine Jensen

The student researchers at Huddersfield who interviewed academic staff on their assignment setting practices:

James Ritchie Julia Kendrick

All the staff across the sector who completed the survey, especially those in Southampton Solent University.

All the Oxford Brookes University students who agreed to be interviewed.

Bob Pomfret of the Oxford Brookes University Media Workshop for his design work.

© Fiona Gilbert & Garry Maguire 2014 3

Table of Contents Introduction .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 4 The need to develop practice in assignment brief design ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Meeting the communication challenge more effectively ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 5 Enhancing the student experience and performance ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Research and development .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 6

Using the guidelines ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Individual practitioner mode ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 8 Staff developer mode ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 11 Institutional mode .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 11 The Guidelines ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 13 Underlying principles .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 14 Organisation of the guidelines ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 15

1. Assignment Brief Task ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 16A. Text type .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 16 B. Explicitness ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 18

2. Assignment Brief Design ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 22C. Layout ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 22 D. Language ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 24 E. Consistency ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 28

3. Assignment Brief Delivery ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 30F. Delivery .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 30 G. Dialogue ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 31 H. Monitoring .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 32

Glossary of terms ................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 33

Further information and resources ................................................................................................................................................................................ 35


Introduction

The need to develop practice in assignment brief design

The core objective of an assignment brief is to maximize the likelihood that students do what is required and expected in assessment. The aim of these guidelines is to support this by developing the effectiveness of a brief’s communication of task requirements and expectations in order to enhance the student academic experience and ultimately, their performance in assessment.

The term ‘assignment brief’ refers herein solely to the written instructions provided to communicate the requirements and expectations of non-exam assessment tasks. A brief is also sometimes referred to as the assignment instructions, criteria, prompts, specifications or rubric. ‘Assignment brief’ is not used in these guidelines to refer to aspects of the task design itself or to the assessment criteria.

There has been an increasing focus of attention on assessment-related practices in tertiary education, particularly with regard to feedback. Although some of this attention has been focused on the design stage of the assessment task itself, there has been less focus on the task setting stage of assessment in general, and in particular, on the effectiveness of delivery of the task instructions i.e. the assignment brief.

The need to focus on the communicative effectiveness of the assignment brief has become more pressing as assignment briefs have become increasingly complex. This is largely because the range of learning outcomes assessment tasks now need to target has increased, due primarily to the need to meet the demands of employability and to cater for individual differences. This has required a widening and increasingly varied range of assessment types. With the massification

of higher education and the diversification of the student body this has meant an increasing proportion of students are now less familiar with the conventions and requirements of this increasing range of assessment types. The increased complexity of the brief therefore, coupled with the call to ensure inclusivity and reduce potential disparities in student attainment, makes effective communication of assignment requirements and expectations both more challenging and more urgent.

This need has perhaps also come more to the fore due to the call for both staff and students alike to share responsibility for developing assessment literacy in a cultivated community of academic practice. An effectively shared communication and understanding of the assessment task is one area that contributes to this process.

The process of improving communicative effectiveness will not only reduce student uncertainty but also allow students to allocate more time to enhancing their academic performance and thus improve the student experience. With fewer queries on what is required and expected it will also lead to a more efficient and effective use of institutional support resources.

The guidelines are designed on the assumption that the brief:

• relates to a constructively aligned task

• adheres to the relevant institutional guidelines for theassessment task

They also assume there are features of assignment briefs that contribute to their communicative effectiveness and the effective features should be maximised whilst the use of less effective features should be minimised.

NB The first instance of each term explained in the glossary is greyed out in the text. Clicking this will take you to the term in the glossary.Clicking the entry in the glossary will bring you back to your place in the text.


The remaining reasons supporting the use of these guidelines derive from the specific nature of such high stakes instructions in an academic context and from the drive to enhance the student experience. These are:

Meeting the communication challenge more effectively

1. The writing of instructions is fundamentally different fromother types of written communication so merits being an areaof continuing professional development for staff.

2. Assignments, since assessment now has to target the demandsof an expanding range and complexity of learning outcomes,require increasingly complex instructions.

3. Expertise in the subject and familiarity with the assignmenttask, means the writer of the brief may not be best placed toevaluate the communicative effectiveness of their owninstructions and the guidelines can help with this.

4. There are features of assignment briefs which researchindicates contribute to their communicative effectiveness andknowledge of these should inform our assessment practice.

Enhancing the student experience and performance

1. The more effective the communication of assessmentrequirements and expectations the better students are able toshow their knowledge, understanding and skills.

2. The level of challenge for students in assessment should deriveprimarily from carrying out the assessment task itself ratherthan from working out what has to be done from the brief.

3. Student cognitive resources should be allocated primarilytowards learning, enhancing performance and showing howthey have met relevant learning outcomes rather than towardsworking out what is required in an assessment task.

4. Optimising the communicative effectiveness of the brief leadsto fewer queries on requirements and expectations and so toless staff and study support resources being used, thusallowing time for more constructive dialogue on the academictask itself.

5. More effective brief design frees up more student time andcognitive resources to be invested in the task itself rather thanin the processing of its requirements, thus potentiallyenhancing both the student academic experience and theiracademic performance.

The guidelines are applicable to all student types and, although perhaps of greater immediacy when designing briefs for those in the early stages of their assessment experience, are applicable to those being designed for students at all stages of their studies.


Research and development

The research contributing to the guidelines involved several stages, each of which emerged as a logical progression from the previous stage. The research was informed by literature in the following areas: assessment and feedback; pedagogic guides containing advice for designing assessments; cognitive load theory; instructional text design, information processing; educational psychology; teaching methodology; linguistics and discourse analysis.

Assignment Brief

Design Guidelines

Assignment Task Types:

Institutional analysis

Assignment Briefs Analysis :

Institutional analysis

Asssignment feedback analysis

Secondary research : Pedagogic guidelines

Instructional design guides

Cognitive psychology Assessment Linguistics

The Student Voice: Interviews

Assessment diaries Feedback

The Staff Voice: Interviews

National survey

Action Research: Piloting of

guidelines on consultancy basis


Assignment task text types research

Initially, an inductive analysis of 120 briefs was conducted to determine the frequency and nature of the written assignment text types required.

Assignment briefs analysis

The most significant finding to emerge from this was that over 20% of the briefs were not explicit about either the required task text types or their expected features. There were also a number of briefs which were unclear or inconsistent about other requirements. This led to a preliminary analysis to identify and collate general effective and less effective communicative features of briefs.

Assessment criteria and assignment feedback analysis

This initial assignment briefs analysis yielded a range of effective and less effective features, the most salient among the latter being a low level of explicitness. This raised the possibility that the written brief itself might have to depend on other means to communicate instructions fully. Therefore, using the same assignment briefs, an analysis of the assessment criteria and the feedback on a sample of submitted assignments was undertaken. The aim was to determine whether the feedback was consistent with and supplementary to requirements and expectations as expressed in the brief and embodied in the assessment criteria. The core outcome of this investigation was that there remained, to some extent, a number of requirements and expectations that were not explicit or were not consistently referred to.

The student voice

An analysis of specific questions on the communication of assignment requirements in student experience surveys and of student audio diaries on assessment was carried out. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a range of students. Participants were asked to select one effective and one less effective assignment brief and then

interviewed on features that contributed to the briefs’ effectiveness in communicating requirements and expectations. No direction was provided as to what might constitute an effective or less effective feature. Students highlighted and discussed, with great insight, a range of features. These were tallied, compared to the previous research findings and an initial prioritisation and categorisation of features was compiled.

The staff voice

The assignment brief design and delivery process was also investigated from the staff perspective. Structured interviews were conducted with lecturers by student researchers in the University of Huddersfield to explore staff perceptions of writing assignment briefs. These informed the design of a survey on designing assignment briefs and communicating assignment requirements, distributed across the HE sector.

Pilot guidelines

The outcomes of these two research areas, coupled with the findings of the previous research further informed the development of a draft set of assignment brief design guidelines which were piloted and evaluated.

Assignment brief consultancy

A trial assignment brief consultancy service was then set up in Oxford Brookes University. Staff members were invited to submit their assignment brief and, applying the guidelines, the communicative features of the brief were commented on and priority areas to work on provided. The experience in and feedback from the trial consultancy facilitated the final development of these assignment brief design guidelines.


Using the guidelines

These guidelines are intended for staff developers, programme teams, those responsible for quality enhancement and for individual members of staff.

They are not intended to be read through in a linear fashion but rather, used as a tool during the process of developing an assessment task and its written instructions. They can be used by individuals when designing a new task or fine-tuning an existing task, by staff developers when designing assessment related activities for continued professional development provision or by institutions for quality enhancement purposes.

These three modes and corresponding ways to exploit the guidelines are suggested below.

Individual practitioner mode

Individual members of staff can make use of the guidelines after designing a new academic assessment task and when beginning to write the instructions. They can also be used to fine-tune existing assignment briefs to enhance their communicate effectiveness.

The guidelines are quite extensive and detailed so cannot be assimilated quickly and subsequently applied to one’s practice. Therefore, to evaluate, edit and develop the communicative effectiveness of one’s brief, a staged approach to exploiting the guidelines is recommended below.

Once the assessment task itself is designed the assignment brief instructions can be developed.

The step-by-step process below is recommended to simultaneously design the brief whilst developing expertise in the area through becoming familiar with the guidelines and applying them to practice.

Preparing the ground

Read through how the guidelines are organised to get a general idea of the sections and sub-sections and what each of these refers to.

Check whether your institution has requirements or design guidelines for written assessment instructions.

Access several existing assignment briefs, perhaps both from within and outside your discipline, and read these to determine their assessment requirements and expectations.

Skim quickly over all the guidelines just to get a slightly better idea of their focus.

3. Assignment Brief Enhancement

F. Delivery

G. Dialogue

H. Monitoring

2. Assignment Brief Design

C. Layout

D. Language

E. Consistency

1. Assignment Brief Task

B. Explicitness A. Text Type


Using the briefs you have accessed, compare and evaluate the communicative effectiveness of their design features.

Planning the assessment task Plan in note form the assessment task you have designed, identifying and highlighting the core task.

Read through the Assignment Task Text Type guidelines sub-section 1A. Check the use of terms in the glossary.

Review your notes with these in mind.

Read through in detail the Assignment Task Explicitness guidelines sub-section 1B. Check the use of terms in the glossary.

Review your notes with these in mind.

Planning the brief List the sections of the brief. Sketch out an initial layout.

Read through in detail the Assignment Brief Design Layout guidelines sub-section 2C. Check the use of terms in the glossary.

Review your plan with these in mind.

List all the key terms you will use. Check you can define these easily yourself and consider potential difficulty for students in interpreting them. Check for use of multiple terms where one would suffice.

Drafting the brief Write a quick first draft of the whole brief.

Consider, with the students who will do the task in mind, what they would understand after one or two readings of the brief and what they might still need to seek clarification about.

Edit your first draft accordingly.

Read through in detail the Assignment Brief Design Language guidelines sub-section 2D. Check the use of terms in the glossary.

Edit your draft with these in mind.

Leave the draft for a while as this allows a fresh look later.

Re-drafting the brief Identify areas that, if added to the instructions, might increase their effectiveness. It is not only what the brief contains that needs to be evaluated but also what it does not contain.

Read through in detail the Assignment Task Explicitness guidelines sub-section 1B again.

Re-draft the brief with these in mind.


Editing the brief

Read through in detail the Assignment Brief Design Consistency guidelines sub-section 2E.

Review your draft with these in mind.

Check, with the help of a colleague preferably from the same discipline, that the assessment task subject requirements have been effectively communicated.

Ask a colleague and perhaps a student, preferably from another discipline, to read the brief with the aim of understanding the assessment requirements and expectations and then discuss to compare their interpretations with what you intended to communicate.

Final drafting Read once more through the guidelines sub-sections 1A, 1B, 1C, 2D & 2E considering which you have applied, which do not apply and which you might still have to think about.

Write a final draft of the brief.

Proofreading the briefDouble-check for consistency in use of terms.

Use a grammar and spellchecker.

Ask a colleague, preferably not an expert in the field, to proofread.

Enhancing the brief

Read through the Assignment Brief Design Enhancement guidelines sub-sections 3F, 3G and 3H.

Plan which aspects of enhancement you are going to implement.

Publish and deliver the assignment brief

Ensure on-going monitoring and enhancement of the communicative effectiveness of your brief.


Staff developer mode

The inclusion of these guidelines would be appropriate on the recommended reading list for teacher education provision such as the Postgraduate Certificate in Teaching in Higher Education (PCTHE) or assessment related staff development workshops. However, the transfer to practice effect would be greater if integrated as a resource within an assessment design or a reflection on practice task.

For example:

a. assessment design task

Participants design all the elements of an assessment task andas part of this activity, evaluate their own instructions, usingone or more sections or sub-sections of the guidelines as asupport tool in doing so. Peer evaluation would be appropriatehere.

b. assessment task (critical) evaluation

An exemplar assessment task brief is provided or participantsselect one of their own briefs. One of the sub tasks is, with theaid of the guidelines, to evaluate the effectiveness of theinstructions and re-design accordingly.

The staff developer should focus staff on one section andperhaps on a limited number of sub-sections within this.

Individuals could for instance, evaluate their own briefs usingthe core section 1, Assignment Brief Task guidelines, focusingon the Text Type sub-section A guidelines.

A colleague could then provide peer evaluation using the sub-section B, Explicitness guidelines.

Institutional mode

These guidelines and the recommended procedure for applying them will support staff development provision and individual practitioners in developing their practice. However, the writing of instructions for an increasingly diverse student body and for increasingly complex assessment tasks would benefit greatly from institutional support.

It is therefore advised that the following be considered:

• Disseminating the guidelines at programme level as well as toindividual staff members

• Integrating assignment brief design practice into institutionalpolicies and procedures

• Including the clarity of assessment tasks as an item in studentexperience evaluations

• Supporting staff in assignment brief enhancement byintegrating into quality assurance procedures

• Facilitating peer evaluation of assignment brief communicativeeffectiveness

• Facilitating student involvement in consultation on theeffectiveness of assignment briefs

• Setting up a central assignment brief consultancy.


Two example uses are outlined below:

a. Quality Assurance and Enhancement tool

There a number of institutions where it is part of the coursedesign process for assignments, before delivery to students, tobe first passed to colleagues for checking and comment. Theguidelines can be used to inform this process.

Where student evaluation data, at course or programme level,yields a negative perception of the communication ofassessment requirements and expectations, the guidelines canprovide a more finely grained analysis of the nature of thisperceived communication gap and thus facilitate development.

b. Staff Consultancy Service

To support the initial application of the guidelines theinstitution can set up a central, faculty or programme-basedconsultancy.

A number of staff, perhaps drawn from members of anacademic literacy support service or staff development unitcan be resourced to become expert in using the guidelines. Theinclusion of students in this would also be appropriate.

Individuals submit their new or existing briefs and receivedevelopmental feedback on their communicative effectiveness.

Ideally this process should be carried out reflecting bestpractice in electronic submission and feedback.

Depending on resources this could be voluntary or arequirement for all new or re-validated assignments.


Assignment Brief

ENHANCEMENT

Assignment Brief DESIGN

Assignment Brief TASK


F. Delivery

G. Dialogue

H. Monitoring


C. Layout

D. Language

E. Consistency



THE GUIDELINES


Underlying principles

The principles underlying the guidelines are listed below. These have emerged from the project team’s experience, research and from dialogue across the sector with staff and students alike, on this area of practice:

1. Working on the communicative effectiveness of the brief willhelp in narrowing the gap between staff expectations andstudent performance.

2. Assignment briefs should be designed such that they maximiseinclusivity with regard to individual differences in language,cultural and educational background, in informationprocessing preferences or in willingness to requestclarification of requirements and expectations.

3. A clear, explicit and accessible brief does not imply a reductionin constructive dialogue emerging from the assessment taskitself.

4. One should aim towards the written brief enabling fullunderstanding of what is required and expected in taskperformance rather than depending on additional spoken orother means of clarifying instructions.

5. Maximising the communicative effectiveness of instructionsdoes not imply spoon-feeding students but means designingand scaffolding briefs appropriately and according tostudents’ stage of academic and assessment literacydevelopment.

6. A clear, explicit and accessible brief need not necessarily implya restriction of student innovation and creativity in taskperformance or hinder development of independence.

7. Although one might attribute students not doing what wasexpected in assignments to their not reading the briefthoroughly, we should not base our practice on a deficit modelof the student’s understanding of instructions, but on theinitial assumption that the fault lies in a communicative failurein the brief.

8. Although making the implicit explicit in briefs may be anunreachable goal, this does not mean we should abandon theattempt.


Organisation of the guidelines

The guidelines are grouped into three sections, each of which is organized into sub-sections. At the core are those relating to the assignment task itself and those features of the brief that contribute to the effective communication of this task. The five sub-sections A-E are ordered to reflect the likely order of thought processes a staff member or team might go through when designing an assignment task and then writing the instructions for this task.

The individual guidelines within each section have been ordered to reflect their likely contribution towards the communicative effectiveness of the assignment brief.

1. The Assignment Brief Task

These guidelines refer to the core assessment task.

A. Text type

These guidelines refer to the final written or spoken product of an assignment.

B. Explicitness

These guidelines refer to the extent to which assessment requirements and expectations are spelled out in the brief.


These guidelines refer to the design choices involved in organizing, formatting and expressing the instructions.

C. Layout

These guidelines refer to the organizing and formatting of the brief.

D. Language

These guidelines refer to aspects of the language used such as vocabulary, expressions, grammatical structure and style.

E. Consistency

These guidelines refer to consistency in the use of language in the brief.


These guidelines refer to improving communicative effectiveness by means beyond the features of the written brief itself.

F. Delivery

These guidelines refer to ways of ensuring that the conditions under which the brief is communicated are optimal.

G. Dialogue

These guidelines refer to ways of ensuring that dialogue between and among students and staff about the assignment is as constructive as possible.

H. Monitoring

These guidelines refer to the on-going process of improving the communicative effectiveness of an assignment brief.


F. Delivery

G. Dialogue

H. Monitoring


C. Layout

D. Language

E. Consistency




Text Type To ensure student time spent working out and confirming assessment requirements is minimized and to maximise inclusivity:

State in the instructions the type of text that students are required to produce.

There are a large and increasing number of possible assignment text types beyond the still most common of essay, report and presentation. Each of these types has a range of sub-types, each with their own organizational text

structure, or format as they are often referred to. The features of a single text type can differ

between disciplines and to some extent within disciplinary groups.

There is not always, among students or staff, a shared understanding of the features of these texts, nor a common term used to refer to each type. Therefore, the more information provided in the brief the better, not only for both student processing of instructions and subsequent performance in the assessed tasks, but also to facilitate staff discussion about the assignment. Consider providing a text type template of the required format.

For example, the range can include such text types as: essay, report, lab report, reflective essay, précis, poster pitch, journal article, letter of complaint, website, research proposal, blog, letter to client from a law firm, article review, care plan, portfolio. There also exist assignments

which involve a combination of two or more of such text types. These are sometimes known as patchwork assignments.

If at this stage of their academic literacy development, students are expected to determine autonomously the type of text and its format and this is one of the assessed learning outcomes, then consider stating this explicitly in the brief.

Text Audience To ensure the student is best equipped to perform the task appropriately:

Indicate where necessary, who the target audience of the assignment is. In other words, tell the student who the text should be written for. Assignment tasks can be designed to have a purely academic, a professional, a vocational or a general public audience. They can also involve a combination of these such as a group marketing report (professional audience) with a reflective journal on the process of the group work (academic audience). If none is stipulated, the default option in students’ minds will be the traditional academic audience. Being explicit about the target audience clarifies the appropriate text design and language style students need to use.

When a degree of autonomy in any of these text type features is expected at any stage of students’ assessment literacy development, then consider being explicit in the brief that this is the case.

1. Assignment Brief Task | These guidelines refer to the core assessment task

A. Text Type | These guidelines refer to the final written or spoken product of an assignment

If you don’t have the structure,

you feel that you are wasting your

time ...

Most inaccurate submissions relate to more complex tasks

which require a combination of elements,

such as for example a portfolio.


For example, common non-academic audiences include the general public, a government department, senior management, operations manager, law client, brand consultancy, social work team, hotel group, and conference delegates.

If at this stage of students’ academic literacy development, it is one of the assessed learning outcomes that students determine audience autonomously, then consider stating this explicitly in the brief.

Text role To better equip the student to perform the task appropriately:

Indicate where appropriate, what role the student is to assume when doing the task. If no text role is stipulated,

the default option in students’ minds will be the traditional student role.

Assignment tasks might however expect students to take on a professional role or be a

combination of the academic and the professional. Stating clearly the

student role clarifies not only their approach to the task itself but also the appropriate text design and writing style.

For example, this might involve performing the task in such roles as management consultant, health care professional, legal adviser, brand management expert, project management team member, an academic, a conference poster presenter or an environmental consultant.

If at this stage of the students’ academic literacy development, autonomy in determining their role is expected, then consider stating this explicitly in the brief.

Text Subsections To ensure students do not have to expend time and effort unnecessarily seeking to clarify requirements:

State what subsections are required in the assignment text type and what the subheadings are for each.

For example, you may require a business report and within this, not require an executive summary. This is a less frequent feature of this text type and so this difference needs to be highlighted.

If at this stage of their academic literacy development, students are expected to decide autonomously on which sub-sections to include and to come up with their own subheadings, then consider stating this explicitly in the brief.

Text Alignment To ensure optimal use of students’ cognitive resources by exploiting existing task schemas:

Avoid wherever feasible mismatches between the assignment brief text requirements and those provided by widely used study skills guides and training.

Where your assignment text requirements differ in any way from the generally accepted conventional features, explain how in the brief.

For example, you may require an essay with sub-headings for its various sections and you may expect charts and figures. These are less frequent features of an essay and so this difference needs to be made salient.

If at this stage of the students’ academic literacy development, they are expected to be flexible in their use of text types, then there is no need to highlight such mismatches.

I ensure that instructions are clearly open to a broad interpretation to allow students to follow the brief in a creative way …

… having thestructure is like a stepping-stone.


Task Familiarity To ensure that students’ assessment task type schemas are activated and to maximise inclusivity:

Aim to increase the level of support in the brief in line with the level of student familiarity with the required task type.

For those assessment tasks students are likely to be very unfamiliar with, consider being

highly explicit about the required task in the instructions. This supports all students and also ensures inclusivity in

assessment by not disadvantaging those from an academic culture where the

assignment task type is less commonly encountered. If such explicitness is not feasible, refer students to where this knowledge can be obtained, by for example, directing them within the brief itself to exemplars or relevant study skills guidelines.

For example, an increasingly common task type is a reflective diary. This is sometimes also referred to as a reflective statement, a reflective log, reflective commentary or reflective essay. It is an unknown type of task in many academic cultures so would require greater explicitness.

If students are at a stage of academic literacy development where they are already familiar with the required task type, or are expected to be autonomous in working out the appropriate characteristics of the

required product of the task, then make this expectation explicit in the brief.

Task Purpose To ensure the overarching purpose of the assignment is immediately clear to students:

Ensure the central purpose of the assignment, i.e. why the student is being asked to do the task, is as explicit as possible by stating concisely the overarching learning aim or rationale. This helps ensure the assignment serves the purpose it was designed to.

For example, ‘The purpose of this assignment is for you to undertake secondary research in order to then evaluate the applicability of several theoretical models in the field.’

If however students are expected to determine the overarching purpose of the assessment task autonomously, then consider stating this explicitly in the brief.

Task Direction To minimise student uncertainty and the time spent seeking clarification of what is expected in the task:

Aim to remove unnecessary ambiguity by giving serious consideration to the use of an open-ended task or one which provides a number

When a degree of autonomy in any of these elements is expected at any stage of students’ assessment literacy development, then consider being explicit in the brief that this is the case.

B. Explicitness | These guidelines refer to the extent to which assessment requirements and expectations are spelled out in the brief

It was only when I got the feedback that I understood what I

should have done ...

We didn’t know where to start, what

to do, it was so broad, so huge and

so open ...


of choices in task elements or assignment requirements.

For example, when offering students full choice in text type and in word count as in ‘use any format, any length as long as it answers the question’, this can result in undue worry and time spent with sources of study support.

and: ‘This assignment may be completed in pairs and in doing so you will have the opportunity to develop ideas with a fellow student.

However, if you have a preference to work individually, you may do so’.

If however students are expected to deal autonomously with open-ended tasks and requirements at this stage of their studies, or an open-ended brief is provided in order to encourage creativity or staff-student

constructive dialogue, then consider stating this explicitly in the brief.

Task Discourse To ensure students’ knowledge of language is activated immediately thus minimizing time spent seeking clarification of the expected discourse style:

Aim to be explicit about which academic functions you expect them to undertake. To do this, use commonly encountered key assignment task verbs such as ‘identify’, ‘critically evaluate’ and ‘justify’ in the instructions. These not only clarify the assessment functions that students are expected to perform but importantly, the discourse style that corresponds to these assignment task verbs.

If students are expected to be able to determine autonomously the assignment task verbs associated with a task, then consider stating this explicitly in the brief.

Task Scaffolding To ensure students are fully aware of all the components and stages involved in the assignment task:

Increase the amount of scaffolding in the brief by breaking down the task into its component parts and the sequence of stages needed to complete it. State these explicitly in the brief.

For example, use a flow chart to illustrate the stages of complex tasks and / or the relationship between the task components.

If the student is expected to work out the appropriate components and stages autonomously then be explicit about the need for them to do this in the brief.

Task Theory To ensure students are aware of the place of theory in the assignment:

Consider making explicit the theoretical frameworks students should draw on, refer to or apply.

For example, ‘refer to at least two of the theoretical frameworks, X, Y and Z, that were covered during the semester’.

If at this stage of the students’ academic literacy development, autonomy in this element is one of the assessed learning outcomes and thus integral to the task, then consider stating this explicitly in the brief.

It was hard to be sure you knew everything you

needed to do, so it was all a bit

worrying …


Task Resources To ensure that students are as clear as possible about the research and other resource requirements of the assignment:

Consider being explicit about the required type and extent of research that is required. If secondary research is required, this should be made clear. Avoid generic statements such as: ‘It is expected you will employ a wide range of sources’. Indicate the minimum number of sources that are required. Give further guidance on what type of sources you expect students to use and where to locate these. Similarly, if there are other resources necessary to perform the task, such as a data set or other documentation, ensure this is included explicitly in the brief.

For example, the instruction: ‘It is expected you will base your critical review on at least four items to back up your critical review, in addition to the articles selected from the VLE: chapters in books, journal articles, research summaries. Some suggestions for reading are included in the module handbook’, is significantly more explicit than ‘It is expected you will employ a wide range of sources’.

If it is an integral part of the assessment that, at this stage of their academic literacy development, students are autonomous in determining the amount of research and the use and locating of sources, then consider stating this explicitly in the brief.

Task Reference style To ensure requests for clarification of requirements are kept to minimum:

Be explicit about the type of academic source referencing that is expected by stating the referencing style required and by clarifying whether a reference list and / or a bibliography is required.

If however students are expected to select the referencing style autonomously and this is one of the assessed learning outcomes, then consider stating this explicitly in the brief.

Task Word count To ensure requests for clarification of requirements are kept to minimum:

Be as explicit as possible about word count requirements. State what is and what is not included in the word count. Similarly, if there are several sections to an assignment, where possible indicate the proportion of the word count each should be allocated.

For example, a case study assignment task might include, amongst other sections, an executive summary, illustrations and tables, a list of references and appendices. Queries on whether or not such sections are included in the word count are very frequent. This task might also include a reflective statement. Queries about the length of such parts of assignments are also very frequent.

If, at this stage of their assessment literacy development, the aim is for students to decide for themselves the appropriate word length, then consider stating this explicitly in the brief.

Every day I spend at least an hour clarifying the task to students, it’s so frustrating…

Everything you needed to do was there – you didn’t depend on finding out by accident from other students …


I spent longer trying to

understand the task than actually

doing it…

Task Timeline To back up the written instructions and better equip the student to perform the task appropriately:

Consider, where the assignment has a complex set of sub tasks each of which contribute in turn to the next, including a timeline for the assessment task stages, preferably in diagram form.

If at this stage of the students’ assessment literacy development, it is expected that students work out and plan their own timeline, then this would not be appropriate.

Task Referring To ensure students are able to access all possible means to clarify assignment requirements:

Consider stating explicitly how students can develop their understanding of what is expected, especially when the written instructions cannot be sufficient to clarify the assignment requirements due to the complexity of the task.

For example, refer students to elements of the assessment criteria or the feedback form that help understand requirements. Where staff-student dialogue is necessary, or student-student dialogue desirable, state clearly how and when this will take place.

If at this stage of their assessment literacy development, students are expected to exploit all available means of clarifying requirements autonomously, then consider stating this explicitly in the brief.

Explicit Inexplicitness To avoid unnecessary requests for clarification and to highlight to students the level of autonomy required at this stage of their academic development:

Aim to be explicit about not being explicit. In other words, ensure wherever feasible, that students are aware that when something is not made explicit in the instructions, that this is deliberate as they are expected or required to be aware of or work it out for themselves.

If there are elements of the assessment task that you consider implicit and only knowable by other means than through the brief itself, such as for example, during a face-face teaching session or through constructive dialogue in a subsequent tutorial setting, then consider stating this explicitly in the brief.

It was only when I got the feedback that I understood

what I should have done...


Assembling To ensure students’ attention when processing the brief is not unnecessarily dispersed:

Aim to ensure that information on the various assignment elements are not unnecessarily scattered throughout the instructions. Assemble

these in distinct sub-sections of the brief while making use of paragraphing, sub-headings

and sub-section indexing to highlight the effective chunking of information.

For example, rather than dispersing the requirements relating to deadlines,

hand in requirements and technical details (such as font, line spacing,

submission mode) throughout the brief, assemble these in a section entitled ‘Hand-in Requirements’ and within this, the necessary sub-headings such as ‘Deadlines’, ‘Font Requirements’ and ‘Cover Sheet’.

Core To ensure students can quickly and easily locate the assignment task itself and are focused on the core requirements from the outset:

Aim to include a concise statement of the core assessment task. Locate this preferably near the beginning of the instructions, highlighted by means of font, formatting or layout. Ensure this is easy to locate on the

page rather than being embedded in a long piece of text along with information about other assignment elements, such as the rationale for the task, the submission details, the cover sheet details and so on. This allows student to not only find the core task quickly, but then to process effectively the more in-depth guidelines provided in the rest of the brief.

For example, A critical review of two academic articles

Ordering To ensure students’ attention is focused logically and efficiently:

Aim to order the constituents of the brief so that they reflect the order that students are most likely to work logically through and process the task instructions to process its requirements.

For example, use the order: Assignment Title, Core Task, Learning Outcomes, Task Requirements, Assessment Criteria, Submission Details, Deadlines.

If there are institutional requirements, such as a standard format, which stipulates a different order, then this would take precedence.

2. Assignment Brief Design | These guidelines refer to the design choices involved in organising, formatting and expressing the instructions

C. Layout | These guidelines refer to the organising and formatting of the brief

There were a lot of things we needed to do, but it was hard to extract them from the

brief, we all were very confused …

It was like a map, broken down into

sections so it is very easy to see …


Learning Outcomes To ensure students can find learning outcomes easily and are more likely to relate these appropriately to the assignment and its requirements:

Consider placing the learning outcomes as close as possible to the core task or the specific task requirement to which they refer.

If, at this stage of their assessment literacy development, students are expected or required to link the assessment task to the relevant learning outcomes autonomously, then consider stating this explicitly in the brief.

Salience To ensure students can identify key information quickly and easily:

Aim to make maximum use of formatting and font tools such as bold, italics, shaded text and so on, to increase salience of key information. This allows students to identify key information at the outset and then to process priority requirements and expectations in a more effective manner.

If it is one of the assessed learning outcomes that students identify and prioritise key information autonomously, then this would not be appropriate.

Sequencing To ensure students d do not have to waste time and cognitive resources in reordering steps for task completion from the instructions:

Consider, depending on the complexity of the processes involved in the task, sequencing the written instructions so that they mirror the

order of the stages the students will go through when doing the assignment. Use a step-by-step approach, with layout options to make these stages clear. This is especially the case when the task is highly complex with

numerous stages and processes involved.

For example, use a numbered list of stages or when there are multiple, complex processes involved, use a flow chart.

If it is integral to the assessment that students, at this stage of their development, figure this out for themselves, then state this explicitly in the brief.

Task components To ensure students can process the instructions efficiently and are fully aware of everything they need to submit from the outset:

Where there are a number of parts to the assignment task students have to complete, consider including these in a format that makes it easy to identify the assignment task components.

It wasn’t just one full text and you had

to search for the important parts …


Visualisation To ensure inclusivity in catering for differing individual learning and information processing style preferences and degree of familiarity with academic tasks:

Consider, where feasible, instead of, or in addition to the written instructions, using visuals, diagrams or illustrations to further clarify or contextualise the assessment task components and processes and how these combine to contribute to the whole. This is especially important when the task has several components.

Spacing To ensure readability of the brief is optimized:

Aim for an effective use of white space on the page between constituents of the brief.

Use horizontal white spacing on the page between headings and text as well as between the main sections and sub sections of the brief and use this consistently. This helps students to get an idea of the overall structure of information in the brief and its constituents and so to process the instructions more effectively.

Length To ensure students are able to process and interpret the task requirements efficiently:

Aim for brief briefs. Keep the overall brief as short as possible, minimising non-essential information in the brief itself, while maintaining clarity and comprehensiveness.

It was very clear, lots of white space and

large fonts ...


Complexity To ensure students’ interpretation of instructions is facilitated:

Aim to use less complexly structured sentences in the brief. This makes them as straightforward as possible

to interpret. Longer sentences with more than two subordinate clauses tend to be more complexly structured. This makes them harder to interpret.

For example, due to the fact that longer sentences which have more than two subordinate clauses

tend to be more complexly structured thus making them harder to interpret, aim to use less complexly

structured sentences in the brief so that they are as straightforward as possible to interpret.

… Similarly, avoid double or treble negatives.

For example, ‘On no account should you not include a reference to at least one theoretical framework unless you provide a convincing rationale for not doing so’.

Information Density To ensure students are not unnecessarily overloaded when processing instructions

Aim to restrict information contained in a sentence to a single constituent of the assessment brief rather than packing instructions about several constituents of the brief into one sentence.

For example,’You are required to submit the essay, relating a theoretical discussion of a concept or author studied on the course,

drawing on scholarly sources, (2,500 words plus/minus 10%, excluding bibliography) in week 11’.

This sentence refers to several constituents of the brief: the text type, the core task, the research requirements, the word count requirements and the deadline.

Cognitive Processes To ensure students’ current academic and assessment literacy knowledge is activated to support their task performance and to clarify what is expected:

Aim to include the more commonly used key assignment task verbs such as the verbs ‘analyse’, ‘identify’, ‘argue’, ‘critically evaluate’.

Using these verbs helps students recognise immediately what is expected and aids in the process of working towards a common understanding of assessment related language.

Cognitive Products To ensure students’ current academic and assessment literacy knowledge is activated to support their task performance and to clarify what is expected:

Aim where appropriate, when using phrases which describe the quality of work expected by the student, to unpack these by restating them in other more concrete ways, or referring students to where they can clarify their intended meaning.

For example, such phrases as ‘quality sources’, ‘sound argument’, ‘robust treatment’, and ‘lucid exposition’.

D. Language | These guidelines refer to aspects of the language used such as vocabulary, expressions, grammatical structure and style

There was a void between them and

us, a void in terminology. A

stream of consciousness with lots of big words …

Love or hate it, academic language gives you power – you want to pushstudents but ensure you are not excluding anyone …


Frequency To ensure the language used for the assignment brief is as accessible as possible:

Avoid words and expressions which are less frequently used by, and therefore potentially less accessible to, certain groups of students.

For example, this language includes:

Academese: unnecessarily rare words and phrases such as ‘concretise’.

Verbs: ‘The essay should occupy no more than 4 pages’

Idioms: such as ‘bear in mind’, ‘not up to scratch’, ‘get to grips with’, ‘start from scratch’ and ‘in a nutshell’.

Adjectives: such as ‘crisp summary’ or ‘long-winded account’.

Latin terms: such as ‘critical analysis is the sine qua non of academic research…’

Or ‘you should, ceteribus paribus, complete your individual research before the group work stage begins’.

Sociocultural References To ensure the cultural references used in the assignment brief are as accessible to the widest possible range of students:

Avoid references to concepts requiring culturally specific knowledge not necessarily shared by all student groups and thus reduce inclusivity.

For example, in a British academic environment, using terms such as ‘Orwellian’, ‘Fat cats’ or acronyms such as ‘NHS’.

If, for the purposes of setting the assignment, the use of such terms is unavoidable, include an explanation.

Assessment Jargon To ensure the terminology used for assessment is as accessible as possible to the full range of students:

Make use of the more frequently used, generally accepted assessment terminology to refer to concepts such as ‘weighting’, ‘exemplar text’ and ‘feed forward’. To aid students’ assessment literacy development, at early stages of their studies, consider providing support in the interpretation of such assessment specific terminology in the brief

itself by defining or explaining where necessary.

Research Jargon To ensure the terminology used for research is as accessible as possible to the full range of students:

Try to make use of research terminology in the brief, such as ‘critical evaluation’, ‘evidence based’ and ‘validity’. To aid students’ assessment literacy development, at early stages of their studies consider providing support in the interpretation of such research specific terminology in the brief itself by defining or explaining where necessary.

If, at this stage of their academic literacy development students are expected to be fully conversant with the research terms used in the brief then this would not be necessary.

I could understand it all more or less

when I read it through the first

time …


Tone To ensure students’ processing of the assignment instructions is not adversely influenced by the use of language:

Provide instructions, which, although direct, avoid a tone which might trigger a negative response in some students. This may adversely affect their processing of the instructions since their processing of information is influenced by their emotional state during reading. Such a response might also lower their subsequent motivation and engagement with the task as they may thus feel themselves to be a less worthy member of the academic community of practice.

Avoid therefore the overuse of ‘do’ and ‘don’t’ type imperatives such, especially with capitals as in ‘DO NOT just describe’.

Avoid the overuse of ‘will’ and ‘must’ in phrases, especially coupled with the use of capitals, as in ‘You WILL employ references in your essay’ and ‘You MUST demonstrate a range of critical thinking in your essay’.

Avoid a tone that stresses the difficulty or the high stakes nature of the assessment task. For example: ‘putting together an argument with a logical progression of reasoning is not easy’ or ‘failure to provide references will lead to a severe penalty and result in failing the coursework’.

Similarly, avoid the use of language such as: ‘Waffling will reduce your mark’, ‘Don’t be fooled into thinking….’ or ‘Avoid hot air’. These, apart from being highly infrequent idioms, have negative emotional connotations.

Assessment briefs are scary. People need to be reassured as well as challenged by the assessment. This all needs to be communicated within the brief.


Naming To ensure effective communication and dialogue about the assignment:

Give the assignment a formal title and use this consistently when referring to the

assignment, both within the brief itself and when communicating about it elsewhere with both students and staff. Students and staff alike may be involved in a

number of courses all of which have assignments entitled for example,

‘Assignment 1’.

Text type To ensure unnecessary requests for clarification are kept to a minimum:

Aim to be consistent in the term used to refer to the text type students are required to produce.

For example, using the terms ‘Reflective Commentary’ and ‘Learning Log’ to refer to the same required text may suggest two differing discourse types to students or perhaps lead them to waste time checking whether indeed two text types are required.

Task To ensure unnecessary requests for clarification are kept to a minimum:

Aim to avoid inconsistency in references to the assignment task components.

For example, where the core task stipulates drawing on ‘two theoretical approaches’ but later in the brief, further guidelines provided refer to ‘your chosen theoretical approach’.

Assessment jargon To ensure students’ cognitive resources are not wasted in the interpretation of unnecessarily competing academic terms:

Aim to consistently use the same term for the same assessment related concept.

For example, when initially referring to the ‘assignment’ itself, avoid then referring to it subsequently as the ‘assessment’, the ‘coursework’ or the ‘task’.

E. Consistency | These guidelines refer to consistency in the use of language in the brief

We were confused because the assignment was called a ‘Business

Case Study’ but everywhere else it was

called ’your essay’ …


Discipline jargon To ensure clarity and facilitate student and staff communication:

Aim to be consistent in the use of subject discipline terms, avoiding the use of multiple terms in the assignment brief to refer to the same or parallel concepts. This consistency in use of language in the brief itself extends to ensuring all staff working on the course employ the same vocabulary when referring to the concept in question.

If however, it is one of the assessed learning outcomes that students develop or exhibit their familiarity with these multiple terms in processing the brief, then this would not apply.

Criteria To ensure students can effectively relate assessment and feedback criteria to the assignment task itself:

Aim to be consistent in use of terms within all elements of the brief: the learning outcomes, the grading or feedback forms and the main body of the brief itself.

For example, the learning outcomes for a case study might refer to ‘action plans’, while the assessment criteria to ‘targets’ and in the assignment brief itself, this then be referred to as ‘recommendations’.

There were three different versions of the instructions...


Delivery Recognition To ensure student time in processing briefs is as efficient as possible:

Aim to use the same, or parallel set of formats for briefs for each of the assignments across a module, programme, field or faculty.

Delivery Testing To ensure maximum readability and that students are more likely to do what is expected:

Test the brief on a colleague, preferably one from another subject area and perhaps also a student on another course. Ask to read the brief and to relate any difficulties in interpretation they have and say what they understand is expected from the assessment task. This is advisable, as the designer of instructions, due to their familiarity with the task and their expertise in the field, is not always best placed to evaluate the brief’s readability.

Delivery Mode To ensure the full range of individual student information processing style preferences are catered for:

Consider using multi modal assignment brief setting by providing written instructions with an oral version also available in the form of a recorded spoken reformulation of the instructions. Such multi modal presentation of the instructions would not be a substitute for constructive dialogue around the assignment task.

Delivery Placement To ensure efficient use of student time in assignment task processing:

Aim to have all documents associated with the assignment, such as the grading criteria, exemplars and feedback sheets, stored together with the brief itself in an easily accessed central place. For example, in an assessment area in the Virtual Learning Environment.

Delivery Reinforcement To ensure that students engagement with the task is optimised:

Aim to refer periodically to the assignment brief during the course. Rather than a single session introducing the assignment, build in regular slots for dialogue about the assignment.

Delivery Exemplars To ensure that students’ current assessment task and text type schemas are activated and used as efficiently as possible:

Consider providing access to sample completed assignments or parallel example texts (exemplar texts) along with marking exercises. This helps contextualize the instructions.

3. Assignment Brief Enhancement | These guidelines refer to improving communicative effectiveness by means beyond the features of the written brief itself

F. Delivery | These guidelines refer to ways of ensuring that the conditions under which the brief are communicated are optimal

The lecturer said you needed to go to the

lecture to find out what to do or you’d get a low

mark …


Assignment Dialogue To ensure communication opportunities are as accessible as possible:

Provide opportunities for discussion of the assignment task among staff and students. These could, for example, be short face-face slots or

Virtual Learning Environment discussion forums. Ensure details of how to access

these opportunities are stated in the brief and the expected degree of engagement is

indicated. This ensures that accessibility is not limited to cue-seekers, in other words,

only to those students who expect or are predisposed to engage in such dialogue.

Discipline Dialogue To ensure discussion is as productive as possible: and to enable staff to better communicate their tacit knowledge:

Provide opportunities for staff members to explore their personal conceptualisations of key discipline-specific concepts and closely associated terms. This development of a shared understanding will help to ensure consistency in the team’s use of terms thus facilitating more effective team communication as well as fostering collaborative development in assessment literacy.

Assessment Jargon Dialogue To ensure communication among staff and students is as effective as possible:

Aim, through discussion, to foster and exploit a common understanding of key assignment task verbs and assessment related language, for example, verbs such as ‘define’, ‘analyse’, ‘argue’, ‘critically evaluate’. These tend to have differing uses in non-academic contexts and even within academic environments, can have multiple interpretations.

Indexing To ensure maximum efficiency when communicating about the assignment:

Use a naming, numbering or similar indexing system for sub sections of briefs to facilitate reference to these when communicating with students about the assignment.

G. Dialogue | These guidelines refer to ways of ensuring that dialogue between and among students and staff about the assignment is as constructive as possible

The lecturers kept mentioning the

assignment in the lectures …

There is discrepancy between lecturers about what the brief means …


Monitoring Understanding To ensure those students with difficulties in interpreting the brief are supported:

Provide a formal system for queries about the assignment, with

responses accessible by the whole group. This could, for example, be paper-based, a Q&A slot in a lecture or on the VLE and it could be peer-peer

or student to staff. This could also be anonymous where it is felt

the students’ cultural background may restrict their readiness to query or engage in dialogue about assessment requirements

Monitoring Difficulties To ensure student difficulties in interpreting the brief are designed out over time:

Set up a means of collating a record of all the assignment queries received and the responses anduse these to design out the less

effective features of the brief. If the difficulty cannot be designed out of

the instruction, then consider adding to a list of FAQs.

Monitoring Performance To ensure student performance of assessment tasks is not potentially hindered by difficulties in interpreting the brief:

Aim to collate common areas of poor performance over time, to determine whether these might be a result of less effective features in the assignment brief itself. Re-design the instructions accordingly to test this possibility.

Monitoring Feedback To ensure student performance of assessment tasks is optimised by the brief itself:

Aim to collate, from completed assignments, recurring feedback comments from assessors and determine whether these might be a result of less effective features in the assignment brief itself. Re-design the instructions accordingly to test this possibility.

Monitoring Evaluation To ensure the brief is as communicatively effective as possible:

Include at programme or course level, a student evaluation questionnaire item focusing on the effectiveness of the brief itself. Collate recurring evaluative comments to increase the effective features in the brief and use the results to assess the brief’s communicative effectiveness over time.

H. Monitoring | These guidelines refer to the on-going process of improving the communicative effectiveness of an assignment brief

We all emailed him so many times that in the

end he rewrote the brief and sent it to us all...

I email the whole cohort as part of firefighting the student grapevine which students believe is more accurate than what is published in the module guide …

I’m catering for lots of different students but have tweaked the instructions a lot so think I’m better now …


Glossary of termsThe first instance of each of the terms below is greyed out in the text.

The terms are explained here as they are used in these guidelines.

Academese: the term is used here with a negative connotation to refer to the use of language which although perhaps appropriate to communicate with other specialists, would be less accessible to the wider academic community and is unlikely to be appropriate in an assignment brief.

Academic literacy: disciplinary and professional knowledge, understanding and skills and extent of integration within the discipline-specific academic and /or professional community of practice.

Assessment literacy: understanding of, and competence in, handling assessment, feedback, feedforward and awareness of their contribution to learning.

Assignment: a non exam-based assessment task. This is sometimes referred to as a ‘coursework’.

Audience: the intended recipient of the written or spoken text type.

Brief: the written instructions provided to communicate expectations and requirements for written or spoken assessment tasks. The brief is also sometimes known as the assignment instructions, criteria, specifications or rubric. It is not used here to refer to aspects of the task design itself, to the assessment criteria or to other forms of assessment such as exams.

Chunking: refers to the grouping of aspects of requirements and expectations for assessment tasks in manageable sized units to reduce potential information overload and support effective, in-depth processing of information.

Cognitive resources: the mental capacity available to the student to allocate to the various aspects of the assignment.

Communicative effectiveness: the extent to which assessment instructions achieve their communication of the intended task requirements and expectations.

Components: this refers to the various elements of the assessment task.

Constituents: this refers to the various elements, or parts, of the assignment brief instructions.

Cover sheet: a front page of the assignment with information including such details as student name and number, statement of originality and word count. This is sometimes an institutional requirement with a template provided for student use.

Cue-seekers: students who are predisposed to engage in dialogue about the assignment requirements and task expectations and thus more likely to request clarification of these.

Delivery: this refers to the stage when the assignment is set and the instructions provided.

Exemplar: a completed assessment task which reflects, in terms of text type and academic conventions, similar characteristics to that which the assignment brief stipulates.

Expectations: these refer to the aspects of the assessed task underlying its performance and primarily involve the application of knowledge and skills (compare with requirements).

Explicitness: the degree to which understanding of the expectations and requirements of an assignment depends on knowledge obtained from the brief itself rather than from sources out with the brief.

Features: the characteristics of the brief such as its layout, degree of explicitness and use of language.

Format: a widely used term to refer to the way information is organised in texts. Sometimes referred to as text structure.


Inclusivity: the avoidance of excluding or disadvantaging students on the grounds of, for example, gender, race, class, sexuality, disability or language competence.

Layout: the way text is formatted and set out on the page.

Patchwork assignment: an assignment task which is made up of a combination of two or more text types and so has more than one audience, language style, layout and so on. Alternatively, it refers to an assignment task with several extracts from one text type.

Readability: the level of difficulty in interpreting the brief, which depends on degree of complexity of its grammar, language and discourse.

Requests for clarification: occasions when a student approaches teaching staff, support services or other students, to clarify an assignment’s requirements or expectations.

Requirements: these refer to elements of the assessment task such as word count, submission mode and deadlines that must be adhered to (compare with expectations).

Scaffolding: various means by which guidance in the brief, in line with current needs and competence, is provided to support students in completing assessment tasks.

Schemas: existing conceptual frameworks that facilitate the efficient and effective processing and interpretation of information.

Sequencing: various means by which guidance in the brief, in line with student needs and competence, is provided to support in completing the assessment task.

Spoon-feeding: a negative term used to refer to a degree of support to students in task completion in the brief which is such that it restricts student autonomy, capacity to develop and opportunities for creativity. Common associated terms are ‘handholding’, ‘near recipes’ or ‘prescriptive’.

Tacit knowledge: the term is used here to refer to knowledge that has become so much part of the teacher’s cognitive repertoire that they are not immediately aware it might need to be made explicit to students.

Text role: this refers to the role the student is to assume as the producer of their oral or written assessment task.

Text structure: a widely used term to refer to the way information is organised in texts. Sometimes referred to as format.

Text type: The term text type is used here to refer to written or spoken texts. Texts with the same or very similar features such as language, discourse and layout, would be considered as one text type. A research report is a text type. A case study is a sub-text type.

VLE: the Virtual Learning Environment where electronic media and information communication technologies are combined in one platform for educational purposes.


Further information and resources:

For more information on the research and pilot, or for further reading and related continuing professional development resources, please visit the Assignment Brief Project web pages at:

http://assignmentbriefdesign.weebly.com

For queries on the guidelines please email:

[email protected]

To obtain a large-print copy of (or sections of) this publication, or to enquire about other formats, please email [email protected]

assignment brief design guidelines - plymouth … gilbert and garry maguire . assignment brief ......

Documents