2. The expectations, including assessment requirements, were clear​

• Announcement summary after each week were great! I think it’s a good way to gain where we should be sitting after each week and what we will be looking at in the coming week.
• The introduction to the modules were very helpful as it helped let us generally know what the upcoming assignment is about.
• Having lectures explaining assignments thoroughly was really helpful as it gave clear expectations.
• The tutor actually went through examples for the assignments and went through good examples of answers. This was so helpful in understanding how to answer a question and I get that it really helped me with not just this subject but other subjects too. More teachers should do this!
• I really liked how the Canvas page broke down what was required for preparation, the tutorial etc.
• All the assignments were done by looking at the examples provided yet the examples were not the top examples and sometimes only "Pass" quality without clear indication.
• Week 5, 2 weeks before our midsem crits, our tutor finally gave us a deliverable list for our assignment. This is way too late in the semester, we basically had a week to get it ready.
• Maybe a more clear/accessible set of instructions for assignments because sometimes it was difficult to find clear info in the subject manual.
• It was often unclear of what was expected of us during assignments. Information was not all in one place and it was easy to miss a requirement.
• For every assessment, the information is spread out over multiple pages in Canvas, making it hard to look at assignments as a whole. This info should be added to one page in the relevant assignment page.

Bloxham, S. & Boyd. P. (2007). Teaching a module: Maximising the potential of assessment. In Developing Effective Assessment in Higher Education: A Practical Guide (pp. 49-65). McGraw-Hill.

Ford, M.L. (2002). Preparing students for assessment in the on-line class. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 91, 77-82.

McLaughlan, R. & Chatterjee, I. (2020). What works in the architecture studio? Five strategies for optimising student learning. International Journal of Art and Design Education, 39(3), 550-64.

• The studio had a lot of time to ask questions, to clarify what needed to be done for each week.
• Having smaller breakout rooms to discuss certain things about the assignments with other students.
• There were plenty of opportunities for asking questions and seeking help, whether it was via the discussion board or after the live Zoom, so I always felt that I could address a problem fairly immediately.
• Cross–pollination sessions and reviews before every submission definitely helped me to develop a better understanding of the expected outcome for each task.
• Tutor was very helpful, very responsive to questions, respectful and clear about what is expected in assignments.
• It was easy for me to get in contact with my tutor regarding issues or questions related to the class topic.
• This is a very complex and demanding subject but it has been very well–presented, with multiple supports provided to assist students including studios, workshops, peer–learning sessions and Teams help channels.
• Students keep getting confused by the requirements and have to keep clarifying with each [other] in the group chat.
• It would be better if the subject was managed better in terms of being specific about assignment information, having more time dedicated towards clarifying questions in live lecture.

Bloxham, S. & Boyd. P. (2007). Preparing students for assessment. In Developing Effective Assessment in Higher Education: A Practical Guide (pp. 66-80). McGraw-Hill.

O'Donovan, B., Price, M. & Rust, C. (2008). Developing student understanding of assessment standards: A nested hierarchy of approaches. Teaching in Higher Education, 13(2), 205-17.

Steel, A., 2013. Clarifying Assessment: Developing Typologies for Forms of Assessment in Law. Journal of the Australasian Law Teachers Association, pp.2014-39.

• Assessment rubric was very good as it created transparency in marking.
• The rubrics were excellent. They gave a strong understanding of the task requirements and clear parameters.
• Assessment outlines were unclear and led us down a path of writing in a style that was not correct. Not being told this until the assessment feedback.
• The marking scheme and requirements on the assignments can be much more clear, so the mark in every studio can be more objective and equal to everyone in the subject.
• I found the rubrics for this subject very vague and could be improved for greater clarity for how we are to be assessed.
• After the assignment results become available, I found that the areas unmentioned/less focused became were marked heavily, whereas the areas I worked hard on and was told to focus on were worth less and even disregarded.
• I would have appreciated greater clarity on the assignment marking guidelines in order to direct my output.
• Marking for assessments is not transparent because the assessment rubric (score for each category) was not given in feedback. It is confusing how marks are broken down.
• The content sometimes seemed more surface level and less technical which often didn’t align with the expectations of the submissions.

Bloxham, S. & Boyd. P. (2007). Moderation: Towards greater consistency in marking. In Developing Effective Assessment in Higher Education: a Practical Guide (pp. 117-128). McGraw-Hill.

Boud, D. (2017). Standards-based assessment for an era of increasing transparency. In Carless, D. et al. (Eds.) Scaling up assessment for learning in higher education. Springer.

Jönsson, A. & Panadero, E. (2017). The use and design of rubrics to support assessment for learning. In Carless, D. et al. (Eds.) Scaling up assessment for learning in higher education. Springer.

McConlogue, Teresa. (2020). Designing Assessment for a Course Unit/Module. Assessment and Feedback in Higher Education: A Guide for Teachers. University College London.

Onsman, A. (2016). Assessing creativity in a ‘New Generation’ architecture degree. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 19, 210-18.

Wolf, K., Connelly, M., & Komara, A. (2008). A tale of two rubrics: Improving teaching and learning across the content areas through assessment. The Journal of Effective Teaching, 8(1), 21-32.

• Instructions was well–outlined for lectures, tutorials and assessments. Tutors are also well–equipped with the knowledge of what needs to be addressed on a weekly basis.
• Consistency between subject guide and assignment requirements in assignment resources.
• Deliverables were often not explained properly or wrong information was given by my tutor during class. In regards to assignments, I’m not sure whether a different tutor would have made it more straightforward but I was often confused about what exactly was due and whether it was going towards my final grade.
• Studio information was disconnected to clear expectations given in lectures, which created confusion and led to incorrect outputs for many students listening to tutor, but then being marked based on subject guide.
• Consistency of expectations and requirements for assignments; my tutor, lecturer/coordinator, rubric, past work examples for guidance, all had different standards and expectations.
• There needs to be more information provided about what we need to produce to meet the evaluation criteria, particularly as it seemed that these expectations differed across the different tutorials as different tutors had specific ideas of what should be included.
• Subject had no subject guide, meaning no one knew what was going on or knew the structure of the subject, everything we heard was from the tutor directly during class. This wasn't exactly confidence inspiring as we would receive conflicting information each week or our Tutor would tell us he didn't know either, meaning we'd just be left in the dark about certain topics. There was a scenario where three students tried to squeeze an answer out of the tutor about the assignment, but he danced his way around them and it was pretty clear he didn't exactly know what was going on either.

Soccio, P., Tregloan, K., & Thompson, J. (2021). Well-coordinated: Learner-focused coordination tactics beyond the pandemergency. Archnet-IJAR, 15(1).