The assignment made sense when you wrote it. Then the questions begin: how long should it be, what counts as evidence, and what exactly are students supposed to argue? The submissions arrive, and you realize several students solved a different task from the one you had in mind.
The handbook recommends building assignments with purpose, clear directions, criteria, examples, and a final check. Those elements help students begin the right work and help you assess what you intended.
1. Explain the purpose in plain language
Tell students what they'll practice and why the task belongs in the course. For example, a comparison paper might ask them to weigh two explanations using evidence. That is more helpful than saying the paper will develop critical thinking without explaining how.
2. State the task and the boundaries
Describe what students should produce, which decisions they need to make, and the relevant requirements. Include length, sources, format, submission route, and deadline where applicable. Separate requirements from optional suggestions so students know what will be assessed.
Use headings or a short sequence when the task has several steps.
3. Share the criteria before work begins
Give students a rubric or another clear account of how you'll judge the work. Describe the difference between levels of performance in terms of the task. 'Excellent analysis' needs an explanation of what that analysis does.
Check that the criteria assess the goal you named. Formatting shouldn't quietly outweigh reasoning if reasoning is the main purpose.
4. Show an example students can discuss
Use an appropriate sample with the required permissions and identifying information handled correctly. Explain why a passage or section meets a criterion. You can also use a short fictional example to compare stronger and weaker reasoning.
The example should help students make decisions, rather than become a script they think they're expected to copy.
5. Provide a useful final checklist
Include the requirements students can check before submitting. Keep it aligned with this assignment. A short essay doesn't need every section of a research article simply because a generic checklist includes them.
If a template would remove needless formatting work, provide one. Leave room for the thinking you want students to do independently.
Check the prompt against the decisions students must make
Read the assignment with a blank page beside you. Can you identify the central question, a plausible approach, the evidence needed, and the basis for assessment? If one of those depends on something you only explained informally, add the necessary clarification to the written directions.
Distinguish productive choice from avoidable uncertainty. Students may need to choose their argument or method because that judgment is part of the learning. They shouldn't need to guess which file format the submission system accepts. Clear logistics leave more room for the thinking you want to assess.
You can test one small part before the whole paper is due. Ask students to describe their proposed claim or explain how one source relates to it, where that fits the course design. Their responses may reveal a misunderstanding while there is still time to teach the missing step. The prompt and the early practice should lead toward the same goal.
Ask a colleague to read the prompt and describe the submission they'd expect to receive. If their answer differs from yours, revise the instructions before assigning the work. It's easier to resolve an ambiguity before thirty students build their papers around it.
Adapted from The New Faculty Handbook by Zafer Unal, pp. 39-40.
