The prose essay, case study and laboratory report, composed by individual students in isolation from their peers, used to be the mainstay of undergraduate writing. However, in recent years an array of alternative assignment types such as blogs, letters and e-posters have widened the repertoire of texts expected. This article attempts to describe the reasoning behind changes in assignment types at undergraduate and master’s level at the beginning of the twenty-first century. Data from 58 semi-structured interviews with lecturers in three UK universities is used together with course handbooks and some clarifications with lecturers via email. Suggested reasons for new assignment types are grouped into three categories: external, lecturer-driven and student-driven. The article surmises that, because of these pressures, students are now expected to produce a wide variety of text types, and greater attention should be paid to guidance in new assignments for both native and non-native speaker students.
Andrews, R. ( 2003) ‘The End of the Essay?’, Teaching in Higher Education8(1): 117-28.
2.
Baynham, M. ( 2000) ‘Academic Writing in New and Emergent Discipline Areas’, in M. Lea and B. Stierer (eds) Student Writing in Higher Education: New Contexts, pp. 17-31. Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.
3.
Bosanquet, N., Gibbs, B., Cumming, S. & Haldenby, A. ( 2006) ‘Class of 2006: A Lifebelt for the IPOD Generation’ : http://www.reform.co.uk/Research/Economy/EconomyArticles/tabid/81/smid/378/ArticleID/613/reftab/70/Default.aspx [accessed 8 September 2009].
4.
British Academic Written English Project Overview: http://www.2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/celte/research/bawe/overview/ [accessed 29 February 2008].
5.
Dearing, R. ( 1997) ‘Higher Education in the Learning Society’ : http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/ncihe/ [accessed 29 February 2008].
6.
Finch, S., Jones, A., Partrement, J. & Cebulla, A. ( 2006) ‘Student Income and Expenditure Survey 2004/5’ : http://www.dfes.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/RR725.pdf [accessed 14 March 2008].
7.
Francis, R. & Raftery, J. ( 2005) ‘Blended Learning Landscapes’, in Brookes eJournal of Learning and Teaching1(3): http://www.brookes.ac.uk/publications/bejlt/volume1issue3/perspective/francis_raftery.pdf! [accessed 14 March 2008].
8.
Garde-Hansen, J. & Calvert, B. ( 2007) ‘Developing a Research Culture in the Undergraduate Curriculum’, Active Learning in Higher Education8(2): 105-16.
9.
Gibbs, G. ( 2006a) ‘Why Assessment is Changing’, in C. Bryan & K. Clegg (eds) Innovative Assessment in Higher Education, pp. 11-22. London: Routledge.
10.
Gibbs, G. ( 2006b) ‘How Assessment Frames Student Learning’ , in C. Bryan & K. Clegg (eds) Innovative Assessment in Higher Education, pp. 23-36. London: Routledge .
11.
Gibbs, G. & Simpson, C. ( 2004) ‘Conditions under which Assessment Supports Student Learning’, Learning and Teaching in Higher Education1(1): 3-31.
12.
Glogowska, M., Young, P. & Lockyer, L. ( 2007) ‘Should I Go or should I Stay?’, Active Learning in Higher Education8(1): 63-77.
13.
Hartley, J. ( 2002) ‘Studying for the Future’, Journal of Further and Higher Education26(3): 207-27.
14.
Henderson, E.S. ( 1980) ‘The Essay in Continuous Assesssment’ , Studies in Higher Education5(2): 197-203.
15.
Hewings, A. & Hewings, M. ( 2001) ‘Approaches to the Study of Disciplinary Variation in Academic Writing: Implications for Syllabus Design’, in D. R. Hall & A. Hewings (eds) Innovation in English Language Teaching , pp. 71-83. London: Open University/Routledge.
16.
Higher Education Statistics Agency (2008) Student Institution Level data tables: http://www.hesa.ac.uk/ [accessed 29 February 2008].
17.
Knight, P. ( 2001) ‘A Briefing on Key Concepts: Formative and Summative, Criterion & Norm-referenced Assessment’. Higher Education Academy briefing paper: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/detail/ourwork/tla/assessment_series . [accessed 29 February 2008].
18.
Lea, M. ( 2001) ‘Computer Conferencing and Assessment: New Ways of Writing in Higher Education’, Studies in Higher Education26(2): 163-81.
19.
Lomas, L. ( 2007) ‘The Locus of Power in UK Universities’ , Active Learning in Higher Education7(3): 243-55.
20.
Nesi, H. & S. Gardner ( 2006) ‘Variation in Disciplinary Culture: University Tutors’ Views on Assessed Writing Tasks’, in R. Kiely, G. Clibbon , P. Rea-Dickins & H. Woodfield (eds) Language, Culture and Identity in Applied Linguistics, British Studies in Applied Linguistics, 21 . London: Equinox Publishing.
21.
Nesi, H., Gardner, S., Forsyth, R., Hindle, D., Wickens, P., Ebeling, S., Leedham, M., Thompson, P. & Heuboeck, A. ( 2005) ‘Towards The Compilation of a Corpus of Assessed Student Writing: An Account of Work in Progress’. Paper presented at Corpus Linguistics Conference, University of Birmingham, UK. Published in the Proceedings from the Corpus Linguistics Conference Series 1(1): www.corpus.bham.ac.uk/PCLC.
22.
North, S. . (2005) ‘Different Values, Different Skills? A Comparison of Essay Writing by Students from Arts and Science Backgrounds’, Studies in Higher Education30: 517-33.
23.
Orsmond, P., Merry, S. & Reiling, K. ( 2000) ‘The Use of Student Derived Marking Criteria in Peer and Self-assessment’, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education25(1): 23-38.
24.
Russell, D.R. ( 2002) ‘Looking Beyond the Interface: Activity Theory and Distributed Learning’, in M. Lea & K. Nicoll (eds) Distributed Learning: Social and Cultural Approaches to Practice , pp. 64-82. London: Routledge.
25.
Taylor, R., Barr, J. & Steele, T. ( 2002) For a Radical Higher Education: After Postmodernism . Buckingham: SRHE/ Open University Press.
26.
Vygotsky, L. ( 1994) The Vygotsky Reader (ed. V. der Veer & J. Valsiner) . Oxford: Blackwell.
27.
Weigle, S.C. ( 2002) Assessing Writing. Cambridge University Press.
28.
Womack, P. ( 1993) ’What are Essays for?’, English in Education27(2): 42-8.
