Tacit knowledge and a mysterious code: articulating academic writing expectations in disciplinary grading criteria.

Academic writing is integral to student achievement in higher education. Despite a move towards enhanced transparency in assessment, little is known about how writing is represented in the grading criteria of the various university disciplines. This qualitative study analyses criteria to uncover how writing expectations are presented within them. First, we reveal what facets of writing are included in the criteria. Second, we identify three issues: a mismatch between the level of challenge and the grade awarded; inconsistencies within criteria in terms of what is being graded; and ambiguities in terms of the language used. We interpret these findings through the conceptual lenses of non-formal learning and tacit knowledge and argue that professional development activities for lecturers need to be designed to render tacit knowledge of academic writing explicit. Our paper is a catalyst for university departmental discussion as to what constitutes quality writing for a specific assignment, and how those expectations might be better conveyed through rubrics.