For institutions where current processes are inconsistent and a redesign is overdue.
Outcome: future-state workflows, requirements, user stories and a pilot plan teams can implement.
Written for digital education leads, assessment and quality teams, programme directors, learning technology leads and project teams moving from review into pilot or rollout.
If the process is unclear, a new system will simply automate confusion.
Why workflow redesign matters
Assessment workflow redesign is the practical work of making assessment, marking, moderation, feedback, Moodle and platform use, handoffs, decisions and responsibilities clearer. In higher education, the platform is only one part of the picture. The surrounding process also needs to make sense: who does what, where decisions are made, how exceptions are handled, and how staff and students experience the workflow.
This sprint helps institutions move from unclear or inconsistent processes towards workable workflows, clearer requirements and stronger foundations for implementation.
Sometimes the workflow problem sits around the assessment task. Sometimes it sits inside the task itself. If a department is reviewing assessment in response to AI, the redesign may need to include assessment design decisions as well as process decisions: what the task is meant to evidence, how students will show their judgement, how feedback will be used, and which Moodle or platform workflow will support the assessment.
Who this is for
Institutions dealing with:
-
inconsistent marking, moderation or feedback workflows;
-
local workarounds that have become difficult to manage;
-
unclear roles, handoffs or decision points;
-
platform processes that do not match academic and operational needs;
-
assessment pilots or platform procurement that need clearer workflow planning.
What you get
Depending on scope, a redesign sprint includes:
-
current-state workflow mapping and future-state workflow design;
-
assessment design review where the issue sits in the task itself;
-
stakeholder interviews or workshops, user stories and requirements;
-
functional and technical requirements, with options or business case support;
-
pilot-readiness review and pilot plan.
Typical timeline
6–12 weeks, depending on complexity.
Typical outputs
-
Current-state and future-state workflow maps.
-
Assessment design and AI-era evidence review.
-
Requirements, user stories and functional requirements.
-
Decision-support materials and pilot plan.
-
Adoption and implementation recommendations.
What this is not
This is not a strategy paper that sits on a shelf.
It is a working set of redesigned workflows, requirements and a pilot plan that academic and professional services teams can implement together.
“She found the ‘sweet spot’ between a process too narrow to flex and so flexible that standardisation was impossible. The QA team was far more synchronised.”
Matthew Noesen, QA Team, Aula Education
Related work
See also:
Book a scoping conversation
If your institution is reviewing marking, moderation, feedback, Moodle or platform workflows, I’d be glad to hear more.