assignment terms review 10 3 (practice)

Understanding Assignments

What this handout is about.

The first step in any successful college writing venture is reading the assignment. While this sounds like a simple task, it can be a tough one. This handout will help you unravel your assignment and begin to craft an effective response. Much of the following advice will involve translating typical assignment terms and practices into meaningful clues to the type of writing your instructor expects. See our short video for more tips.

Basic beginnings

Regardless of the assignment, department, or instructor, adopting these two habits will serve you well :

• Read the assignment carefully as soon as you receive it. Do not put this task off—reading the assignment at the beginning will save you time, stress, and problems later. An assignment can look pretty straightforward at first, particularly if the instructor has provided lots of information. That does not mean it will not take time and effort to complete; you may even have to learn a new skill to complete the assignment.
• Ask the instructor about anything you do not understand. Do not hesitate to approach your instructor. Instructors would prefer to set you straight before you hand the paper in. That’s also when you will find their feedback most useful.

Assignment formats

Many assignments follow a basic format. Assignments often begin with an overview of the topic, include a central verb or verbs that describe the task, and offer some additional suggestions, questions, or prompts to get you started.

An Overview of Some Kind

The instructor might set the stage with some general discussion of the subject of the assignment, introduce the topic, or remind you of something pertinent that you have discussed in class. For example:

“Throughout history, gerbils have played a key role in politics,” or “In the last few weeks of class, we have focused on the evening wear of the housefly …”

The Task of the Assignment

Pay attention; this part tells you what to do when you write the paper. Look for the key verb or verbs in the sentence. Words like analyze, summarize, or compare direct you to think about your topic in a certain way. Also pay attention to words such as how, what, when, where, and why; these words guide your attention toward specific information. (See the section in this handout titled “Key Terms” for more information.)

“Analyze the effect that gerbils had on the Russian Revolution”, or “Suggest an interpretation of housefly undergarments that differs from Darwin’s.”

Additional Material to Think about

Here you will find some questions to use as springboards as you begin to think about the topic. Instructors usually include these questions as suggestions rather than requirements. Do not feel compelled to answer every question unless the instructor asks you to do so. Pay attention to the order of the questions. Sometimes they suggest the thinking process your instructor imagines you will need to follow to begin thinking about the topic.

“You may wish to consider the differing views held by Communist gerbils vs. Monarchist gerbils, or Can there be such a thing as ‘the housefly garment industry’ or is it just a home-based craft?”

These are the instructor’s comments about writing expectations:

“Be concise”, “Write effectively”, or “Argue furiously.”

Technical Details

These instructions usually indicate format rules or guidelines.

“Your paper must be typed in Palatino font on gray paper and must not exceed 600 pages. It is due on the anniversary of Mao Tse-tung’s death.”

The assignment’s parts may not appear in exactly this order, and each part may be very long or really short. Nonetheless, being aware of this standard pattern can help you understand what your instructor wants you to do.

Interpreting the assignment

Ask yourself a few basic questions as you read and jot down the answers on the assignment sheet:

Why did your instructor ask you to do this particular task?

Who is your audience.

• What kind of evidence do you need to support your ideas?

What kind of writing style is acceptable?

• What are the absolute rules of the paper?

Try to look at the question from the point of view of the instructor. Recognize that your instructor has a reason for giving you this assignment and for giving it to you at a particular point in the semester. In every assignment, the instructor has a challenge for you. This challenge could be anything from demonstrating an ability to think clearly to demonstrating an ability to use the library. See the assignment not as a vague suggestion of what to do but as an opportunity to show that you can handle the course material as directed. Paper assignments give you more than a topic to discuss—they ask you to do something with the topic. Keep reminding yourself of that. Be careful to avoid the other extreme as well: do not read more into the assignment than what is there.

Of course, your instructor has given you an assignment so that they will be able to assess your understanding of the course material and give you an appropriate grade. But there is more to it than that. Your instructor has tried to design a learning experience of some kind. Your instructor wants you to think about something in a particular way for a particular reason. If you read the course description at the beginning of your syllabus, review the assigned readings, and consider the assignment itself, you may begin to see the plan, purpose, or approach to the subject matter that your instructor has created for you. If you still aren’t sure of the assignment’s goals, try asking the instructor. For help with this, see our handout on getting feedback .

Given your instructor’s efforts, it helps to answer the question: What is my purpose in completing this assignment? Is it to gather research from a variety of outside sources and present a coherent picture? Is it to take material I have been learning in class and apply it to a new situation? Is it to prove a point one way or another? Key words from the assignment can help you figure this out. Look for key terms in the form of active verbs that tell you what to do.

Key Terms: Finding Those Active Verbs

Here are some common key words and definitions to help you think about assignment terms:

Information words Ask you to demonstrate what you know about the subject, such as who, what, when, where, how, and why.

• define —give the subject’s meaning (according to someone or something). Sometimes you have to give more than one view on the subject’s meaning
• describe —provide details about the subject by answering question words (such as who, what, when, where, how, and why); you might also give details related to the five senses (what you see, hear, feel, taste, and smell)
• explain —give reasons why or examples of how something happened
• illustrate —give descriptive examples of the subject and show how each is connected with the subject
• summarize —briefly list the important ideas you learned about the subject
• trace —outline how something has changed or developed from an earlier time to its current form
• research —gather material from outside sources about the subject, often with the implication or requirement that you will analyze what you have found

Relation words Ask you to demonstrate how things are connected.

• compare —show how two or more things are similar (and, sometimes, different)
• contrast —show how two or more things are dissimilar
• apply —use details that you’ve been given to demonstrate how an idea, theory, or concept works in a particular situation
• cause —show how one event or series of events made something else happen
• relate —show or describe the connections between things

Interpretation words Ask you to defend ideas of your own about the subject. Do not see these words as requesting opinion alone (unless the assignment specifically says so), but as requiring opinion that is supported by concrete evidence. Remember examples, principles, definitions, or concepts from class or research and use them in your interpretation.

• assess —summarize your opinion of the subject and measure it against something
• prove, justify —give reasons or examples to demonstrate how or why something is the truth
• evaluate, respond —state your opinion of the subject as good, bad, or some combination of the two, with examples and reasons
• support —give reasons or evidence for something you believe (be sure to state clearly what it is that you believe)
• synthesize —put two or more things together that have not been put together in class or in your readings before; do not just summarize one and then the other and say that they are similar or different—you must provide a reason for putting them together that runs all the way through the paper
• analyze —determine how individual parts create or relate to the whole, figure out how something works, what it might mean, or why it is important
• argue —take a side and defend it with evidence against the other side

More Clues to Your Purpose As you read the assignment, think about what the teacher does in class:

• What kinds of textbooks or coursepack did your instructor choose for the course—ones that provide background information, explain theories or perspectives, or argue a point of view?
• In lecture, does your instructor ask your opinion, try to prove their point of view, or use keywords that show up again in the assignment?
• What kinds of assignments are typical in this discipline? Social science classes often expect more research. Humanities classes thrive on interpretation and analysis.
• How do the assignments, readings, and lectures work together in the course? Instructors spend time designing courses, sometimes even arguing with their peers about the most effective course materials. Figuring out the overall design to the course will help you understand what each assignment is meant to achieve.

Now, what about your reader? Most undergraduates think of their audience as the instructor. True, your instructor is a good person to keep in mind as you write. But for the purposes of a good paper, think of your audience as someone like your roommate: smart enough to understand a clear, logical argument, but not someone who already knows exactly what is going on in your particular paper. Remember, even if the instructor knows everything there is to know about your paper topic, they still have to read your paper and assess your understanding. In other words, teach the material to your reader.

Aiming a paper at your audience happens in two ways: you make decisions about the tone and the level of information you want to convey.

• Tone means the “voice” of your paper. Should you be chatty, formal, or objective? Usually you will find some happy medium—you do not want to alienate your reader by sounding condescending or superior, but you do not want to, um, like, totally wig on the man, you know? Eschew ostentatious erudition: some students think the way to sound academic is to use big words. Be careful—you can sound ridiculous, especially if you use the wrong big words.
• The level of information you use depends on who you think your audience is. If you imagine your audience as your instructor and they already know everything you have to say, you may find yourself leaving out key information that can cause your argument to be unconvincing and illogical. But you do not have to explain every single word or issue. If you are telling your roommate what happened on your favorite science fiction TV show last night, you do not say, “First a dark-haired white man of average height, wearing a suit and carrying a flashlight, walked into the room. Then a purple alien with fifteen arms and at least three eyes turned around. Then the man smiled slightly. In the background, you could hear a clock ticking. The room was fairly dark and had at least two windows that I saw.” You also do not say, “This guy found some aliens. The end.” Find some balance of useful details that support your main point.

You’ll find a much more detailed discussion of these concepts in our handout on audience .

The Grim Truth

With a few exceptions (including some lab and ethnography reports), you are probably being asked to make an argument. You must convince your audience. It is easy to forget this aim when you are researching and writing; as you become involved in your subject matter, you may become enmeshed in the details and focus on learning or simply telling the information you have found. You need to do more than just repeat what you have read. Your writing should have a point, and you should be able to say it in a sentence. Sometimes instructors call this sentence a “thesis” or a “claim.”

So, if your instructor tells you to write about some aspect of oral hygiene, you do not want to just list: “First, you brush your teeth with a soft brush and some peanut butter. Then, you floss with unwaxed, bologna-flavored string. Finally, gargle with bourbon.” Instead, you could say, “Of all the oral cleaning methods, sandblasting removes the most plaque. Therefore it should be recommended by the American Dental Association.” Or, “From an aesthetic perspective, moldy teeth can be quite charming. However, their joys are short-lived.”

Convincing the reader of your argument is the goal of academic writing. It doesn’t have to say “argument” anywhere in the assignment for you to need one. Look at the assignment and think about what kind of argument you could make about it instead of just seeing it as a checklist of information you have to present. For help with understanding the role of argument in academic writing, see our handout on argument .

What kind of evidence do you need?

There are many kinds of evidence, and what type of evidence will work for your assignment can depend on several factors–the discipline, the parameters of the assignment, and your instructor’s preference. Should you use statistics? Historical examples? Do you need to conduct your own experiment? Can you rely on personal experience? See our handout on evidence for suggestions on how to use evidence appropriately.

Make sure you are clear about this part of the assignment, because your use of evidence will be crucial in writing a successful paper. You are not just learning how to argue; you are learning how to argue with specific types of materials and ideas. Ask your instructor what counts as acceptable evidence. You can also ask a librarian for help. No matter what kind of evidence you use, be sure to cite it correctly—see the UNC Libraries citation tutorial .

You cannot always tell from the assignment just what sort of writing style your instructor expects. The instructor may be really laid back in class but still expect you to sound formal in writing. Or the instructor may be fairly formal in class and ask you to write a reflection paper where you need to use “I” and speak from your own experience.

Try to avoid false associations of a particular field with a style (“art historians like wacky creativity,” or “political scientists are boring and just give facts”) and look instead to the types of readings you have been given in class. No one expects you to write like Plato—just use the readings as a guide for what is standard or preferable to your instructor. When in doubt, ask your instructor about the level of formality they expect.

No matter what field you are writing for or what facts you are including, if you do not write so that your reader can understand your main idea, you have wasted your time. So make clarity your main goal. For specific help with style, see our handout on style .

Technical details about the assignment

The technical information you are given in an assignment always seems like the easy part. This section can actually give you lots of little hints about approaching the task. Find out if elements such as page length and citation format (see the UNC Libraries citation tutorial ) are negotiable. Some professors do not have strong preferences as long as you are consistent and fully answer the assignment. Some professors are very specific and will deduct big points for deviations.

Usually, the page length tells you something important: The instructor thinks the size of the paper is appropriate to the assignment’s parameters. In plain English, your instructor is telling you how many pages it should take for you to answer the question as fully as you are expected to. So if an assignment is two pages long, you cannot pad your paper with examples or reword your main idea several times. Hit your one point early, defend it with the clearest example, and finish quickly. If an assignment is ten pages long, you can be more complex in your main points and examples—and if you can only produce five pages for that assignment, you need to see someone for help—as soon as possible.

Tricks that don’t work

Your instructors are not fooled when you:

• spend more time on the cover page than the essay —graphics, cool binders, and cute titles are no replacement for a well-written paper.
• use huge fonts, wide margins, or extra spacing to pad the page length —these tricks are immediately obvious to the eye. Most instructors use the same word processor you do. They know what’s possible. Such tactics are especially damning when the instructor has a stack of 60 papers to grade and yours is the only one that low-flying airplane pilots could read.
• use a paper from another class that covered “sort of similar” material . Again, the instructor has a particular task for you to fulfill in the assignment that usually relates to course material and lectures. Your other paper may not cover this material, and turning in the same paper for more than one course may constitute an Honor Code violation . Ask the instructor—it can’t hurt.
• get all wacky and “creative” before you answer the question . Showing that you are able to think beyond the boundaries of a simple assignment can be good, but you must do what the assignment calls for first. Again, check with your instructor. A humorous tone can be refreshing for someone grading a stack of papers, but it will not get you a good grade if you have not fulfilled the task.

Critical reading of assignments leads to skills in other types of reading and writing. If you get good at figuring out what the real goals of assignments are, you are going to be better at understanding the goals of all of your classes and fields of study.

You may reproduce it for non-commercial use if you use the entire handout and attribute the source: The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Make a Gift

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser or activate Google Chrome Frame to improve your experience.

Mathematics Gr 10 Revision T3

This is grade 10 revision material. This is covering the grade 10 term 3 content.

The content covered is, 

1. 2D application of Trigonometry

2. Statistics

3. Probability

Do you have an educational app, video, ebook, course or eResource?

Contribute to the Western Cape Education Department's ePortal to make a difference.

Home Contact us Terms of Use Privacy Policy Western Cape Government © 2024. All rights reserved.

Rubric Best Practices, Examples, and Templates

A rubric is a scoring tool that identifies the different criteria relevant to an assignment, assessment, or learning outcome and states the possible levels of achievement in a specific, clear, and objective way. Use rubrics to assess project-based student work including essays, group projects, creative endeavors, and oral presentations.

Rubrics can help instructors communicate expectations to students and assess student work fairly, consistently and efficiently. Rubrics can provide students with informative feedback on their strengths and weaknesses so that they can reflect on their performance and work on areas that need improvement.

How to Get Started

Best practices, moodle how-to guides.

• Workshop Recording (Spring 2024)
• Workshop Registration

Step 1: Analyze the assignment

The first step in the rubric creation process is to analyze the assignment or assessment for which you are creating a rubric. To do this, consider the following questions:

• What is the purpose of the assignment and your feedback? What do you want students to demonstrate through the completion of this assignment (i.e. what are the learning objectives measured by it)? Is it a summative assessment, or will students use the feedback to create an improved product?
• Does the assignment break down into different or smaller tasks? Are these tasks equally important as the main assignment?
• What would an “excellent” assignment look like? An “acceptable” assignment? One that still needs major work?
• How detailed do you want the feedback you give students to be? Do you want/need to give them a grade?

Step 2: Decide what kind of rubric you will use

Types of rubrics: holistic, analytic/descriptive, single-point

Holistic Rubric. A holistic rubric includes all the criteria (such as clarity, organization, mechanics, etc.) to be considered together and included in a single evaluation. With a holistic rubric, the rater or grader assigns a single score based on an overall judgment of the student’s work, using descriptions of each performance level to assign the score.

Advantages of holistic rubrics:

• Can p lace an emphasis on what learners can demonstrate rather than what they cannot
• Save grader time by minimizing the number of evaluations to be made for each student
• Can be used consistently across raters, provided they have all been trained

Disadvantages of holistic rubrics:

• Provide less specific feedback than analytic/descriptive rubrics
• Can be difficult to choose a score when a student’s work is at varying levels across the criteria
• Any weighting of c riteria cannot be indicated in the rubric

Analytic/Descriptive Rubric . An analytic or descriptive rubric often takes the form of a table with the criteria listed in the left column and with levels of performance listed across the top row. Each cell contains a description of what the specified criterion looks like at a given level of performance. Each of the criteria is scored individually.

Advantages of analytic rubrics:

• Provide detailed feedback on areas of strength or weakness
• Each criterion can be weighted to reflect its relative importance

Disadvantages of analytic rubrics:

• More time-consuming to create and use than a holistic rubric
• May not be used consistently across raters unless the cells are well defined
• May result in giving less personalized feedback

Single-Point Rubric . A single-point rubric is breaks down the components of an assignment into different criteria, but instead of describing different levels of performance, only the “proficient” level is described. Feedback space is provided for instructors to give individualized comments to help students improve and/or show where they excelled beyond the proficiency descriptors.

Advantages of single-point rubrics:

• Easier to create than an analytic/descriptive rubric
• Perhaps more likely that students will read the descriptors
• Areas of concern and excellence are open-ended
• May removes a focus on the grade/points
• May increase student creativity in project-based assignments

Disadvantage of analytic rubrics: Requires more work for instructors writing feedback

Step 3 (Optional): Look for templates and examples.

You might Google, “Rubric for persuasive essay at the college level” and see if there are any publicly available examples to start from. Ask your colleagues if they have used a rubric for a similar assignment. Some examples are also available at the end of this article. These rubrics can be a great starting point for you, but consider steps 3, 4, and 5 below to ensure that the rubric matches your assignment description, learning objectives and expectations.

Step 4: Define the assignment criteria

Make a list of the knowledge and skills are you measuring with the assignment/assessment Refer to your stated learning objectives, the assignment instructions, past examples of student work, etc. for help.

  Helpful strategies for defining grading criteria:

• Collaborate with co-instructors, teaching assistants, and other colleagues
• Brainstorm and discuss with students
• Can they be observed and measured?
• Are they important and essential?
• Are they distinct from other criteria?
• Are they phrased in precise, unambiguous language?
• Revise the criteria as needed
• Consider whether some are more important than others, and how you will weight them.

Step 5: Design the rating scale

Most ratings scales include between 3 and 5 levels. Consider the following questions when designing your rating scale:

• Given what students are able to demonstrate in this assignment/assessment, what are the possible levels of achievement?
• How many levels would you like to include (more levels means more detailed descriptions)
• Will you use numbers and/or descriptive labels for each level of performance? (for example 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 and/or Exceeds expectations, Accomplished, Proficient, Developing, Beginning, etc.)
• Don’t use too many columns, and recognize that some criteria can have more columns that others . The rubric needs to be comprehensible and organized. Pick the right amount of columns so that the criteria flow logically and naturally across levels.

Step 6: Write descriptions for each level of the rating scale

Artificial Intelligence tools like Chat GPT have proven to be useful tools for creating a rubric. You will want to engineer your prompt that you provide the AI assistant to ensure you get what you want. For example, you might provide the assignment description, the criteria you feel are important, and the number of levels of performance you want in your prompt. Use the results as a starting point, and adjust the descriptions as needed.

Building a rubric from scratch

For a single-point rubric , describe what would be considered “proficient,” i.e. B-level work, and provide that description. You might also include suggestions for students outside of the actual rubric about how they might surpass proficient-level work.

For analytic and holistic rubrics , c reate statements of expected performance at each level of the rubric.

• Consider what descriptor is appropriate for each criteria, e.g., presence vs absence, complete vs incomplete, many vs none, major vs minor, consistent vs inconsistent, always vs never. If you have an indicator described in one level, it will need to be described in each level.
• You might start with the top/exemplary level. What does it look like when a student has achieved excellence for each/every criterion? Then, look at the “bottom” level. What does it look like when a student has not achieved the learning goals in any way? Then, complete the in-between levels.
• For an analytic rubric , do this for each particular criterion of the rubric so that every cell in the table is filled. These descriptions help students understand your expectations and their performance in regard to those expectations.

Well-written descriptions:

• Describe observable and measurable behavior
• Use parallel language across the scale
• Indicate the degree to which the standards are met

Step 7: Create your rubric

Create your rubric in a table or spreadsheet in Word, Google Docs, Sheets, etc., and then transfer it by typing it into Moodle. You can also use online tools to create the rubric, but you will still have to type the criteria, indicators, levels, etc., into Moodle. Rubric creators: Rubistar , iRubric

Step 8: Pilot-test your rubric

Prior to implementing your rubric on a live course, obtain feedback from:

• Teacher assistants

Try out your new rubric on a sample of student work. After you pilot-test your rubric, analyze the results to consider its effectiveness and revise accordingly.

• Limit the rubric to a single page for reading and grading ease
• Use parallel language . Use similar language and syntax/wording from column to column. Make sure that the rubric can be easily read from left to right or vice versa.
• Use student-friendly language . Make sure the language is learning-level appropriate. If you use academic language or concepts, you will need to teach those concepts.
• Share and discuss the rubric with your students . Students should understand that the rubric is there to help them learn, reflect, and self-assess. If students use a rubric, they will understand the expectations and their relevance to learning.
• Consider scalability and reusability of rubrics. Create rubric templates that you can alter as needed for multiple assignments.
• Maximize the descriptiveness of your language. Avoid words like “good” and “excellent.” For example, instead of saying, “uses excellent sources,” you might describe what makes a resource excellent so that students will know. You might also consider reducing the reliance on quantity, such as a number of allowable misspelled words. Focus instead, for example, on how distracting any spelling errors are.

Example of an analytic rubric for a final paper

Example of a holistic rubric for a final paper

Single-Point Rubric

More examples:

• Single Point Rubric Template ( variation )
• Analytic Rubric Template make a copy to edit
• A Rubric for Rubrics
• Bank of Online Discussion Rubrics in different formats
• Mathematical Presentations Descriptive Rubric
• Math Proof Assessment Rubric
• Kansas State Sample Rubrics
• Design Single Point Rubric

Technology Tools: Rubrics in Moodle

• Moodle Docs: Rubrics
• Moodle Docs: Grading Guide (use for single-point rubrics)

Tools with rubrics (other than Moodle)

• Google Assignments
• Turnitin Assignments: Rubric or Grading Form

Other resources

• DePaul University (n.d.). Rubrics .
• Gonzalez, J. (2014). Know your terms: Holistic, Analytic, and Single-Point Rubrics . Cult of Pedagogy.
• Goodrich, H. (1996). Understanding rubrics . Teaching for Authentic Student Performance, 54 (4), 14-17. Retrieved from   
• Miller, A. (2012). Tame the beast: tips for designing and using rubrics.
• Ragupathi, K., Lee, A. (2020). Beyond Fairness and Consistency in Grading: The Role of Rubrics in Higher Education. In: Sanger, C., Gleason, N. (eds) Diversity and Inclusion in Global Higher Education. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore.

Welcome to the new OASIS website! We have academic skills, library skills, math and statistics support, and writing resources all together in one new home.

• Walden University
• Faculty Portal

Common Assignments: Literature Reviews

Basics of literature reviews.

A literature review is a written approach to examining published information on a particular topic or field. Authors use this review of literature to create a foundation and justification for their research or to demonstrate knowledge on the current state of a field. This review can take the form of a course assignment or a section of a longer capstone project. Read on for more information about writing a strong literature review!

Students often misinterpret the term "literature review" to mean merely a collection of source summaries, similar to annotations or article abstracts. Although summarizing is an element of a literature review, the purpose is to create a comprehensive representation of your understanding of a topic or area of research, such as what has already been done or what has been found. Then, also using these sources, you can demonstrate the need for future research, specifically, your future research.

There is usually no required format or template for a literature review. However, there are some actions to keep in mind when constructing a literature review:

• Include an introduction and conclusion . Even if the literature review will be part of a longer document, introductory and concluding paragraphs can act as bookends to your material. Provide background information for your reader, such as including references to the pioneers in the field in the beginning and offering closure in the end by discussing the implications of future research to the field.
• Avoid direct quotations . Just like in an annotated bibliography, you will want to paraphrase all of the material you present in a literature review. This assignment is a chance for you to demonstrate your knowledge on a topic, and putting ideas into your own words will ensure that you are interpreting the found material for your reader. Paraphrasing will also ensure your review of literature is in your authorial voice.
• Organize by topic or theme rather than by author. When compiling multiple sources, a tendency can be to summarize each source and then compare and contrast the sources at the end. Instead, organize your source information by your identified themes and patterns. This organization helps demonstrate your synthesis of the material and inhibits you from creating a series of book reports.
•  Use headings . APA encourages the use of headings within longer pieces of text to display a shift in topic and create a visual break for the reader. Headings in a literature review can also help you as the writer organize your material by theme and note any layers, or subtopics, within the field.
• Show relationships and consider the flow of ideas. A literature review can be lengthy and dense, so you will want to make your text appealing to your reader. Transitions and comparison terms will allow you to demonstrate where authors agree or disagree on a topic and highlight your interpretation of the literature.

Related Multimedia, Social Media, and Other Resources

Randolph, J. J. (2009). A guide to writing the dissertation literature review. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation , 14 (13), 1–13. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1219&context=pare

Didn't find what you need? Email us at [email protected] .

• Previous Page: Example
• Next Page: Synthesizing Your Sources
• Office of Student Disability Services

Walden Resources

Departments.

• Academic Residencies
• Academic Skills
• Career Planning and Development
• Customer Care Team
• Field Experience
• Military Services
• Student Success Advising
• Writing Skills

Centers and Offices

• Center for Social Change
• Office of Academic Support and Instructional Services
• Office of Degree Acceleration
• Office of Research and Doctoral Services
• Office of Student Affairs

Student Resources

• Doctoral Writing Assessment
• Form & Style Review
• Quick Answers
• ScholarWorks
• SKIL Courses and Workshops
• Walden Bookstore
• Walden Catalog & Student Handbook
• Student Safety/Title IX
• Legal & Consumer Information
• Website Terms and Conditions
• Cookie Policy
• Accessibility
• Accreditation
• State Authorization
• Net Price Calculator
• Cost of Attendance
• Contact Walden

Walden University is a member of Adtalem Global Education, Inc. www.adtalem.com Walden University is certified to operate by SCHEV © 2024 Walden University LLC. All rights reserved.

Teaching, Learning, & Professional Development Center

• Teaching Resources
• TLPDC Teaching Resources

How Do I Create Meaningful and Effective Assignments?

Prepared by allison boye, ph.d. teaching, learning, and professional development center.

Assessment is a necessary part of the teaching and learning process, helping us measure whether our students have really learned what we want them to learn. While exams and quizzes are certainly favorite and useful methods of assessment, out of class assignments (written or otherwise) can offer similar insights into our students' learning.  And just as creating a reliable test takes thoughtfulness and skill, so does creating meaningful and effective assignments. Undoubtedly, many instructors have been on the receiving end of disappointing student work, left wondering what went wrong… and often, those problems can be remedied in the future by some simple fine-tuning of the original assignment.  This paper will take a look at some important elements to consider when developing assignments, and offer some easy approaches to creating a valuable assessment experience for all involved.

First Things First…

Before assigning any major tasks to students, it is imperative that you first define a few things for yourself as the instructor:

• Your goals for the assignment . Why are you assigning this project, and what do you hope your students will gain from completing it? What knowledge, skills, and abilities do you aim to measure with this assignment?  Creating assignments is a major part of overall course design, and every project you assign should clearly align with your goals for the course in general.  For instance, if you want your students to demonstrate critical thinking, perhaps asking them to simply summarize an article is not the best match for that goal; a more appropriate option might be to ask for an analysis of a controversial issue in the discipline. Ultimately, the connection between the assignment and its purpose should be clear to both you and your students to ensure that it is fulfilling the desired goals and doesn't seem like “busy work.” For some ideas about what kinds of assignments match certain learning goals, take a look at this page from DePaul University's Teaching Commons.
• Have they experienced “socialization” in the culture of your discipline (Flaxman, 2005)? Are they familiar with any conventions you might want them to know? In other words, do they know the “language” of your discipline, generally accepted style guidelines, or research protocols?
• Do they know how to conduct research?  Do they know the proper style format, documentation style, acceptable resources, etc.? Do they know how to use the library (Fitzpatrick, 1989) or evaluate resources?
• What kinds of writing or work have they previously engaged in?  For instance, have they completed long, formal writing assignments or research projects before? Have they ever engaged in analysis, reflection, or argumentation? Have they completed group assignments before?  Do they know how to write a literature review or scientific report?

In his book Engaging Ideas (1996), John Bean provides a great list of questions to help instructors focus on their main teaching goals when creating an assignment (p.78):

1. What are the main units/modules in my course?

2. What are my main learning objectives for each module and for the course?

3. What thinking skills am I trying to develop within each unit and throughout the course?

4. What are the most difficult aspects of my course for students?

5. If I could change my students' study habits, what would I most like to change?

6. What difference do I want my course to make in my students' lives?

What your students need to know

Once you have determined your own goals for the assignment and the levels of your students, you can begin creating your assignment.  However, when introducing your assignment to your students, there are several things you will need to clearly outline for them in order to ensure the most successful assignments possible.

• First, you will need to articulate the purpose of the assignment . Even though you know why the assignment is important and what it is meant to accomplish, you cannot assume that your students will intuit that purpose. Your students will appreciate an understanding of how the assignment fits into the larger goals of the course and what they will learn from the process (Hass & Osborn, 2007). Being transparent with your students and explaining why you are asking them to complete a given assignment can ultimately help motivate them to complete the assignment more thoughtfully.
• If you are asking your students to complete a writing assignment, you should define for them the “rhetorical or cognitive mode/s” you want them to employ in their writing (Flaxman, 2005). In other words, use precise verbs that communicate whether you are asking them to analyze, argue, describe, inform, etc.  (Verbs like “explore” or “comment on” can be too vague and cause confusion.) Provide them with a specific task to complete, such as a problem to solve, a question to answer, or an argument to support.  For those who want assignments to lead to top-down, thesis-driven writing, John Bean (1996) suggests presenting a proposition that students must defend or refute, or a problem that demands a thesis answer.
• It is also a good idea to define the audience you want your students to address with their assignment, if possible – especially with writing assignments.  Otherwise, students will address only the instructor, often assuming little requires explanation or development (Hedengren, 2004; MIT, 1999). Further, asking students to address the instructor, who typically knows more about the topic than the student, places the student in an unnatural rhetorical position.  Instead, you might consider asking your students to prepare their assignments for alternative audiences such as other students who missed last week's classes, a group that opposes their position, or people reading a popular magazine or newspaper.  In fact, a study by Bean (1996) indicated the students often appreciate and enjoy assignments that vary elements such as audience or rhetorical context, so don't be afraid to get creative!
• Obviously, you will also need to articulate clearly the logistics or “business aspects” of the assignment . In other words, be explicit with your students about required elements such as the format, length, documentation style, writing style (formal or informal?), and deadlines.  One caveat, however: do not allow the logistics of the paper take precedence over the content in your assignment description; if you spend all of your time describing these things, students might suspect that is all you care about in their execution of the assignment.
• Finally, you should clarify your evaluation criteria for the assignment. What elements of content are most important? Will you grade holistically or weight features separately? How much weight will be given to individual elements, etc?  Another precaution to take when defining requirements for your students is to take care that your instructions and rubric also do not overshadow the content; prescribing too rigidly each element of an assignment can limit students' freedom to explore and discover. According to Beth Finch Hedengren, “A good assignment provides the purpose and guidelines… without dictating exactly what to say” (2004, p. 27).  If you decide to utilize a grading rubric, be sure to provide that to the students along with the assignment description, prior to their completion of the assignment.

A great way to get students engaged with an assignment and build buy-in is to encourage their collaboration on its design and/or on the grading criteria (Hudd, 2003). In his article “Conducting Writing Assignments,” Richard Leahy (2002) offers a few ideas for building in said collaboration:

• Ask the students to develop the grading scale themselves from scratch, starting with choosing the categories.

• Set the grading categories yourself, but ask the students to help write the descriptions.

• Draft the complete grading scale yourself, then give it to your students for review and suggestions.

A Few Do's and Don'ts…

Determining your goals for the assignment and its essential logistics is a good start to creating an effective assignment. However, there are a few more simple factors to consider in your final design. First, here are a few things you should do :

• Do provide detail in your assignment description . Research has shown that students frequently prefer some guiding constraints when completing assignments (Bean, 1996), and that more detail (within reason) can lead to more successful student responses.  One idea is to provide students with physical assignment handouts , in addition to or instead of a simple description in a syllabus.  This can meet the needs of concrete learners and give them something tangible to refer to.  Likewise, it is often beneficial to make explicit for students the process or steps necessary to complete an assignment, given that students – especially younger ones – might need guidance in planning and time management (MIT, 1999).
• Do use open-ended questions.  The most effective and challenging assignments focus on questions that lead students to thinking and explaining, rather than simple yes or no answers, whether explicitly part of the assignment description or in the  brainstorming heuristics (Gardner, 2005).
• Do direct students to appropriate available resources . Giving students pointers about other venues for assistance can help them get started on the right track independently. These kinds of suggestions might include information about campus resources such as the University Writing Center or discipline-specific librarians, suggesting specific journals or books, or even sections of their textbook, or providing them with lists of research ideas or links to acceptable websites.
• Do consider providing models – both successful and unsuccessful models (Miller, 2007). These models could be provided by past students, or models you have created yourself.  You could even ask students to evaluate the models themselves using the determined evaluation criteria, helping them to visualize the final product, think critically about how to complete the assignment, and ideally, recognize success in their own work.
• Do consider including a way for students to make the assignment their own. In their study, Hass and Osborn (2007) confirmed the importance of personal engagement for students when completing an assignment.  Indeed, students will be more engaged in an assignment if it is personally meaningful, practical, or purposeful beyond the classroom.  You might think of ways to encourage students to tap into their own experiences or curiosities, to solve or explore a real problem, or connect to the larger community.  Offering variety in assignment selection can also help students feel more individualized, creative, and in control.
• If your assignment is substantial or long, do consider sequencing it. Far too often, assignments are given as one-shot final products that receive grades at the end of the semester, eternally abandoned by the student.  By sequencing a large assignment, or essentially breaking it down into a systematic approach consisting of interconnected smaller elements (such as a project proposal, an annotated bibliography, or a rough draft, or a series of mini-assignments related to the longer assignment), you can encourage thoughtfulness, complexity, and thoroughness in your students, as well as emphasize process over final product.

Next are a few elements to avoid in your assignments:

• Do not ask too many questions in your assignment.  In an effort to challenge students, instructors often err in the other direction, asking more questions than students can reasonably address in a single assignment without losing focus. Offering an overly specific “checklist” prompt often leads to externally organized papers, in which inexperienced students “slavishly follow the checklist instead of integrating their ideas into more organically-discovered structure” (Flaxman, 2005).
• Do not expect or suggest that there is an “ideal” response to the assignment. A common error for instructors is to dictate content of an assignment too rigidly, or to imply that there is a single correct response or a specific conclusion to reach, either explicitly or implicitly (Flaxman, 2005). Undoubtedly, students do not appreciate feeling as if they must read an instructor's mind to complete an assignment successfully, or that their own ideas have nowhere to go, and can lose motivation as a result. Similarly, avoid assignments that simply ask for regurgitation (Miller, 2007). Again, the best assignments invite students to engage in critical thinking, not just reproduce lectures or readings.
• Do not provide vague or confusing commands . Do students know what you mean when they are asked to “examine” or “discuss” a topic? Return to what you determined about your students' experiences and levels to help you decide what directions will make the most sense to them and what will require more explanation or guidance, and avoid verbiage that might confound them.
• Do not impose impossible time restraints or require the use of insufficient resources for completion of the assignment.  For instance, if you are asking all of your students to use the same resource, ensure that there are enough copies available for all students to access – or at least put one copy on reserve in the library. Likewise, make sure that you are providing your students with ample time to locate resources and effectively complete the assignment (Fitzpatrick, 1989).

The assignments we give to students don't simply have to be research papers or reports. There are many options for effective yet creative ways to assess your students' learning! Here are just a few:

Journals, Posters, Portfolios, Letters, Brochures, Management plans, Editorials, Instruction Manuals, Imitations of a text, Case studies, Debates, News release, Dialogues, Videos, Collages, Plays, Power Point presentations

Ultimately, the success of student responses to an assignment often rests on the instructor's deliberate design of the assignment. By being purposeful and thoughtful from the beginning, you can ensure that your assignments will not only serve as effective assessment methods, but also engage and delight your students. If you would like further help in constructing or revising an assignment, the Teaching, Learning, and Professional Development Center is glad to offer individual consultations. In addition, look into some of the resources provided below.

Online Resources

“Creating Effective Assignments” http://www.unh.edu/teaching-excellence/resources/Assignments.htm This site, from the University of New Hampshire's Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning,  provides a brief overview of effective assignment design, with a focus on determining and communicating goals and expectations.

Gardner, T.  (2005, June 12). Ten Tips for Designing Writing Assignments. Traci's Lists of Ten. http://www.tengrrl.com/tens/034.shtml This is a brief yet useful list of tips for assignment design, prepared by a writing teacher and curriculum developer for the National Council of Teachers of English .  The website will also link you to several other lists of “ten tips” related to literacy pedagogy.

“How to Create Effective Assignments for College Students.”  http:// tilt.colostate.edu/retreat/2011/zimmerman.pdf     This PDF is a simplified bulleted list, prepared by Dr. Toni Zimmerman from Colorado State University, offering some helpful ideas for coming up with creative assignments.

“Learner-Centered Assessment” http://cte.uwaterloo.ca/teaching_resources/tips/learner_centered_assessment.html From the Centre for Teaching Excellence at the University of Waterloo, this is a short list of suggestions for the process of designing an assessment with your students' interests in mind. “Matching Learning Goals to Assignment Types.” http://teachingcommons.depaul.edu/How_to/design_assignments/assignments_learning_goals.html This is a great page from DePaul University's Teaching Commons, providing a chart that helps instructors match assignments with learning goals.

Additional References Bean, J.C. (1996). Engaging ideas: The professor's guide to integrating writing, critical thinking, and active learning in the classroom . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Fitzpatrick, R. (1989). Research and writing assignments that reduce fear lead to better papers and more confident students. Writing Across the Curriculum , 3.2, pp. 15 – 24.

Flaxman, R. (2005). Creating meaningful writing assignments. The Teaching Exchange .  Retrieved Jan. 9, 2008 from http://www.brown.edu/Administration/Sheridan_Center/pubs/teachingExchange/jan2005/01_flaxman.pdf

Hass, M. & Osborn, J. (2007, August 13). An emic view of student writing and the writing process. Across the Disciplines, 4. 

Hedengren, B.F. (2004). A TA's guide to teaching writing in all disciplines . Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's.

Hudd, S. S. (2003, April). Syllabus under construction: Involving students in the creation of class assignments.  Teaching Sociology , 31, pp. 195 – 202.

Leahy, R. (2002). Conducting writing assignments. College Teaching , 50.2, pp. 50 – 54.

Miller, H. (2007). Designing effective writing assignments.  Teaching with writing .  University of Minnesota Center for Writing. Retrieved Jan. 9, 2008, from http://writing.umn.edu/tww/assignments/designing.html

MIT Online Writing and Communication Center (1999). Creating Writing Assignments. Retrieved January 9, 2008 from http://web.mit.edu/writing/Faculty/createeffective.html .

Contact TTU

What is a Literature Review? How to Write It (with Examples)

A literature review is a critical analysis and synthesis of existing research on a particular topic. It provides an overview of the current state of knowledge, identifies gaps, and highlights key findings in the literature. 1 The purpose of a literature review is to situate your own research within the context of existing scholarship, demonstrating your understanding of the topic and showing how your work contributes to the ongoing conversation in the field. Learning how to write a literature review is a critical tool for successful research. Your ability to summarize and synthesize prior research pertaining to a certain topic demonstrates your grasp on the topic of study, and assists in the learning process. 

Table of Contents

What is the purpose of literature review , a. habitat loss and species extinction: , b. range shifts and phenological changes: , c. ocean acidification and coral reefs: , d. adaptive strategies and conservation efforts: .

• Choose a Topic and Define the Research Question: 
• Decide on the Scope of Your Review: 
• Select Databases for Searches: 
• Conduct Searches and Keep Track: 
• Review the Literature: 
• Organize and Write Your Literature Review: 
• How to write a literature review faster with Paperpal? 

Frequently asked questions 

What is a literature review .

A well-conducted literature review demonstrates the researcher’s familiarity with the existing literature, establishes the context for their own research, and contributes to scholarly conversations on the topic. One of the purposes of a literature review is also to help researchers avoid duplicating previous work and ensure that their research is informed by and builds upon the existing body of knowledge.

A literature review serves several important purposes within academic and research contexts. Here are some key objectives and functions of a literature review: 2  

1. Contextualizing the Research Problem: The literature review provides a background and context for the research problem under investigation. It helps to situate the study within the existing body of knowledge. 

2. Identifying Gaps in Knowledge: By identifying gaps, contradictions, or areas requiring further research, the researcher can shape the research question and justify the significance of the study. This is crucial for ensuring that the new research contributes something novel to the field.

Find academic papers related to your research topic faster. Try Research on Paperpal

3. Understanding Theoretical and Conceptual Frameworks: Literature reviews help researchers gain an understanding of the theoretical and conceptual frameworks used in previous studies. This aids in the development of a theoretical framework for the current research. 

4. Providing Methodological Insights: Another purpose of literature reviews is that it allows researchers to learn about the methodologies employed in previous studies. This can help in choosing appropriate research methods for the current study and avoiding pitfalls that others may have encountered. 

5. Establishing Credibility: A well-conducted literature review demonstrates the researcher’s familiarity with existing scholarship, establishing their credibility and expertise in the field. It also helps in building a solid foundation for the new research. 

6. Informing Hypotheses or Research Questions: The literature review guides the formulation of hypotheses or research questions by highlighting relevant findings and areas of uncertainty in existing literature. 

Literature review example 

Let’s delve deeper with a literature review example: Let’s say your literature review is about the impact of climate change on biodiversity. You might format your literature review into sections such as the effects of climate change on habitat loss and species extinction, phenological changes, and marine biodiversity. Each section would then summarize and analyze relevant studies in those areas, highlighting key findings and identifying gaps in the research. The review would conclude by emphasizing the need for further research on specific aspects of the relationship between climate change and biodiversity. The following literature review template provides a glimpse into the recommended literature review structure and content, demonstrating how research findings are organized around specific themes within a broader topic. 

Literature Review on Climate Change Impacts on Biodiversity:  

Climate change is a global phenomenon with far-reaching consequences, including significant impacts on biodiversity. This literature review synthesizes key findings from various studies: 

Climate change-induced alterations in temperature and precipitation patterns contribute to habitat loss, affecting numerous species (Thomas et al., 2004). The review discusses how these changes increase the risk of extinction, particularly for species with specific habitat requirements. 

Observations of range shifts and changes in the timing of biological events (phenology) are documented in response to changing climatic conditions (Parmesan & Yohe, 2003). These shifts affect ecosystems and may lead to mismatches between species and their resources. 

The review explores the impact of climate change on marine biodiversity, emphasizing ocean acidification’s threat to coral reefs (Hoegh-Guldberg et al., 2007). Changes in pH levels negatively affect coral calcification, disrupting the delicate balance of marine ecosystems. 

Recognizing the urgency of the situation, the literature review discusses various adaptive strategies adopted by species and conservation efforts aimed at mitigating the impacts of climate change on biodiversity (Hannah et al., 2007). It emphasizes the importance of interdisciplinary approaches for effective conservation planning. 

Strengthen your literature review with factual insights. Try Research on Paperpal for free!

How to write a good literature review 

Writing a literature review involves summarizing and synthesizing existing research on a particular topic. A good literature review format should include the following elements. 

Introduction: The introduction sets the stage for your literature review, providing context and introducing the main focus of your review. 

• Opening Statement: Begin with a general statement about the broader topic and its significance in the field. 
• Scope and Purpose: Clearly define the scope of your literature review. Explain the specific research question or objective you aim to address. 
• Organizational Framework: Briefly outline the structure of your literature review, indicating how you will categorize and discuss the existing research. 
• Significance of the Study: Highlight why your literature review is important and how it contributes to the understanding of the chosen topic. 
• Thesis Statement: Conclude the introduction with a concise thesis statement that outlines the main argument or perspective you will develop in the body of the literature review. 

Body: The body of the literature review is where you provide a comprehensive analysis of existing literature, grouping studies based on themes, methodologies, or other relevant criteria. 

• Organize by Theme or Concept: Group studies that share common themes, concepts, or methodologies. Discuss each theme or concept in detail, summarizing key findings and identifying gaps or areas of disagreement. 
• Critical Analysis: Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of each study. Discuss the methodologies used, the quality of evidence, and the overall contribution of each work to the understanding of the topic. 
• Synthesis of Findings: Synthesize the information from different studies to highlight trends, patterns, or areas of consensus in the literature. 
• Identification of Gaps: Discuss any gaps or limitations in the existing research and explain how your review contributes to filling these gaps. 
• Transition between Sections: Provide smooth transitions between different themes or concepts to maintain the flow of your literature review. 

Write and Cite as yo u go with Paperpal Research. Start now for free!

Conclusion: The conclusion of your literature review should summarize the main findings, highlight the contributions of the review, and suggest avenues for future research. 

• Summary of Key Findings: Recap the main findings from the literature and restate how they contribute to your research question or objective. 
• Contributions to the Field: Discuss the overall contribution of your literature review to the existing knowledge in the field. 
• Implications and Applications: Explore the practical implications of the findings and suggest how they might impact future research or practice. 
• Recommendations for Future Research: Identify areas that require further investigation and propose potential directions for future research in the field. 
• Final Thoughts: Conclude with a final reflection on the importance of your literature review and its relevance to the broader academic community. 

Conducting a literature review 

Conducting a literature review is an essential step in research that involves reviewing and analyzing existing literature on a specific topic. It’s important to know how to do a literature review effectively, so here are the steps to follow: 1  

Choose a Topic and Define the Research Question:  

• Select a topic that is relevant to your field of study. 
• Clearly define your research question or objective. Determine what specific aspect of the topic do you want to explore? 

Decide on the Scope of Your Review:  

• Determine the timeframe for your literature review. Are you focusing on recent developments, or do you want a historical overview? 
• Consider the geographical scope. Is your review global, or are you focusing on a specific region? 
• Define the inclusion and exclusion criteria. What types of sources will you include? Are there specific types of studies or publications you will exclude? 

Select Databases for Searches:  

• Identify relevant databases for your field. Examples include PubMed, IEEE Xplore, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. 
• Consider searching in library catalogs, institutional repositories, and specialized databases related to your topic. 

Conduct Searches and Keep Track:  

• Develop a systematic search strategy using keywords, Boolean operators (AND, OR, NOT), and other search techniques. 
• Record and document your search strategy for transparency and replicability. 
• Keep track of the articles, including publication details, abstracts, and links. Use citation management tools like EndNote, Zotero, or Mendeley to organize your references. 

Review the Literature:  

• Evaluate the relevance and quality of each source. Consider the methodology, sample size, and results of studies. 
• Organize the literature by themes or key concepts. Identify patterns, trends, and gaps in the existing research. 
• Summarize key findings and arguments from each source. Compare and contrast different perspectives. 
• Identify areas where there is a consensus in the literature and where there are conflicting opinions. 
• Provide critical analysis and synthesis of the literature. What are the strengths and weaknesses of existing research? 

Organize and Write Your Literature Review:  

• Literature review outline should be based on themes, chronological order, or methodological approaches. 
• Write a clear and coherent narrative that synthesizes the information gathered. 
• Use proper citations for each source and ensure consistency in your citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.). 
• Conclude your literature review by summarizing key findings, identifying gaps, and suggesting areas for future research. 

Whether you’re exploring a new research field or finding new angles to develop an existing topic, sifting through hundreds of papers can take more time than you have to spare. But what if you could find science-backed insights with verified citations in seconds? That’s the power of Paperpal’s new Research feature!  

How to write a literature review faster with Paperpal?  

Paperpal, an AI writing assistant, integrates powerful academic search capabilities within its writing platform. With the Research | Cite feature, you get 100% factual insights, with citations backed by 250M+ verified research articles, directly within your writing interface. It also allows you auto-cite references in 10,000+ styles and save relevant references in your Citation Library. By eliminating the need to switch tabs to find answers to all your research questions, Paperpal saves time and helps you stay focused on your writing.   

Here’s how to use the Research feature:  

• Ask a question: Get started with a new document on paperpal.com. Click on the “Research | Cite” feature and type your question in plain English. Paperpal will scour over 250 million research articles, including conference papers and preprints, to provide you with accurate insights and citations. 

• Review and Save: Paperpal summarizes the information, while citing sources and listing relevant reads. You can quickly scan the results to identify relevant references and save these directly to your built-in citations library for later access. 
• Cite with Confidence: Paperpal makes it easy to incorporate relevant citations and references in 10,000+ styles into your writing, ensuring your arguments are well-supported by credible sources. This translates to a polished, well-researched literature review. 

The literature review sample and detailed advice on writing and conducting a review will help you produce a well-structured report. But remember that a good literature review is an ongoing process, and it may be necessary to revisit and update it as your research progresses. By combining effortless research with an easy citation process, Paperpal Research streamlines the literature review process and empowers you to write faster and with more confidence. Try Paperpal Research now and see for yourself.  

A literature review is a critical and comprehensive analysis of existing literature (published and unpublished works) on a specific topic or research question and provides a synthesis of the current state of knowledge in a particular field. A well-conducted literature review is crucial for researchers to build upon existing knowledge, avoid duplication of efforts, and contribute to the advancement of their field. It also helps researchers situate their work within a broader context and facilitates the development of a sound theoretical and conceptual framework for their studies.

Literature review is a crucial component of research writing, providing a solid background for a research paper’s investigation. The aim is to keep professionals up to date by providing an understanding of ongoing developments within a specific field, including research methods, and experimental techniques used in that field, and present that knowledge in the form of a written report. Also, the depth and breadth of the literature review emphasizes the credibility of the scholar in his or her field.  

Before writing a literature review, it’s essential to undertake several preparatory steps to ensure that your review is well-researched, organized, and focused. This includes choosing a topic of general interest to you and doing exploratory research on that topic, writing an annotated bibliography, and noting major points, especially those that relate to the position you have taken on the topic. 

Literature reviews and academic research papers are essential components of scholarly work but serve different purposes within the academic realm. 3 A literature review aims to provide a foundation for understanding the current state of research on a particular topic, identify gaps or controversies, and lay the groundwork for future research. Therefore, it draws heavily from existing academic sources, including books, journal articles, and other scholarly publications. In contrast, an academic research paper aims to present new knowledge, contribute to the academic discourse, and advance the understanding of a specific research question. Therefore, it involves a mix of existing literature (in the introduction and literature review sections) and original data or findings obtained through research methods. 

Literature reviews are essential components of academic and research papers, and various strategies can be employed to conduct them effectively. If you want to know how to write a literature review for a research paper, here are four common approaches that are often used by researchers.  Chronological Review: This strategy involves organizing the literature based on the chronological order of publication. It helps to trace the development of a topic over time, showing how ideas, theories, and research have evolved.  Thematic Review: Thematic reviews focus on identifying and analyzing themes or topics that cut across different studies. Instead of organizing the literature chronologically, it is grouped by key themes or concepts, allowing for a comprehensive exploration of various aspects of the topic.  Methodological Review: This strategy involves organizing the literature based on the research methods employed in different studies. It helps to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of various methodologies and allows the reader to evaluate the reliability and validity of the research findings.  Theoretical Review: A theoretical review examines the literature based on the theoretical frameworks used in different studies. This approach helps to identify the key theories that have been applied to the topic and assess their contributions to the understanding of the subject.  It’s important to note that these strategies are not mutually exclusive, and a literature review may combine elements of more than one approach. The choice of strategy depends on the research question, the nature of the literature available, and the goals of the review. Additionally, other strategies, such as integrative reviews or systematic reviews, may be employed depending on the specific requirements of the research.

The literature review format can vary depending on the specific publication guidelines. However, there are some common elements and structures that are often followed. Here is a general guideline for the format of a literature review:  Introduction:   Provide an overview of the topic.  Define the scope and purpose of the literature review.  State the research question or objective.  Body:   Organize the literature by themes, concepts, or chronology.  Critically analyze and evaluate each source.  Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the studies.  Highlight any methodological limitations or biases.  Identify patterns, connections, or contradictions in the existing research.  Conclusion:   Summarize the key points discussed in the literature review.  Highlight the research gap.  Address the research question or objective stated in the introduction.  Highlight the contributions of the review and suggest directions for future research.

Both annotated bibliographies and literature reviews involve the examination of scholarly sources. While annotated bibliographies focus on individual sources with brief annotations, literature reviews provide a more in-depth, integrated, and comprehensive analysis of existing literature on a specific topic. The key differences are as follows: 

References 

• Denney, A. S., & Tewksbury, R. (2013). How to write a literature review.  Journal of criminal justice education ,  24 (2), 218-234. 
• Pan, M. L. (2016).  Preparing literature reviews: Qualitative and quantitative approaches . Taylor & Francis. 
• Cantero, C. (2019). How to write a literature review.  San José State University Writing Center . 

Paperpal is a comprehensive AI writing toolkit that helps students and researchers achieve 2x the writing in half the time. It leverages 22+ years of STM experience and insights from millions of research articles to provide in-depth academic writing, language editing, and submission readiness support to help you write better, faster.  

Get accurate academic translations, rewriting support, grammar checks, vocabulary suggestions, and generative AI assistance that delivers human precision at machine speed. Try for free or upgrade to Paperpal Prime starting at US$19 a month to access premium features, including consistency, plagiarism, and 30+ submission readiness checks to help you succeed.  

Experience the future of academic writing – Sign up to Paperpal and start writing for free!  

Related Reads:

• Empirical Research: A Comprehensive Guide for Academics 
• How to Write a Scientific Paper in 10 Steps 
• How Long Should a Chapter Be?
• How to Use Paperpal to Generate Emails & Cover Letters?

6 Tips for Post-Doc Researchers to Take Their Career to the Next Level

Self-plagiarism in research: what it is and how to avoid it, you may also like, academic integrity vs academic dishonesty: types & examples, dissertation printing and binding | types & comparison , what is a dissertation preface definition and examples , the ai revolution: authors’ role in upholding academic..., the future of academia: how ai tools are..., how to write a research proposal: (with examples..., how to write your research paper in apa..., how to choose a dissertation topic, how to write a phd research proposal, how to write an academic paragraph (step-by-step guide).

• Open access
• Published: 13 September 2024

A systematic review of medical practitioners’ retention and application of basic sciences to clinical practice

• Francis A. Albert 1 ,
• Abdul-Aziz Seidu 1 ,
• Hannah M. Mason 1 ,
• Emma Anderson 1 ,
• Faith O. Alele 2 ,
• Paula Heggarty 1 ,
• Aaron Hollins 1 ,
• Tarun Sen Gupta 1 ,
• Richard B. Hays 1 ,
• Lawrie McArthur 3 &
• Bunmi S. Malau-Aduli 1 , 4  

BMC Medical Education volume  24 , Article number:  997 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

Medical education offers the foundational base for future healthcare professionals, with basic sciences playing a pivotal role in providing essential knowledge and skills for clinical practice. However, the long-term retention and application of this knowledge in clinical practice remain a significant challenge. This systematic review synthesised global evidence from diverse studies on the short / long-term retention and clinical application of basic sciences among medical doctors.

A comprehensive search was conducted across six databases, including Web of Science, Scopus, Medline, CINAHL, Emcare, and Informit. The review included studies that encompassed a variety of study designs, participant groups, and educational interventions. The Quality Assessment with Diverse Studies (QuADS) tool was utilised to assess the quality of the reviewed studies.

A total of 10 studies were included in the review. The findings revealed that rehearsals significantly optimise the retention of basic science knowledge among medical practitioners. Retention varied by discipline, with medical practitioners retaining more knowledge in anatomy (mean scores ranging from 45.0 to 82.9%), while microbiology had the lowest retention score (39.1%). Factors influencing retention included age, gender, and curriculum type. Educational interventions such as targeted courses, integration of basic sciences with clinical skills, generative retrieval and continuous quality improvement in the curriculum were found to enhance both knowledge retention and clinical reasoning. The concept of ‘encapsulated knowledge’ demonstrates that integrated basic science knowledge helps in synthesising clinical presentations, reducing the need for detailed recall as clinical experience increases. The reviewed studies primarily involved interns and surgeons, leaving a significant gap in research for specialties like internal medicine and primary care/ general practice.

Detailed retention of basic science knowledge may diminish over time; however, the conceptual framework remains essential for ongoing learning and clinical reasoning. This review’s findings highlight the need for specialised educational interventions to improve long-term retention. Continuous professional development and targeted educational techniques are vital for maintaining clinical competence and applying basic science knowledge effectively throughout a medical career. Further research is needed to address gaps in specialty-specific knowledge application and the impact of different instructional methods.

Peer Review reports

Basic sciences are the foundation of modern medical practice and contribute substantially to medical education [ 1 , 2 ]. Anatomy, physiology, biochemistry, microbiology, pathology, pharmacology and immunology underpin the understanding of normal structure and function, pathophysiology, diagnoses and treatment modalities [ 3 , 4 , 5 ]. A critical aspect of medical education is the cognitive integration of basic sciences into clinical reasoning and decision-making processes [ 6 ]. This establishes critical links between ‘what’ (possible diagnosis), to ‘how’ (disease mechanisms) and ‘why’ (underlying causes) [ 7 , 8 ], improving diagnostic accuracy and an understanding of key clinical features [ 8 ]. The relevance of basic sciences, first highlighted in Flexner’s 1910 report [ 9 ], remains relevant throughout medical careers, although new knowledge develops continuously in both the sciences and their clinical application [ 5 , 8 , 10 , 11 , 12 ]. However, maintaining current knowledge of basic sciences can be a significant challenge [ 1 , 7 , 10 , 13 ].

Long-standing concerns exist regarding the retention of basic sciences knowledge among clinicians [ 5 , 14 , 15 ]. Retention after one year is reported to be approximately 67–75%, decreasing to about 50% after two years [ 16 ], even though basic science knowledge may be relied on when managing a challenging clinical problem [ 13 , 17 , 18 ]. A significant issue in monitoring retention is how this knowledge is assessed. Assessment often relies on multiple-choice questions (MCQs) [ 19 ], typically at the ‘knows’ (factual recall) and ‘knows how’ (knowledge application) levels [ 20 , 21 ] at an early stage of integration with clinical reasoning. On the other hand, clinical assessment is usually at the ‘shows how’, ‘does’ and ‘is’ levels, relying on a combination of ‘working knowledge’ for commonly encountered clinical problems accessing and integrating longer-term stored knowledge when prompted by clinical presentations [ 22 , 23 ].

Factors that may influence knowledge retention include curriculum approaches, frequency of testing, feedback delivery, and perceived clinical relevance [ 24 ]. There also appears to be differences based on gender and level of maturity that are not yet well understood [ 25 ]. Most of the literature on this topic relate to undergraduate medical training but the landscape changes in specialty training (residency and fellowship programs), perhaps due to the inherent diversity and complexity. Here the emphasis is on narrowing and deepening knowledge and skills to the relevant restricted clinical practice (including both supervised practice by interns and independent practice by residents and trained practitioners) [ 26 , 27 ]. Continuing professional development (CPD) differs further, with the emphasis on maintaining currency, often involving new knowledge and skills, following a more self-directed learning approach [ 27 ]. It is likely that specialist clinical practice fosters the development of ‘encapsulated knowledge’, a form of transformed basic science knowledge that attaches relevant basic science knowledge to clinical scenarios and diagnoses [ 28 , 29 ]. With increasing expertise, working memory may consist almost entirely of ‘encapsulated knowledge’ that is focused on the narrower scope of practice.

While clinicians continue to use basic sciences in clinical reasonings, their level of retention of basic science knowledge has not been as fully investigated as it is in the undergraduate medical training context [ 26 ]. For example, a recent review by Castillo et al. [ 30 ] identified interventions designed to aid the transfer of basic science knowledge to clinical reasoning in undergraduate health professions education. This highlights the need to understand the value of basic science knowledge retention in clinical reasoning within the dynamic context of postgraduate clinical practice [ 31 ].

This systematic review aimed to explore the long-term retention and application of basic sciences to clinical practice among medical practitioners. The insights gained may extend the existing body of knowledge and offer valuable strategies for enhancing value and impact of basic sciences in clinical practice. The review addressed the following research questions:

How relevant is the retention of basic sciences knowledge to clinical practice?

Does the study of basic sciences provide a framework for learning concepts that do not need to be retained?

What factors influence the retention, application and utility of basic sciences in clinical practice?

This systematic review adhered to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines [ 32 ].

Data sources and search strategy

Electronic databases were systematically searched from March 6th, 2023, to September 30th 2023, following the development of search terms. These databases included Web of Science, Scopus, Medline, CINAHL, Emcare, and Informit. Search strategies were designed using a mix of free text and subject headings specific to each database, to represent the concepts of medical education, basic science, clinical reasoning, and retention. Boolean operators “AND” and “OR” were used to refine the search strings to meet the unique requirements of each database. This approach aligns with best practice in systematic reviews, as it minimises bias and enhances the comprehensiveness of the search [ 33 ]. The complete search strategies employed in this review are detailed in the supplementary information section (Additional File 1). Additionally, hand searching of the reference lists of the studies included in the review was used to identify further relevant studies.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

This systematic review sought primary, peer-reviewed articles published in English, from the year 2000 to 2023. The focus of this review was on medical practitioners’ retention of basic sciences knowledge, its relevance to practice and factors associated with retention. Studies from other disciplines, such as nursing and allied health, were excluded. Also excluded were studies that considered only undergraduate medical students or participants’ perceptions of the value of basic sciences in clinical practice. For more detailed information on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, please refer to Additional File 2.

Study selection

From all databases were uploaded into Rayyan (an online tool for systematic reviews that facilitates the screening and selection of relevant studies) [ 34 ]. The initial screening process included studies conducted in both undergraduate and postgraduate settings to ensure a comprehensive review of the available literature. This led to a larger pool of studies in the initial review process but ensured that all relevant studies, particularly those combining different educational levels, were thoroughly considered before application of exclusion criteria. The review was conducted independently by five authors (FAA, BSM-A, FOA, AS, and HM), who first went through each study’s title and abstract and eliminated studies that did not meet the inclusion criteria. Following this, a full-text screening of the remaining studies was performed by the same authors. Only those studies that met the eligibility criteria were included in the final review. Any disagreements that arose during the screening process were addressed and resolved through consensus in weekly meetings with the entire project team.

Data extraction strategy

A standardised data extraction form was created using Microsoft Office Excel and data from the eligible articles were extracted by FAA and AS. The data extracted included the study title, authors, publication year, country, study aim/objectives, study design, setting, participants, and key findings in relation to knowledge retention, application and utility of basic sciences. Any discrepancies in data extraction were resolved through discussions involving all team members to achieve consensus. This rigorous approach ensured the accuracy and consistency of the data extraction process.

Quality appraisal

Quality appraisal is recommended in systematic reviews, particularly when they encompass diverse methodologies [ 35 , 36 ]. In this review, two authors (FAA & AS) independently appraised all included studies using the Quality Assessment of Diverse Studies (QuADS) tool, developed by Harrison et al. [ 37 ], a modified version of the Quality Assessment Tool for Studies with Diverse Designs (QATSDD) [ 38 ]. This tool includes 13 criteria describing the quality of studies in systematic reviews. Any disagreements were resolved in a consensus meeting, ensuring a unified and comprehensive evaluation of all studies. Studies were not excluded based on their quality rating, though the significance of their findings were considered when reporting the results and drawing conclusions.

Search results

A total of 4381 articles were identified in the initial search. After duplicates were removed, 3254 articles were eligible for title and abstract screening. We excluded 3129 articles that were deemed irrelevant to the topic, leaving 75 articles for full text screening. Seven of these articles met the inclusion criteria. An additional three studies were identified through hand-searching the references of the already identified studies. Therefore, a total of 10 studies were included in the systematic review. Details of the search strategy is presented in the PRISMA flow chart (Fig.  1 ).

Study characteristics

The studies included in this systematic review were published between 2002 and 2022 (Table  1 ). Many of the studies (80%, n  = 8) adopted quantitative study design such as cross-sectional, prospective, or randomized controlled trial (RCT) [ 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 ], with one study each employing multi-methods [ 47 ] and a qualitative approach [ 48 ] respectively. Of the 10 studies [ 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 ], four were conducted in Saudi Arabia [ 39 , 40 , 44 , 46 ], two each in the Netherlands [ 42 , 48 ] and USA [ 41 , 45 ], and one each in Canada [ 47 ] and the UK [ 43 ]. Most of the studies (80%, n  = 8) [ 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 ] were conducted in academic settings such as universities, while the remaining (20%, n  = 2) [ 43 , 44 ] were conducted in clinical settings. The studies varied in terms of participant demographics, with the number of participants ranging from 10 to 300. Half of the studies (50%, n  = 5) involved a population of interns [ 39 , 40 , 44 , 46 , 48 ], three (30%, n  = 3) involved residents [ 41 , 45 , 47 ], and one each (10%, n  = 1) included senior doctors [ 42 ] and combined residents and interns [ 43 ]. The residents’ specialisations included radiation oncology, anaesthesiology, and medical physics. In terms of curriculum, four (40%, n  = 4) of the studies employed a combination of traditional and problem based learning (PBL) curriculum [ 39 , 40 , 44 , 46 ], while the rest (60%, n  = 6) did not specify the type of curriculum employed [ 41 , 42 , 43 , 45 , 47 , 48 ]. Over half of the studies (60%, n  = 6) used assessment to examine the retention of basic science [ 39 , 40 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 46 ]; one study considered the association between basic sciences and clinical reasoning [ 48 ], while the rest of the studies (40%, n  = 4) employed various forms of education or learning interventions [ 41 , 45 , 47 , 48 ]. Anatomy was the most examined basic science subject (60%, n  = 6) in the included studies [ 41 , 42 , 43 , 45 , 47 , 48 ], followed by biochemistry [ 42 , 44 ] and physiology [ 39 , 42 ] with two (20%, n  = 2) studies each, and one study ( n  = 1) each for microbiology [ 40 ], pathology [ 42 ], and pharmacology [ 46 ]. In terms of the outcome(s) measured, knowledge retention was the focus of most studies (70%, n  = 7) [ 39 , 40 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 ], followed by a combination of knowledge retention and perceived value in two studies (20%, n  = 2) [ 41 , 47 ], and clinical reasoning in one study (10%, n  = 1) [ 48 ].

PRISMA flow diagram [ 32 ]

Knowledge retention and relevance of basic sciences

Nine studies [ 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 ] reported on knowledge retention of the basic sciences among medical practitioners (Table  1 ). Four of the studies [ 41 , 43 , 45 , 47 ] focused on anatomy, while one study each focused on physiology [ 39 ], biochemistry [ 44 ], pharmacology [ 46 ], and microbiology [ 40 ]. In addition, one study [ 42 ] assessed four basic science disciplines (anatomy, biochemistry, physiology and pathology). Knowledge retention was assessed in these studies using tests or examinations. While all studies used known assessment tools, the measures used to report knowledge retention varied, including proportions of participants who passed and mean pass scores. Three of the four studies [ 41 , 45 , 47 ] used an intervention approach where the pre-test and post-test scores of participants were, respectively, 45–60% and 72–86%, 3 months later. The fourth study [ 43 ] investigated anatomy knowledge based on the number of years post-graduation from medical school. Newly qualified doctors and doctors who were two to four years postgraduation had average scores of 72.1% and 77.1%, respectively, while doctors in training with four or more years of experience and doctors who worked as anatomy demonstrators had higher scores of 82.4% and 82.9% respectively [ 43 ].

Knowledge retention in other basic science disciplines, including physiology, biochemistry, microbiology, and pharmacology, was assessed separately, and showed similar findings. Biochemistry and pharmacology showed similar retention scores with mean scores of 45.3 ± 15.8% [ 44 ] and 45.1 ± 19.7% [ 46 ], respectively. Microbiology had the lowest mean score of 39.1 ± 18% [ 40 ]. Where all four disciplines (anatomy, biochemistry, physiology and pathology) were assessed, doctors who had recently graduated from medical school achieved an average score of 40%. The scores declined with increasing years post-graduation with doctors who graduated more than 50 years ago achieving a 25% correct score [ 42 ]. On the other hand, mean scores were not reported for physiology, rather 26% of the participants were reported to have passed the knowledge test [ 39 ].

Influence of basic science retention on clinical reasoning ability

Only one study [ 48 ] examined the influence of anatomy knowledge on clinical reasoning/decision making. Junior doctors were observed to apply anatomical knowledge, acquired from practice-based learning, throughout all phases of patient consultations, particularly during physical examination. The use of anatomical terms was closely linked to clinical reasoning, suggesting that doctors visualised the relevant anatomical information during their consultations [ 48 ]. Interestingly, about half of the doctors were not consciously aware of this visualisation process until the recall phase [ 48 ]. Some mental processes during the consultation excluded verbalisation as they were either partly unconscious, implicit, or overshadowed by new, reflective thoughts [ 48 ]. All participants reported visualising the necessary anatomical structures for the task during the consultation.

Factors influencing basic sciences knowledge retention

Five studies examined the influences on the retention of basic sciences [ 39 , 40 , 42 , 44 , 46 ]. Two of these studies [ 39 , 40 ] identified predictors of knowledge retention, while the other three studies [ 42 , 44 , 46 ] identified associated factors. Predictors of knowledge retention were age, curriculum type, and retention interval (Table  2 ). Age and curriculum type were predictors of physiological knowledge recall [ 39 ]. Scores showed an inverse relationship with age, highlighting that younger doctors had a better recall of knowledge compared to their older counterparts [ 39 ]. In addition, graduates from traditional or conventional schools performed better than those from integrated schools. Retention interval was inversely related to scores and predicted knowledge recall/ performance in four basic science disciplines (anatomy, physiology, biochemistry, and pharmacology). This implies that individuals who have been out of medical school for a longer time tend to have fewer correct answers compared to recent graduates. Three studies [ 40 , 44 , 46 ] reported on factors that influence knowledge retention, these include gender, preparation for examinations, type of curriculum and type of college. Females were reported to score higher than males, and individuals preparing for qualifying examinations scored higher than their counterparts [ 46 ]. In terms of curriculum, there were conflicting results. In some cases, participants from institutions with conventional educational approaches performed better than those trained based on hybrid or innovative educational methods such as problem-based learning (PBL) [ 39 , 44 ]. Another study [ 40 ] indicated that interns who graduated from private colleges performed significantly better compared to those from government colleges.

Study quality

As shown in Table  3 , the results of the QuADS assessment revealed variations in the quality assessment criteria of the reviewed studies. The articles scored between 22 and 36 out of a possible 39. The reviewed studies excelled in areas such as the articulation of research aims and objectives, providing a clear description of the research setting and target population, detailing the data collection process, the appropriateness of the analytical method used, and the relevance of the study design in achieving the research aims. However, the studies scored lower in areas like the theoretical or conceptual foundations of the research and the justification for the chosen analytical method. Notably, more than half of the studies (60%, n  = 6) [ 39 , 40 , 41 , 43 , 44 , 46 ] scored zero for not considering research stakeholders in the research design or implementation. This highlights the need for improved engagement with participants and stakeholders in the co-design of research.

This systematic review provides a comprehensive analysis of the long-term retention and clinical application of basic science knowledge among medical practitioners. It emphasises that retaining basic science knowledge is fundamental for accurate diagnosis and treatment planning. Basic sciences form the foundation for understanding complex clinical concepts and enhance overall clinical competence. Although natural knowledge decay occurs over time, effective educational interventions and continuous professional development significantly improve retention and application, helping practitioners handle diverse clinical challenges. These findings align with research suggesting that memory and cognitive abilities may decline with age, and instructional methods during medical education impact knowledge retention [ 16 ].

The review highlights the critical role of retaining basic science knowledge in developing clinical expertise. For example, detailed anatomical knowledge significantly affects diagnostic accuracy and treatment planning, particularly in specialties like radiation oncology [ 47 ]. A gap often exists between theoretical knowledge and practical application, necessitating tailored educational approaches. Senior professionals and clinical-year students may exhibit lower basic science knowledge due to insufficient rehearsal and traditional teaching methods that fail to integrate theory with clinical practice [ 49 , 50 ]. Effective instructional interventions such as continuing education, dissection courses, generative retrieval, and integrated anatomy training enhance knowledge retention and application [ 42 , 45 , 47 ].

Factors like age, gender, and curriculum type (e.g., Problem-Based Learning) influence basic science retention, with younger practitioners typically retaining knowledge better [ 16 , 51 , 52 , 53 ]. Doctors who graduated more than 50 years ago had lower scores in basic sciences, potentially due to restricted practice scope, fewer practice hours, changes in medical education, and natural cognitive decline [ 42 ]. Continuous professional development and targeted educational techniques are crucial for maintaining clinical competence and ensuring effective application of basic science knowledge throughout the medical career [ 54 , 55 ]. Schmidt and Rikers [ 51 ] describe how basic science knowledge, through extensive clinical experience, integrates into higher-level clinical concepts or “illness scripts,” facilitating efficient case processing. Teaching basic sciences within a clinical context and introducing patient problems early in the curriculum are essential for developing ‘encapsulated knowledge’, highlighting the importance of integrating and retaining basic science knowledge [ 5 ].

While detailed retention of basic science knowledge may diminish over time, the conceptual framework remains crucial for ongoing learning and clinical reasoning [ 1 , 2 , 7 , 10 ]. The concept of ‘encapsulated knowledge’ shows that integrated basic science knowledge aids in synthesising clinical presentations, reducing the need for detailed recall as clinical experience grows [ 49 , 50 , 51 ]. Research indicates that basic science knowledge improves diagnostic accuracy over time, with students who learned causal explanations for symptoms retaining diagnostic information better than those who learned epidemiological information [ 56 ]. This suggests that basic science knowledge provides a coherent framework that enhances recall and organisation of clinical information, improving diagnostic skills.

Curriculum reforms integrating basic sciences with clinical training are vital for building a robust foundation for clinical practice [ 8 ]. This insight underlines the importance of basic sciences not just for their content but for structuring advanced clinical concepts, essential for developing competent clinicians [ 6 ]. A study showed that higher scores among anatomy demonstrators were likely due to repeated teaching exposure, while improved scores among doctors with more years post-graduation suggest the reinforcing effect of clinical practice [ 43 ]. Measuring clinicians’ retention of basic science information, even if not directly relevant to current practice, has significant implications. Basic science knowledge often underpins critical thinking and clinical decision-making, and retention supports a broader understanding of patient care and treatment mechanisms. It becomes crucial in unexpected situations or complex cases requiring holistic understanding [ 2 , 7 ]. Retaining basic science information, even if not directly relevant, maintains overall clinical competence and adaptability [ 14 ]. Frequent testing and relearning help clinicians stay prepared for various clinical challenges, enabling effective integration of new information and enhancing clinical skills over time. The concept of ‘encapsulated knowledge’ suggests that while detailed knowledge might not be explicitly retained, principles and frameworks from basic sciences are internalised and used in clinical reasoning [ 29 , 51 , 57 ]. Measuring retention helps identify gaps in understanding, guiding targeted educational interventions to reinforce critical concepts [ 58 ].

The observed differences between men and women [ 59 , 60 ], graduates of private and government college education [ 40 ] and confusion over the impact of instructional methods [ 25 ], require further exploration. Notably, existing studies were conducted among interns, and surgeons with no study conducted in specialities like internal medicine, primary care or general practice. This is a significant gap in the literature, as medical practitioners irrespective of their area of specialisation often need to apply a broad range of basic science knowledge in their practice [ 59 ].

Strengths and limitations

The major strength of this review lies in its comprehensive analysis, drawing from a diverse range of studies with different designs, participant groups, and educational interventions. The use of the QuADS tool for quality assessment ensured a robust evaluation of included studies. Although the QuADS review indicated that the studies were generally of average quality, they collectively provide valuable insights into the long-term retention and application of basic sciences knowledge. These studies contribute to identifying key trends and gaps in current medical education practices, thereby guiding future research and educational plans. The inclusion of studies predominantly from Saudi Arabia, may introduce regional biases, affecting the generalisability of the findings. While this review provides valuable insights across different educational and healthcare contexts, cautious interpretation is necessary when applying the results to other regions. Other limitations include variability in the scope of medical programs, English language bias, and the predominance of cross-sectional studies, which may limit the generalisability of findings. Additionally, the relatively small number of studies on certain disciplines may constrain interpretation, although they highlight significant gaps in the literature.

This systematic review provides a comprehensive analysis of the long-term retention and clinical application of basic science knowledge among medical practitioners. The review underscores the critical importance of retaining basic science knowledge for effective clinical practice. Detailed knowledge is essential for clinical accuracy, while foundational concepts support clinical reasoning and new information synthesis. Effective educational interventions, including continuous education and generative retrieval, mitigate knowledge decay and ensure high standards of care. Integrating basic and clinical sciences is crucial for lifelong learning and clinical competence, ultimately enhancing patient outcomes. Tailored educational approaches and ongoing professional development are necessary to address knowledge gaps and maintain clinical excellence.

Data availability

The dataset supporting the findings of this review is included within the article and its supplementary files.

Abbreviations

Generative Retrieval

Long-Term Retention

Problem Based Learning

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

The Quality Assessment with Diverse Studies

Transesophageal Echocardiography

Sabita Yograj AN, Bhat RK, Gupta, Gupta G, Leela K. Role of basic sciences in making of a clinician: perspectives of medical students from North India. PubMed. 2019;8:171–171. https://doi.org/10.4103/jehp.jehp_66_19 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Finnerty EP, Chauvin S, Bonaminio G, Andrews M, Carroll RG, Pangaro LN. Flexner Revisited: the role and value of the Basic sciences in Medical Education. Acad Med. 2010;85:349–55. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181c88b09 .

Porta M. A dictionary of public health. Oxford University Press; 2018.

Curiosity Creates Cures. the Value and Impact of Basic Research. www.nigms.nih.gov.2019. https://www.nigms.nih.gov/education/fact-sheets/Pages/curiosity-creates-cures.aspx . Accessed 1 Jan 2023.

Buja LM. Medical Education today: all that glitters is not gold. BMC Med Educ. 2019;19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1535-9 .

Heiman HL, O’Brien CL, Butter J, Uchida T, Yelen M, Garcia PM. Ready to reason: integration of Clinical Education and Basic Science Improves Medical Students’ self-assessed clinical reasoning before clerkships. Med Sci Educ. 2015;25:513–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-015-0181-z .

Cervantes J, Dudrey E, Baatar D, Lyn H, Sambalingam D, Wojciechowska J, et al. Improving integration of Basic Science into Clinical Medicine: Vertical Integration into Clinical Education (VICE) activity. Med Sci Educ. 2022;32:47–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-021-01485-7 .

Priyia Pusparajah BH, Goh, Lee L et al. Jodi Woan-Fei Law, Loh Teng‐Hern Tan, Vengadesh Letchumanan,. Integrating the Basic and Clinical Sciences Throughout the Medical Curriculum: Contemplating the Why, When and How. Prog Drug Discov Biomed Sci. 2022;5. https://doi.org/10.36877/pddbs.a0000308

Abraham F. Report on Medical Education in the United States and Canada: a report to the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. The Carnegie Foundation; 1910.

Malau-Aduli BS, Alele FO, Heggarty P, Teague P-A, Sen Gupta T, Hays R. Perceived clinical relevance and retention of basic sciences across the medical education continuum. Adv Physiol Educ. 2019;43:293–9. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00012.2019 .

Dickinson BL, Gibson K, VanDerKolk K, Greene J, Rosu CA, Navedo DD, et al. It is this very knowledge that makes us doctors: an Applied Thematic analysis of how medical students perceive the relevance of Biomedical Science Knowledge to Clinical Medicine. BMC Med Educ. 2020;20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02251-w .

Cheng Q. Grand Challenges and Perspectives in Biomedical Analysis and Diagnostics. Front Anal Sci. 2021;1. https://doi.org/10.3389/frans.2021.700386 .

Hawkins N, Younan H-C, Fyfe M, Parekh R, McKeown A. Exploring why medical students still feel underprepared for clinical practice: a qualitative analysis of an authentic on-call simulation. BMC Med Educ. 2021;21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-021-02605-y .

Goshu B. Basic Medical sciences Knowledge Retention for Clinical Practice. Adv Med Educ Pract. 2022;13. https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S364631 .

Binstock JM, Pino MA, Primavera LH. What Physicians wished they would have learned in Medical School: a Survey. Med Sci Educ. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-019-00903-1 .

Custers EJFM. Long-Term Retention of Basic Science knowledge: a review study. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2010;15:109–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-008-9101-y .

Joseph G-M, Patel VL. Domain knowledge and hypothesis Genenation in Diagnostic reasoning. Med Decis Mak. 1990;10:31–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X9001000107 .

Woods NN, Brooks LR, Norman GR. The role of Biomedical Knowledge in diagnosis of difficult clinical cases. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2007;12:417–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-006-9054-y .

Grainger R, Dai W, Osborne E, Kenwright D. Medical students create multiple-choice questions for learning in pathology education: a pilot study. BMC Med Educ. 2018;18:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1312-1 .

Al-Wardy NM. Assessment methods in undergraduate medical education. Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J. 2010;10:203. PMID: 21509230; PMCID: PMC3074721.

Google Scholar  

Schmidmaier R, Eiber S, Ebersbach R, Schiller M, Hege I, Holzer M, et al. Learning the facts in medical school is not enough: which factors predict successful application of procedural knowledge in a laboratory setting? BMC Med Educ. 2013;13:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-13-28 .

Holmboe ES. Work-based assessment and co-production in postgraduate medical training. GMS J Med Educ. 2017;34. https://doi.org/10.3205/zma001135 .

Collard A, Brédart S, Bourguignon J-P. Context impact of clinical scenario on knowledge transfer and reasoning capacity in a medical problem-based learning curriculum. High Educ Res Dev. 2016;35:242–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2015.1087383 .

Ganguly P, Yaqinuddin A, Al-Kattan W, Kemahli S, AlKattan K. Medical education dilemma: how can we best accommodate basic sciences in a curriculum for 21st century medical students? Can J Physiol Pharmacol. 2019;97:293–6. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjpp-2018-0428 .

Malau-Aduli BS, Lee AY, Cooling N, Catchpole M, Jose M, Turner R. Retention of knowledge and perceived relevance of basic sciences in an integrated case-based learning (CBL) curriculum. BMC Med Educ. 2013;13. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-13-139 .

Norman G. The basic role of basic science. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2012;17:453–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-012-9394-8 .

Matus AR, Matus LN, Hiltz A, Chen T, Kaur B, Brewster P, et al. Development of an Assessment technique for Basic Science Retention using the NBME Subject Exam Data. BMC Med Educ. 2022;22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03842-5 .

Schmidt HG, Boshuizen HP. Encapsulation of biomedical knowledge. Advanced models of cognition for medical training and practice. Springer; 1992. pp. 265–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-02833-9_15 .

Rikers RM, Loyens SM, Schmidt HG. The role of encapsulated knowledge in clinical case representations of medical students and family doctors. Med Educ. 2004;38:1035–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2004.01955.x .

Castillo J-M, Park YS, Harris I, Cheung JJH, Sood L, Clark MD, et al. A critical narrative review of transfer of basic science knowledge in health professions education. Med Educ. 2018;52:592–604. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13519 .

HINES D. The application of anatomy and other Basic Medical sciences in General Practice. Med Educ. 2009;4:145–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.1970.tb01610

Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated Guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Int J Surg. 2021;88:105906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.105906 .

Klerings I, Robalino S, Booth A, Escobar-Liquitay CM, Sommer I, Gartlehner G, et al. Rapid Reviews methods series: Guidance on Literature Search. BMJ Evid-Based Med. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2022-112079 .

Ouzzani M, Hammady H, Fedorowicz Z, Elmagarmid A. Rayyan—a web and Mobile App for systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2016;5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4 .

Moons P, Goossens E, Thompson DR. Rapid reviews: the pros and cons of an accelerated review process. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2021;20. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurjcn/zvab041 .

Dowling M, Efstathiou N, Amanda D, Cherith S, Fernández-Ortega P, Dieperink KB, et al. Cancer nursing research priorities: a rapid review. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2023;102272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejon.2023.102272 .

Harrison R, Jones B, Gardener P, Lawton R. Quality Assessment with Diverse studies (QuADS): an Appraisal Tool for Methodological and reporting quality in systematic reviews of mixed- or multi-method studies. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021;21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06122-y .

Sirriyeh R, Lawton R, Gardner P, Armitage G. Reviewing studies with diverse designs: the development and evaluation of a New Tool. J Eval Clin Pract. 2012;18:746–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2753.2011.01662.x .

AlMohanna AM, Suliman ME, AlEssa NA, Khatib SY, Saeed AA, Hamza MA. Recall of physiology knowledge among medical interns: an exploratory study in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Adv Physiol Educ. 2018;42:541–6. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00116.2017 .

Alosaimi B, Saeed AA, Mustafa AA, AlJabr WA, Batarfi MA, Hamza MA. Recall of prior knowledge in Medical Microbiology among Medical interns: a Multicenter Cross-sectional Assessment in Saudi Arabia. Adv Med Educ Pract. 2022;13. https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S364330 .

Chino JP, Lee WR, Madden R, Sims EL, Kivell TL, Doyle SK, et al. Teaching the anatomy of oncology: evaluating the impact of a dedicated oncoanatomy course. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011;79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.10.054 . https://doi-org.elibrary.jcu.edu.au/ .

Custers E, ten Cate O. Very long-term retention of basic science knowledge in doctors after graduation. Med Educ. 2011;45. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2010.03889.x .

Gupta Y, Morgan M, Singh A, Ellis H. Junior doctors’ knowledge of applied clinical anatomy. Clin Anat off J Am Assoc Clin Anat Br Assoc Clin Anat. 2008;21:334–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/ca.20628 .

Hamza MA, Idris AET, Almohanna A, AlKabaa A, Saeed A, Satti GM. Recall knowledge of biochemistry for interns after graduation from medical schools. Int J Biosci Biochem Bioinforma. 2013;3:16. https://doi.org/10.7763/IJBBB.2013.V3.155 .

Kleiman AM, Forkin KT, Bechtel AJ, Collins SR, Ma JZ, Nemergut EC, et al. Generative Retrieval improves Learning and Retention of Cardiac anatomy using Transesophageal Echocardiography. Anesth Analg. 2017;124. https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000002004 .

Mustafa A, Alassiry H, Al-Turki A, Alamri N, Alhamdan N, Saeed A et al. Recall of theoretical pharmacology knowledge by 6th year medical students and interns of three medical schools in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Educ Res Int. 2016;2016. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/5374653

Labranche L, Johnson M, Palma D, D’Souza L, Jaswal J. Integrating anatomy training into radiation oncology residency: considerations for developing a multidisciplinary, interactive learning module for adult learners. Anat Sci Educ. 2014;8:158–65. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1472 . https://doi-org.elibrary.jcu.edu.au/ .

Vorstenbosch MATM, Kooloos JGM, Bolhuis SM, Laan RFJM. An investigation of anatomical competence in junior medical doctors. Anat Sci Educ. 2016;9. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1513 . https://doi-org.elibrary.jcu.edu.au/ .

Lazić E, Dujmović J, Hren D. Retention of basic sciences knowledge at clinical years of medical curriculum. Croat Med J. 2006;47:882–0.

Mohamed E-B, Sheikh B, Shalaby S, Mohamed E-A, Allam A. Evaluation of basic medical sciences knowledge retention among medical students. Ibnosina J Med Biomed Sci. 2011;3:45–52. https://doi.org/10.4103/1947-489X.210870 .

Schmidt HG, Rikers RM. How expertise develops in medicine: knowledge encapsulation and illness script formation. Med Educ. 2007;41:1133–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2007.02915.x .

Strobel J, van Barneveld A, When Is PBL. More effective? A Meta-synthesis of Meta-analyses comparing PBL to Conventional classrooms. Interdiscip J Probl-Based Learn. 2009;3. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1046 .

Trullàs JC, Blay C, Sarri E, Pujol R. Effectiveness of problem-based learning methodology in undergraduate medical education: a scoping review. BMC Med Educ. 2022;22:104. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03154-8 . https://doi-org.elibrary.jcu.edu.au/ .

Donker SCM, Vorstenbosch MATM, Gerhardus MJT, Thijssen DHJ. Retrieval Practice and Spaced learning: preventing loss of knowledge in Dutch Medical sciences students in an ecologically valid setting. BMC Med Educ. 2022;22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-021-03075-y . https://doi-org.elibrary.jcu.edu.au/ .

Henderson A, Prescott C. Re-envisaging continuing professional development to improve patient outcomes. Nurse Educ Today. 2020;89:104402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2020.104402 . https://doi-org.elibrary.jcu.edu.au/ .

Woods NN, Neville AJ, Levinson AJ, Howey EHA, Oczkowski WJ, Norman GR. The value of basic science in clinical diagnosis. Acad Med. 2006;81.

Harackiewicz JM, Priniski SJ. Improving student outcomes in higher education: the science of targeted intervention. Annu Rev Psychol. 2018;69:409–35. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-122216-011725 .

Heck AJ, Cross CE, Tatum VY. Early Medical Education Readiness interventions: enhancing undergraduate preparedness. Handbook of Research on the Efficacy of Training Programs and Systems in Medical Education. IGI Global; 2020. pp. 283–304.

Eich-Krohm A, Robra B-P, Marx Y, Herrmann M. Finding common (research) ground between general practitioners and neuroscientists: the vital role of knowledge circulation in closing the evidence-to-practice gap. BMC Fam Pract. 2021;22:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-021-01560-3 . https://doi-org.elibrary.jcu.edu.au/ .

Saeed S, Zyngier D. How motivation influences student engagement: a qualitative case study. J Educ Learn. 2012;1:252–67. https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v1n2p252 .

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to the Australian College of Rural & Remote Medicine for funding this project.

This systematic review was funded by the Australian College of Rural and Remote Medicine.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

College of Medicine and Dentistry, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD, 4811, Australia

Francis A. Albert, Abdul-Aziz Seidu, Hannah M. Mason, Emma Anderson, Paula Heggarty, Aaron Hollins, Tarun Sen Gupta, Richard B. Hays & Bunmi S. Malau-Aduli

School of Health, University of the Sunshine Coast, Sippy Downs, QLD, 4556, Australia

Faith O. Alele

Adelaide Rural Clinical School, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, 5606, Australia

Lawrie McArthur

School of Medicine and Public Health, College of Health, Medicine and Wellbeing, The University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, 2308, Australia

Bunmi S. Malau-Aduli

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the conception and design of the study. FAA, AS and FOA were responsible for data collection, while BSM-A and FOA, provided advice on data analysis and interpretation. The initial drafts of the manuscript were developed by FAA and AS. All authors provided feedback on earlier versions of the manuscript and have read and agreed to the final version.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bunmi S. Malau-Aduli .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Competing interests.

The corresponding author (Bunmi S Malau-Aduli) is an Associate Editor with BMC Medical Education. All other authors have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Supplementary material 2, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Albert, F.A., Seidu, AA., Mason, H.M. et al. A systematic review of medical practitioners’ retention and application of basic sciences to clinical practice. BMC Med Educ 24 , 997 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05952-8

Download citation

Received : 02 March 2024

Accepted : 23 August 2024

Published : 13 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05952-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Medical education
• Basic sciences
• Knowledge retention
• Clinical reasoning
• Postgraduate medical trainees
• Medical practitioners

BMC Medical Education

ISSN: 1472-6920

• General enquiries: [email protected]