PRISM•MO
Student README template
The ten-section README from the README Model, with short prompts inside each section and worked examples of what a strong entry looks like. Students fill it in. Their thinking shows up where it is easiest to mark.
Starter Pack
Run PRISM on your next assignment.
Everything you need to use the PRISM Workflow™ and Framework™ on one piece of coursework. A ready-to-use assignment. A student README template. A marking checklist that maps to criteria you already use. An annotated example. A two-page quick start.
Shorter evidence. Faster marking. Clearer decisions.
What this is
A short, practical way to try PRISM on real coursework.
If you have read the Workflow, the Framework and the README Model, you know the shape of the system. The Starter Pack turns that shape into a single coursework you can mark this term. Drop it into an existing module. Keep your criteria. See whether student thinking becomes easier to read.
"Use this in your next assignment and actually see how your students are thinking."
The hero asset
A ready-to-use assignment, already written around PRISM.
One full assignment brief, written the way a lecturer would actually hand it to students. The PRISM Workflow is baked into the brief. The README Model is built into the submission requirement. Copy it into your module and run it.
Assignment brief
A small business tax calculator
A self-contained programming task that suits HND Level 4 and Level 5 work, adaptable up to degree level. The brief specifies the problem, the constraints, the submission format, and what counts as evidence. Students ship a repo with a working build and a README.
- Brief that names the problem and the constraints
- Expected submission: repo, README, working build
- Suggested timeline for a two or three week assignment
- Variations for web, console, or API deliverables
Everything else in the pack
Six supporting assets that carry the assignment.
Each one answers a question a lecturer asks once the brief is on the page. What do students submit. How do I mark it. What does "good" look like. How do I explain AI use. How do I get going without reading the whole site.
Marking checklist
A one-page checklist aligned to the four Framework lenses: Output, Process, Decisions, Understanding. Each lens lists what a weak, an acceptable, and a strong submission looks like, written in the language of what a marker actually sees.
Annotated example submission
A full student submission for the tax calculator assignment, with inline marker comments. Where the reasoning holds. Where the AI use is handled well. Where the understanding starts to thin. A final marking summary explains the judgement.
Quick-start guide
Two pages. Page one, how to brief students and what to say about AI. Page two, how to mark efficiently and what to ignore. No theory. Read it in ten minutes. Run the assignment the same week.
AI-use expectations sheet
One page you can hand to students. What they are allowed to do with AI. What they have to show. Examples of good AI use and examples of poor AI use. Sets the boundary before the assignment starts, not after a submission lands.
Workflow and Framework reference
A single-page summary of the Workflow and the Framework, for staff who need the logic on one sheet. Useful for moderation meetings, standardisation, and conversations with awarding bodies or internal quality teams.
What it actually does for you
Less time guessing. More time marking with confidence.
Features are easy to list. The test that matters is whether something shortens the job you already do. The Starter Pack is designed to do four specific things.
Makes student thinking readable
The README template turns "I can't tell what they understood" into a document where decisions, AI exchanges, and reflection sit in predictable places. You stop hunting for evidence.
Cuts marking time, not rigour
The checklist gives you one place to look per lens. The annotated example shows you what to recognise quickly. The pass, acceptable, strong scale keeps the judgement calibrated across a cohort.
Sets AI expectations before submission
The expectations sheet removes most of the ambiguity that causes arguments at the end of a module. Students know what they have to show. You know what you have to look for.
Gives you a defensible audit trail
When a moderator, an external examiner, or an awarding body asks how you assessed an AI-assisted submission, the README, the checklist, and the Framework lenses are the answer. The evidence is inside the artefact.
Who this is for
Practitioners who are marking this term, not next year.
The pack is written for the people actually setting and marking coursework. It is not a curriculum document. It does not pretend to solve AI at the institutional level. It solves the job in front of you.
What it isn't
Three things the pack is deliberately not.
Not an anti-AI system
The pack assumes students will use AI and that they should. PRISM reads for evidence of thinking, not for the presence of AI. A student who used a model well is doing what the system is built for.
Not a replacement for your criteria
Your assessment criteria stay. The Framework lenses sit on top of them. The checklist is a reading pass, not a new rubric. Existing grading decisions still belong to you and your team.
Not a rigid template
The brief, the README, and the checklist are starting points. Adapt them to your module, your cohort, your institution. The shape of the Workflow and the Framework holds. Everything else is yours to edit.
How to use it
Five steps to run it on one assignment.
You do not need to redesign a module. You do not need approval from a committee. You can run this on a single coursework and see whether the evidence changes.
- Pick an upcoming programming assignment. The tax calculator brief works as is, or use your own problem.
- Replace the existing reflection requirement with the README template. Give students the AI-use expectations sheet at the briefing.
- Let students do the work. The Workflow structures the process. The README structures the evidence.
- Mark one submission using the checklist. Compare that reading to the mark the final build alone would have produced.
- Decide whether the evidence the README carried changed the judgement. If it did, keep using it.
The test. If a lecturer looks at the pack and thinks "that's interesting", the pack has failed. If they look at it and think "I could use this next week", it has done its job.
Get the pack
Download the PRISM Starter Pack.
The pack is hosted as a versioned release on GitHub. No signup, no email gate. Free while PrismMO is in preview. Fork it into your module folder and edit what you need. If you want a note when a new version ships, subscribe to the PrismMO Substack.
Download from GitHub
The current release contains seven editable assets: the assignment brief, the README template, the marking checklist, the annotated example, the quick-start guide, the AI-use expectations sheet, and the one-page Workflow and Framework reference.
Markdown is the standard format for v0.1.0. An MS Word version is in the pipeline.
Editable formats. Fork it, adapt it, drop it into your module.
Where this sits in PrismMO
The Starter Pack turns the system into a single coursework.
If you are new to PrismMO, these pages explain the logic the pack is built on. If you have read them, the pack is the quickest way to test the ideas on your own module.
Run PRISM once. Then decide what to do with the rest.
The fastest way into PrismMO is a single assignment, marked against the same criteria you already use, with a README that carries the evidence. The Starter Pack is the quickest route to that first run.
Keep thinking visible.