Demystifying academic skills, building a shared language for student success: Reflections from the My 5 Skills project

Corrinne Millard, Leena Parmar, Lisa Appleyard-Keeling and Louise Barnes are a collaborative team of Programme Support Tutors in the Department of Social Care and Social Work, focused on improving student success and belonging through the development and delivery of impactful student support initiatives.

What does it mean to be a good academic writer? What does critical thinking actually look like at Level 4 compared to Level 7? How much independence should a student display at each stage of the studies?

These are the questions that higher education staff need to grapple with every day. Yet despite being central to student success, the answers are not always as consistent as we would assume.

The My 5 Skills project emerged from a simple but important observation: much of what we expect students to know remains implicit. Academic skills are often referenced in teaching, assessment and feedback. But the language used to describe them is often interpreted very differently across modules, teams and disciplines. For students, this can make higher education feel like a process of decoding hidden expectations rather than developing knowledge and capacity.

At its heart, My 5 Skills is about making the implicit explicit. The aim was to create a shared language for academic skills development with staff and students having a clear understanding of what progression looks like from entry level through to postgraduate study.

Why this work matters

The project began around three years ago as a Programme Support Tutor (PST) initiative focused on demystifying the language of higher education. Through multiple iterations, discussions, and refinements, it has evolved into a wider conversation about transparency, consistency, and educational justice. For us, educational justice is about equity, making education and its expectations accessible for all our students (Matus and Riberi, 2026).

While academic skills such as reading, writing, critical thinking and research are expected across all programmes, expectations are often interpreted differently by individual lecturers, modules and disciplines. These differences can create what has been described as a ‘hidden curriculum’: the unspoken rules, expectations and assumptions that students are expected to understand, but are rarely made explicit (Advance HE, 2020). Such ambiguity can be particularly challenging for students from widening participation backgrounds who may have less access to the social and cultural capital that supports success in higher education.

This matters because academic skills are not simply technical competencies. They are closely linked to professional values including ethical practice, reflexivity, inclusivity and evidence-informed decision-making. Developing a shared language around these skills helps staff communicate expectations more clearly and supports students in understanding how their learning should develop over time.

The challenge extends beyond standardisation moving towards transparency. Students should have a clear understanding of what good academic performance looks like. This includes how academic skills progress across all levels of study, how the skills relate to assessments, and the competencies needed for future professional roles.

Starting the conversation

The latest phase of the project began with a whole staff workshop involving academics teaching across health, social care and social work programmes.

The workshop recognised that academic standards are socially constructed (Bunn, Threadgold and Burke, 2020) and best explored through dialogue. Rather than presenting a predefined framework, the session was intentionally interactive. Staff were encouraged to examine their own assumptions about academic performance and compare these with recognised sector standards.

Grounded in the Framework for the Higher Education qualifications (FHEQ) and relevant Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) subject benchmark statements, the workshop sought to create space for critical discussion around progression standards and expectations.

The aim was not to prescribe a single way of teaching or assessing, instead it was to work towards greater coherence, ensuring that students encounter clear developmental pathways for transitioning to higher education Level 4 through to achieving skills of autonomy, originality and advanced criticality at Level 7.

The 5 Skills framework

Central to the project is a focus on five interconnected academic skills that underpins success across all programmes:

• Reading and understanding
• Academic writing
• Critical thinking and metacognition
• Research and use of evidence
• Communication and collaboration 

Although these terms are frequently used in higher education, participants recognised that definitions often vary. For example, one tutor’s understanding of critical thinking may differ significantly from another’s.

Making assumptions visible

One of the most revealing workshop activities asked staff to examine anonymised extracts of students work representing different levels of study.

This simple exercise quickly surfaced a range of assumptions. Staff drew on indicators such as depth of analysis, use of evidence, structure, and critical engagement. While there was broad consensus, there were also areas of disagreement, which highlights how differently academic standards can be interpreted.

The value of the activity was in creating a space to discuss why particular judgements were made, and which criteria were prioritised. The emphasis was not on ‘correct’ answers but on dialogue.

In taking this approach, the exercise mirrored many of the conversations which take place during moderation, calibration, and external examining. This reminded staff involved that professional judgement benefits from shared reference points and from ongoing dialogue.

Creating a shared framework: Defining academic skills progression

The second stage of the workshop focussed on articulating minimum threshold standards across Levels 4 to 7.

Working in groups, staff used structured grids to define what students should be able to demonstrate in each of the five skills.

Discussion focused on identifying minimum threshold expectations for a range of skills across Levels 4 to 7. Staff worked collaboratively to describe observable, assessable competencies rather than relying on broad statements.

The emphasis on threshold standards was deliberate. Participants considered: 

• What must students demonstrate to pass?
• What do students actually need to do at this level of study?
• What identifiable competencies demonstrate the skill? 
• How much independence is reasonable?
• Are expectations realistic and inclusive?
• Do assessment tasks enable students to demonstrate these skills?

Focussing on observable competencies helped us to move the conversation away from vague descriptors towards clear language that students can understand.

The resulting discussions began to transform tacit knowledge into explicit guidance. By mapping progression across levels, staff were able to identify clearer developmental pathways and reduce unintended inconsistencies.

The skills grid

The workshop concluded with a commitment to collate ideas into a departmental academic skills grid. The grid will be presented to students and staff who will be asked for feedback. Based on the feedback received, this will potentially be amended before the framework will be piloted in selected modules in Semester 1.

The next phase: Making education more transparent

The My 5 Skills project began as an attempt to demystify academic language and academic skills. It has since evolved to become something that has generated conversations and reflections about our expectations of our students learning.

The project makes educational expectations more transparent, therefore more inclusive and accessible.

When students have greater knowledge of what academic skills matter and how they develop across the student journey, they become better placed to engage with learning confidently. Additionally, when staff share a common language academic expectations become clearer and therefore more consistent, fair and equitable.

Ultimately, the session reinforced that improving consistency was not about standardisation for its own sake, but importantly about equity. By making expectations clearer, institutions can reduce the impact of hidden curricula, support widening participation agendas and ensure that all students have the opportunity to develop the academic capabilities needed for success.

References

Advance HE (2025) The Hidden Curriculum of Higher Education. Available at: https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/hidden-curriculum-higher-education (Accessed: 9 July 2026).

Bunn, M., Threadgold, S. and Burke, P.J. (2020) ‘Class in Australian higher education: The university as a site of social reproduction’, Journal of Sociology, 56(3) September 2020, pp. 422–438. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/1440783319851188

Matus, C., and Riberi, V. (2026) ‘Educational justice in contemporary scholarship: a systemic literature review of principles, perspectives, and emerging directions (2009–2024). Front. Educ. 11 March 2026. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2026.1727249

QAA (2026) Subject Benchmark Statements. Gloucester: Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education. Available at: Subject Benchmark Statements (Accessed: 14 July 2026)

QAA (2024) The Frameworks for Higher Education Qualifications of UK Degree-Awarding Bodies (FHEQ). Gloucester: Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education. Available at: The Frameworks for Higher Education Qualifications of UK Degree-Awarding Bodies (Accessed: 14 July 2026)