Resource: Telari course creation schema Version: 1.4 Used at: Drafting teaching material, Drafting assessment questions and Preparing for Telari Not used for: deciding whether the project is a course or series, approving the lesson map or replacing specialist/final assurance Requires: teaching_material phase: approved course plan; complete_course phase: approved plan, teaching-material baseline, assessed concept/capability map and course assessment rulebook; for a series course, the approved series manifest from series_schema Companion resources: authoring_controller and course_planning; reviewer role resources are embedded in the same runbook. Telari course-format instructions for LLM chat tools Purpose Use these instructions when helping a Telari user create course material outside Telari. This schema supports a teaching-material baseline followed later by the final Telari-compatible import text. It is not used to decide the course structure or assessment design. Do not assume the user wants a full course in one response unless they explicitly ask for the final import document. When the course belongs to a series, retain the approved course boundary, shared terminology, source allocation, prerequisites and assessment role from the latest series manifest. Produce one separate Telari course document; do not embed the series manifest in the course import text. Schema phase and authoring mode - teaching_material phase: after course-plan approval, draft the complete learner-visible lessons without question blocks, model answers, marking schemes, assessment selection rules or a course marking schema. Save an immutable teaching-material baseline. It is an educator-review artifact, not an import candidate. - complete_course phase: only after the educator approves the assessed concept/capability map and complete course assessment rulebook, start from the exact approved teaching-material baseline and add the approved assessment. Do not silently rewrite teaching while creating questions. - Complete Mode is the default for the overall workflow whenever the user asks to create or revise a Telari course. It completes both schema phases, performs the author construction check, labels the result for educator review and offers the optional multi-role quality loop. - Draft Mode applies only when the user explicitly requests an incomplete output. It must never be presented as ready to import or publish. - Planning artifacts are not course drafts. Do not draft teaching before course-plan approval. Do not draft questions before educator approval of the assessed concept/capability map and complete course assessment rulebook. Approved design authority In teaching_material phase, use the latest educator-approved course plan and source boundary. Do not invent assessment questions or finalize an assessment architecture while writing the lessons. In complete_course phase, use the exact approved teaching-material baseline, assessed concept/capability map and latest educator-approved course assessment rulebook. The rulebook controls assessment purpose, modes, authored and served counts, grouping, selection, response bounds, workload, scoring, feedback, progression and pass decisions for this course. Do not import numerical defaults or a preferred recall/reasoning mix from another course. Every question and mandatory criterion must trace in the external authoring evidence to approved map ids at the approved depth. Do not put the hidden map or its ids into student-visible prompts merely for traceability. Trace every assessed outcome to taught material, an explicit prerequisite or facts supplied in the prompt. Challenge main objectives with relevant boundary cases, and inventory substantive source-dependent claims for relevance, authority, independence, currency, permitted use and attribution. If question drafting exposes a missing, inaccurate or insufficiently taught concept, stop. Revise and re-identify the teaching baseline, remap affected concepts and obtain the required educator approvals before continuing. Do not silently change teaching, definitions, boundaries or assessment depth while writing questions. If the candidate cannot follow the approved rulebook, or the material indicates that the approved design should change, stop and propose a new rulebook version for educator approval. Do not silently redesign the assessment. Teaching-material baseline In teaching_material phase, produce complete course metadata and every learner-visible lesson summary, theory block, section, factoid, media placement and source reference required by the approved plan. Omit Course marking schema and every Question, Model answer, Marking scheme, question-group and assessment-selection field. Save a newly named immutable UTF-8 .md baseline with exact byte length and SHA-256. It is not ready to import. The educator reviews this baseline for content, depth, terminology, boundaries, progression and source use before assessment mapping begins. Final output requirement In complete_course phase, preserve the approved teaching baseline exactly except for educator-approved corrections recorded through the remap/reapproval path. Add only the approved questions and assessment controls. Save the complete course as a newly named immutable .md file. It remains a working candidate requiring educator review. The optional specialist/final-review loop may add assurance over the same identity but cannot certify accuracy or replace educator/subject-matter-expert judgement. Do not create or claim hidden reviewer chats. The final document must begin with complete course metadata followed by the chosen course marking schema, all as top-level lines before the first lesson. Use these exact metadata labels: - Course title: the final educator-facing course title. - Course short description: a concise description for course lists, no more than 200 characters. - Course keywords: useful comma-separated discovery terms. Do not leave these metadata values blank or ask the educator to re-enter them during import. After the metadata lines, include the chosen course marking schema as a top-level line before the first lesson. Use exactly one of these examples unless the user has chosen a custom course-specific scheme: - Course marking schema: 0-100%. - Course marking schema: 0-5. - Course marking schema: Custom. After that top-level marking-schema line, start each lesson with a heading such as # Lesson or # Lesson 1: Descriptive lesson title. Repeat that lesson block for each lesson in the course. Do not output JSON, YAML, a JavaScript/TypeScript/Python data structure, a list/map representation, or a wrapper around the course. Do not put the final course inside a code fence. Do not include commentary before or after the final course document unless the user asks for commentary separately. Author construction check and optional handoff Inside the external authoring chat and before specialist handoff, inspect the complete candidate against the approved plan, exact teaching-material baseline, approved assessed concept/capability map, approved assessment rulebook and this exact schema. Confirm that teaching changes are authorized, every question/criterion traces to approved map items at the approved depth, every planned lesson and assessment exists, approved modes/counts/serving/scoring decisions are followed, obvious prompt/rubric mismatches are repaired and available structure checks have run. For every question variant, record a question-specific weight rationale and score five independent calibration responses: minimal fully correct, strong with one minor omission, correct alternative, plausible but materially wrong and irrelevant/blank. Check temporal and authority ambiguity, supplied-fact restatement, open-ended alternative acceptance, duplicate deductions and partial-credit cliffs. Recalculate the minimum served path and distinguish guaranteed from rotation-only assessed capabilities; do not treat the authored question inventory as served coverage. This is a self-consistency check, not independent review or a Telari educational-quality check. Present one compact Final course decision card: exact candidate filename; authored and minimum served counts; guaranteed and rotation-only capability/group coverage; recorded sampled-undercoverage authorization or not required; what was checked; unresolved issues; optional extra-review choice; and Reply with corrections or APPROVE. Do not require the educator to interpret internal map ids, hashes or manifests unless they are needed for an optional file handoff. Offer the multi-role assessment as an optional quality check. If selected, create the exact private packet and packet-manifest.md defined by the pinned runbook. It requires candidate filename, exact byte length and SHA-256, approved plan, teaching-baseline, concept/capability-map and assessment-rulebook identities, pinned versions and the four role ids. If the tools cannot calculate these values, skip or change tools. Do not invent a hash. Produce four concise ready-to-copy reviewer launch prompts and one role-specific ZIP per chat only when selected. Every ZIP contains authoring-bundle.txt and all exact evidence required by that role. Each prompt names the assigned bundled role resource, candidate identity and one ZIP attachment. Direct-web reviewers open the complete authoring bundle; attachment reviewers use the copy inside the ZIP. Never copy, summarize or paraphrase reviewer criteria into the handoff. Keep prompts outside common evidence. Guide the user through one chat setup at a time: open the named chat, attach the one supplied role ZIP and copy the supplied prompt. The authoring chat locates resources, assembles attachments, writes prompts, merges reports and proposes finding dispositions; consequential decisions return to the educator. Keep generated review ZIPs separate from the candidate. Status commentary, QA evidence and review reports stay outside the Telari Markdown import artifact. For Telari upload, provide one complete .md course file and state that Telari will check supported structure and import compatibility only, not factual or educational quality. Phase precedence for the format reference below The complete Telari lesson format below describes the final complete_course import document. In teaching_material phase, use its metadata, lesson and learner-visible material syntax only; the explicit teaching-material baseline rules above override every requirement below for Course marking schema, question blocks, model answers, marking schemes, groups, selection rules and other assessment fields. Those requirements activate only in complete_course phase. Telari lesson paste format Use Markdown headings exactly as shown. Telari parses the headings, then lets you edit and reorder the interpreted blocks before saving. You can paste one lesson or several lessons at once. Required structure: 1. For a whole-course paste, put the selected course marking schema before the first lesson: Course marking schema: 0-100%, Course marking schema: 0-5, or Course marking schema: Custom. 2. Start each lesson with # Lesson, # Lesson 1, or # Lesson 1: Lesson title. 3. Add Title, Summary, Intent, Feedback timing, optional Required pass rate and optional Questions served per attempt. 4. Add ## Material for the main theory shown before questions. 5. Add one or more ## Question blocks. 6. Repeat the lesson block for each lesson. Telari will split the paste into separate lessons for review before saving. Deterministic requirements: - The headings, metadata field names, supported values, question-group declarations, draw sizes and selection-rule syntax below are parser inputs. Reproduce them exactly; do not invent alternatives. - Telari generates persistent course, lesson and question identifiers. Do not add authoring-workflow ids or unsupported ID fields to the course document. Supported values: Delivery type: - linear: fixed sequence. The lesson material, factoids and questions are delivered in the authored order. - practice_bank: grouped practice questions. The lesson contains a large question pool, and each practice run draws a smaller server-selected set from the groups. Intent: - mastery - assessment Type and intent are separate: - Use linear + mastery for a normal learning lesson. - Use linear + assessment for a fixed assessment. - Use practice_bank + mastery for revision drills and self-study practice. - Use practice_bank + assessment only when you deliberately want a sampled assessment-style run. Feedback timing: - after_each_question - after_section - after_assignment - manual_release Required pass rate: - Optional percentage, for example 70 or 70%. - It applies only to linear progression mastery lessons. - If set, the student must reach this lesson aggregate percentage before the next sequential lesson unlocks. - Assessment lessons record the assessment result but do not use this threshold to block progression. Questions served per attempt: - Optional positive whole number. - Leave blank or omit to serve every question in the lesson. - If set below the available question count, Telari chooses that many questions server side and stores the selected set for the attempt. - If set equal to or above the available question count, Telari serves every question. - Technical validity is not evidence of educational adequacy. The latest educator-approved course assessment rulebook controls the educational design. Assessment authoring under the course rulebook - Use only the latest educator-approved course assessment rulebook. Do not apply generic bank sizes, recall/reasoning ratios, rotation thresholds, workload limits or lesson-duration targets. - Draft only from the educator-approved assessed concept and capability map. Every question and mandatory criterion must trace to one or more approved map ids at the approved depth. Every approved assessment item must be guaranteed on the served path or be marked rotation_only with a separate explicit sampled-undercoverage authorization. - Use exact current or permitted earlier teaching provenance from the map. Do not silently change a definition, taxonomy, boundary or expected depth while converting material into questions. - Draft every question from the material, outcome, mode, response bound, serving rule and scoring approach approved for its lesson or assessment. - Keep recall flashcard-style when the rulebook selects recall: one atomic target, normally answered by a word, number, short phrase or concise sentence; only a necessary concept definition may require one to three concise sentences. Explanation, comparison, application, evaluation and justification are not recall. - Make every scored requirement visible in the prompt or logically indispensable to answering it. Keep criteria atomic and non-overlapping, use question-specific proportional weights and continuous partial credit, accept equivalent defensible answers and keep model answers concise. Do not reuse one convenient weight pattern or force every incomplete criterion to half credit without a recorded educational reason. - Do not award material marks for repeating supplied facts, preferred labels or question wording unless the visible task requires that identification. General requests for a check, reason, evidence source or next step accept all defensible alternatives; name a mandatory mechanism in the prompt. - Make temporal state and authority explicit. Distinguish one final event sequence from separate detection points or counterfactual choices, and distinguish action scope from actor authority and implementation/change-control permission. - Calibrate every authored variant with five independent responses: minimal fully correct, strong with one minor omission, correct alternative, plausible but materially wrong and irrelevant/blank. Record criterion contributions and verify that one omission is not deducted twice. Where actual Telari runtime grading is available through an approved test path, distinguish its observed output from author/reviewer expectations; otherwise state runtime calibration not run. - Keep questions answerable from taught material, explicit prerequisites or facts supplied in the prompt. Do not require unsupported external knowledge or an unavailable physical, visual, file or software dependency. - Reconcile authored and served counts, groups, selection rules, answer bounds, workload and progression with the approved rulebook. Parser validity proves only technical compatibility. - Recalculate first-path coverage after drafting. Report authored versus served counts and guaranteed versus rotation-only map ids in the final educator decision card. Do not let a large authored bank conceal a thin served path. - If the material or intended outcome makes the approved design unsuitable, stop and propose a rulebook amendment for educator approval before changing the assessment architecture. - Keep the rulebook and review evidence outside the Telari Markdown import document. Learner-facing language and agency: - Write teaching material, examples, scenarios, feedback, questions and student instructions in a respectful voice that preserves learner agency. - When an action is expected or recommended, use "you should ..." rather than a bare command-verb imperative. Write "You should record the decision" rather than "Record the decision." - "You can ..." means the action is genuinely optional or describes a capability or permission. Never replace "you should ..." with "you can ..." when the action remains expected or recommended. - Use "you must ..." only for a genuinely non-negotiable safety, legal, compliance or technical requirement. Do not manufacture obligation through tone. - Phrase assessment tasks as clear questions such as "How would you ...?", "What would you recommend ...?" or "Which approach would you choose, and why?" rather than beginning with a bare imperative such as "Explain", "Describe", "Record" or "Evaluate". The question must still make the required response explicit; agency-preserving language must not make an assessed requirement optional. - Reserve bare imperatives for exact interface labels, literal commands or code, source quotations and genuinely mandatory short operational or safety directions. Do not mechanically rewrite quoted source text, code or exact interface labels. - Review sentence-initial command verbs and revise them unless one of those narrow exceptions applies. Question blocks: - Title is for educator organization. Students do not see question titles. - Prompt is required and is shown to the student. - Student instructions are optional and are shown with the prompt. - Model answer is optional. It is hidden from students by default and used only by the LLM for grading unless model-answer release is enabled later. - Model answers are concise representative grading references. Lesson-material word-count, depth, source and media requirements do not apply to model answers or student responses. - Marking scheme is strongly recommended. It should include criteria, strictness, expected reasoning and feedback guidance. Older labels such as Rubric notes, Marking criteria and Feedback guidance are also accepted. - Question group is optional for linear lessons and recommended for practice banks. Groups are reusable banks of questions with shared serving, grading and feedback rules. Use an existing group when a question tests the same skill; create a new group only for a distinct purpose or rule set. - Question type is a shared question-group attribute and accepts recall, understanding, reasoning, mixed or custom. Repeat it on each grouped question for clarity. If members of one group declare different types, Telari stores that group as mixed; it never silently keeps one member's type for the whole group. - Group purpose, Serving rules, Grading rules, Feedback rules, Progression rules and Generation rules are preserved as question group attributes. - Student responses use one plain-text answer field. Do not require formatted tables/spreadsheets or require learners to create or upload graphs, charts, diagrams, illustrations, images or files. Ask for labelled bullets or prose instead. Questions may ask learners to interpret supplied media or describe a structure in words. Marking scheme section: - Put a Marking scheme field inside every ## Question block. - The marking scheme is hidden from students and supplied to the LLM only as grading context. - Include score rules, required concepts, common mistakes, strictness and feedback guidance. - In a complete working candidate, begin with a Criteria: subsection and one bullet per independently scored concept. Every bullet must map to a visible prompt requirement or a genuinely inherent element; do not hide extra requirements or score the same concept twice. For a 0-100% course, give every criterion an explicit percentage weight and make the weights total exactly 100%. - Apply the assessment authoring contract below to every question, including manually authored, imported and generated questions. - Example: Marking scheme: Award 3 for a complete answer that links all stated factors to wine style. Award 2 for correct individual factors with limited integration. Award 1 for listing factors without explaining interaction. Award 0 for incorrect or irrelevant answers. Feedback should push the student from description to interaction and outcome. Assessment authoring contract: - The visible prompt and student instructions define the assessable scope. Every mandatory scoring criterion must map to an exact visible counterpart or be logically indispensable to answering that request correctly. Professional desirability, model-answer presence or reviewer expectation is not inherent necessity. - If a count, named mechanism, boundary, implementation stage, evidence example or test is mandatory, request it visibly. Otherwise treat it as an optional improvement, not a required deduction. - Keep each scoring criterion atomic and non-overlapping. Do not deduct the same weakness again under a differently worded criterion. - For percentage marking, assign weights to independent criteria that total 100 and describe full, strong-partial, limited-partial and absent or incorrect performance. For other scales, define equally clear non-overlapping score bands. - Choose criterion weights from the educational importance of this exact question. Do not copy one convenient allocation across a bank, such as 35/35/30 or four equal quarters, without a recorded question-specific reason. - Partial credit is continuous and proportionate. Do not force every incomplete answer to exactly half credit. A fixed zero/half/full scheme is acceptable only when the criterion is genuinely binary or has one defensible halfway state and the rulebook records why. - Weight the central decision, conclusion or causal reasoning more heavily than implementation refinements. A substantially correct answer must not fall into a low partial-credit band solely because useful refinements are missing. - Treat model and expected answers as representative, not automatically exhaustive. Credit technically equivalent wording and valid alternative reasoning that satisfies the visible task. - Facts already supplied by the scenario may be relied upon. Do not award substantial marks merely for repeating them, reproducing a taxonomy label or restating the question unless identification or classification is visibly requested and educationally material. - When the visible task asks generally for a check, evidence source, reason, response or next step, accept every defensible alternative that addresses the supplied risk. If one named mechanism or category is mandatory, name it in the visible task. - Keep action scope, actor authority and implementation or change-control permission distinct. Do not infer one from another; state every authority fact the answer needs in the learner-visible scenario. - For a sequence of events, state whether the learner is analysing one final state, separate detection points or a counterfactual earlier decision. If two reasonable readings require materially different answers, rewrite the prompt before scoring it. - Keep the model answer, expected answer, marking scheme and score bands consistent. Do not make a rubric element mandatory if the model answer omits it. - Do not require downstream investigation, testing or implementation that depends on unresolved authority, scope or evidence unless the visible task explicitly asks for that wider lifecycle response. - Keep teaching-content requirements separate from answer requirements. Lesson theory word-count targets, section-depth targets, image/diagram requirements and source-coverage targets apply to the teaching material only; they must not be copied into student prompts, model answers, rubrics or audit expectations. - Telari assessment responses use one plain-text answer field. Do not require a formatted table/spreadsheet or require the learner to draw, generate, embed, upload or attach a graph, chart, diagram, illustration, image, file or other artifact. Ask for labelled bullets or prose instead. A question may ask the learner to interpret a visual that Telari supplies, or to describe a structure in words. - A model answer is a concise representative grading reference, not a replacement lesson or essay. It needs enough substance to establish correctness and acceptable reasoning, but it has no inherited minimum word count and does not need to reproduce teaching assets. Extended-response length is assessable only when the educator deliberately makes it visible in a compatible text task; never infer it from the length of the lesson material. - Make every question self-contained and portable. Do not rely on phrases such as 'in this course', unexplained lesson numbers or examples whose necessary context is absent from the visible question. - Before finalising every question variant, test a minimal fully correct answer, a strong answer with one minor omission, a correct alternative approach, a plausible but materially wrong answer and an irrelevant or blank answer. The strong-but-imperfect answer must not suffer a cliff or duplicate deduction. - Also generate and freeze one minimal complete answer from the prompt and student instructions before consulting the model answer or rubric. It must receive full credit when scored afterwards; otherwise repair the prompt/rubric contract. - Where the actual Telari grading prompt can be run with an approved simulated or bounded test provider, record observed criterion scores and feedback for those calibration answers. Author or reviewer expectations alone are not runtime calibration; when runtime scoring is unavailable, label it not run and do not claim it passed. - Map every role, authority, ownership, jurisdiction, relationship or prior-evidence assumption used by the model answer or rubric to explicit learner-visible scenario text. Sections: - ## Section blocks are optional. - Use sections when feedback timing is after_section. - If a lesson uses sections, each question should name its Section. - In a practice_bank lesson, use Question group inside each question to define serving groups, such as Recall, Understanding, Reasoning, Group A or Group B. Reuse the same group name for related questions. Older section/group headings are still accepted and converted into question groups. Factoids: - ## Factoid blocks are optional theory fragments that break up the question flow. - A factoid is delivered before the next question unless you move it in the editor. - Use factoids for reminders, examples, definitions or small pieces of theory that should appear between questions. Media: - Add any number of images or embedded videos inside factoid/theory bodies where they should appear. - For question-specific media, put a ## Factoid block immediately before the relevant ## Question and place the media markers inside that factoid body. Telari will anchor that media to the next question. - Put each media marker on its own line at the exact insertion point. - Public image sources should stay as normal links, for example [Image source](https://example.com/image.jpg). To embed an image in a lesson, upload the image file in the course ZIP. - ZIP image assets should use unique paths, preferably under assets/, such as assets/lesson-01/lesson-01-image-01-diagram.png. The educator is responsible for copyright and reuse rights for every uploaded image. - For ZIP image assets, reference the asset path where the image should appear: Image: assets/lesson-01/lesson-01-image-01-diagram.png or [[image: assets/lesson-01/lesson-01-image-01-diagram.png | Alt text]]. - File names alone do not place images. The lesson text must reference the image at the exact insertion point. - Uploaded images inserted by Telari use: [[uploaded-image: lesson-media/path.jpg | Alt text]] - Videos: [[video: https://youtu.be/video-id | Optional title]] or [[video: https://vimeo.com/video-id | Optional title]] - YouTube marker syntax is still accepted: [[youtube: https://youtu.be/video-id | Optional title]] - For your own videos, upload them to YouTube or Vimeo in an embeddable privacy mode, then paste the link. Alternative prepared document format: - Telari also accepts prepared lessons with # Lesson title, ## Lesson role, # Theory, # Factoid 1, # Questions and grading criteria, ## Q1 or ## Question 1, and # Lesson level grading instruction. - This format is useful when working with an LLM to generate a full lesson document first. Practice bank guidance: - Use practice_bank when you have many practice questions and want students to receive a smaller randomised selection each time. - Always include Practice draw size for practice_bank lessons, for example 10 or 15-20. - Put minimum-per-group serving rules in Practice selection rules, not in prose. Canonical syntax: Practice selection rules: Research design and participants: 5; Evidence interpretation and responsibility: 5 - A semicolon separates rules. Within each rule, a colon separates the exact group title from its positive whole-number minimum. Do not use semicolons or colons inside group titles. Commas are supported inside explicit Question group titles. - Every group named in Practice selection rules must also exist as a Question group field. Reproduce its declared title exactly. Matching is tolerant of case and punctuation for legacy imports, but generators must not rely on that tolerance. - Selection-rule counts are minimums. If their total is below the draw size, Telari fills the remaining places using balanced random selection. The total must not exceed the maximum draw size, and each group must contain at least its declared minimum. - Omit Practice selection rules when no group minimum is required; Telari then uses balanced random selection across the declared groups. - Legacy rules such as Practice selection rules: at least 3 from Terra/Luna; at least 2 from Broader vulnerability remain accepted for existing material, but new material should use the canonical Group title: N form. - Put Question group inside each question block. Prefer an existing group name when the question belongs to the same bank. Preferred group names describe the purpose, such as Recall, Understanding, Reasoning, Summative recall or Case analysis. - Older formats such as "## Section" with "Title: Group A", "## Group A", or "Group: Group A" inside each question block are still accepted for import compatibility. - If a generator accidentally places a clear group marker such as "Group: A" inside rubric notes, Telari will try to extract it, but explicit group fields are safer. - Each group and complete bank must match the authored depth, served draw, selection and repeat-practice decisions in the approved course assessment rulebook. - Questions in a practice bank are practice questions; they still need prompts, criteria and feedback guidance. - Telari chooses the selected questions server side. The LLM must not choose or rewrite questions. Marking scheme guidance: points_5 Course marking schema: 0-5. For this course, every answer is scored out of 5. Use each question's Marking scheme to describe what a 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 and 0 answer looks like. Use whole-number scoring only. This is the discrete option; do not use decimal scores. Do not write controlling x-marks totals for individual questions; Telari will score each answer on the 0-5 scale. Make the bands cumulative and non-overlapping so one omission cannot cause several deductions. Include acceptable equivalent wording where exact phrasing is not required. Marking scheme guidance: percentage_100 Course marking schema: 0-100%. For this course, every answer is scored out of 100. Use each question's Marking scheme to describe percentage bands, weighting or deductions rather than a controlling x-marks total. A useful pattern is: start at 100, then deduct named percentages for missing required mechanisms, missing conditions, imprecise but broadly correct language, incorrect terminology and material misconceptions. Use independent criteria whose weights total 100, and state how partial coverage is credited. Do not count one omission under multiple criteria. If you include legacy mark counts such as 3 marks, Telari will treat them only as relative guidance for coverage and importance, not as the scoring scale. Include acceptable equivalent wording where exact phrasing is not required. Marking scheme guidance: custom Course marking schema: Custom. For this course, each question uses its authored mark scale. In each Marking scheme, state the total marks and the mark-by-mark criteria clearly. Each awarded mark should correspond to evidence the student must provide. Keep criteria independent and state how partial coverage is credited without deducting the same omission more than once. Include expected concepts, common mistakes, strictness and feedback guidance. Template # Lesson Title: Summary: Delivery type: linear Intent: mastery Feedback timing: after_each_question Required pass rate: Questions served per attempt: ## Material Paste the lesson material students and the LLM should use here. ## Section Title: Section title Material: Optional section theory. ## Factoid Section: Section title Title: Short factoid title Body: Optional theory fragment shown before the next question. Add media exactly where it should appear: [Image source](https://example.com/diagram.jpg) [[image: assets/lesson-01/lesson-01-image-01-diagram.png | Alt text for a ZIP image asset]] [[uploaded-image: lesson-media/path/to/image.jpg | Alt text for an uploaded image]] [[video: https://youtu.be/video-id | Optional video title]] [[video: https://vimeo.com/video-id | Optional video title]] ## Question Section: Section title Title: Prompt: Student instructions: Model answer: Marking scheme: ## Question Title: Prompt: Student instructions: Model answer: Marking scheme: Practice bank variant: # Lesson Title: Topic practice bank Summary: Large grouped question bank for repeated practice runs. Delivery type: practice_bank Intent: mastery Feedback timing: after_each_question Required pass rate: Practice draw size: 15-20 Practice selection rules: Group A: 3; Group B: 2 ## Question Question group: Group A Question type: recall Group purpose: Fast recall practice. Title: Prompt: Student instructions: Model answer: Marking scheme: ## Question Question group: Group B Question type: understanding Group purpose: Explanation and application practice. Title: Prompt: Student instructions: Model answer: Marking scheme: Alternative prepared document format: # Lesson title ## Lesson role Short purpose and context. # Section 1 - Topic group Section theory or overview. # Factoid 1 - Optional reminder Bullet-point material. [[video: https://youtu.be/video-id | Optional video title]] # Questions and grading criteria ## Q1 - Question title You may also use ## Q1, ## Question 1, or ## Question 1 - Question title. **Section:** Topic group **Question:** Question prompt. **Expected answer:** Expected response. **Marking scheme:** Award scores against the criteria, not exact wording. **Criteria checked:** * criterion **Strictness:** Medium high. **Strong answer example:** Strong response. **Feedback guidance:** One short paragraph guidance. # Lesson level grading instruction Shared grading guidance for every question.