Designed to encourage critical thinking and reflexivity, this task sees students assume disciplinary specific roles as part of a peer-review process that requires giving and receiving constructive criticism related to a written piece. For example, in DRAM3102, students work in pairs, as both Dramaturgs (a person in the theatre industry who assists in research and development of plays and provides critical feedback to playwrights) and Playwrights. Each student produces a short piece of written work specific to their disciplinary context which is read aloud in dedicated class time. Following this, each pair collates and summarises their feedback given during the in-class readings, which partially informs a written review of the draft. Students then generate a peer-review report of approximately three pages for their partner. The report should contain detailed feedback on their partner's draft and offer specific recommendations for improvement. As well as providing personalised textual analysis and suggestions, students refine their skills in professional communication and constructive critique as part of this task. This technique can be usefully be applied to any context in which assessing critical thinking, encouraging collaborative idea-building, working effectively in professional relationships, and communicating effectively is de review process that requires giving and receiving constructive criticism related to a written piece. For example, in DRAM3102, students work in pairs, as both Dramaturgs (a person in the theatre industry who assists in research and development of plays and provides critical feedback to playwrights) and Playwrights. Each student produces a short piece of written work specific to their disciplinary context which is read aloud in dedicated class time. Following this, each pair collates and summarises their feedback given during the in-class readings, which partially informs a written review of the draft. Students then generate a peer-review report of approximately three pages for their partner. The report should contain detailed feedback on their partner's draft and offer specific recommendations for improvement. As well as providing personalised textual analysis and suggestions, students refine their skills in professional communication and constructive critique as part of this task. This technique can be usefully be applied to any context in which assessing critical thinking, encouraging collaborative idea-building, working effectively in professional relationships, and communicating effectively is dereview report of approximately three pages for their partner. The report should contain detailed feedback on their partner's draft and offer specific recommendations for improvement. As well as providing personalised textual analysis and suggestions, students refine their skills in professional communication and constructive critique as part of this task. This technique can be usefully be applied to any context in which assessing critical thinking, encouraging collaborative idea-building, working effectively in professional relationships, and communicating effectively is desired.
PLEASE NOTE: The academic integrity information displayed on this page is currently under review. Some examples and descriptions were developed before the widespread availability of generative AI tools and may not reflect current approaches to assessment security. When adapting an assessment idea, staff should consider how the design supports authorship, verifies student achievement of learning outcomes, and mitigates inappropriate use of AI and other forms of academic misconduct.

Details