This student-driven assessment is designed to promote confidence and competence in peer-led practical demonstration. It comprises a lesson plan or seminar notes, and a 15-20 minute teaching demonstration that aligns with a curriculum or discipline. Students showcase their demonstration to peers in class time and facilitate interactive participation and discussion.

This workbook technique uses progressive learning pedagogies to inform weekly activities that dynamically build on course content. Through formative and summative tasks, students complete one activity per week for the course duration. Feedback is regularly provided for formative tasks to enhance engagement and promote learning outcomes for higher-level summative tasks.

This assessment is based on the work that a typical 1st year to 5th year graduate would do as an investment analyst. They are required to work in a team of four and complete extensive research and analysis of a company, it's industry and competitors. Then develop a rigorous financial model to value the company and write an in depth report for an investment committee to recommend buying or selling this investment.

This authentic assessment sees students collaborate to prepare and present a 5-minute pitch aimed at a hypothetical funding body. The imagined context is that this will precede a hypothetical five thousand dollar grant application for a product or project relevant to a specific disciplinary content or area of professional practice.

Developed as an assessment for learning (rather than assessment of learning), this scaffolded task prompts students to consider how social theory is brought to bear through personal narratives. Students use digital platforms (e.g. Pinterest) to create a fictional character profile which becomes a point of reference for progressive tutorial activities.

As a class students are set a collaborative task to produce a creative item relevant to their discipline (e.g. in MUSC3020, an original Album recorded and produced by students) and attend weekly laboratory sessions focused on relevant skill acquisition. This is scaffolded with written reflections where students outline their contribution.

Designed as a sequential case-based online and in-class approach, students are able to scaffold their clinical skills and reasoning through developing and implementing case based assessment and management strategies of simple and complex patients. Students are assigned 6 patient cases within Week 8 of the semester of which will be similar to the cases that students are assigned in their end of semester practical examination. Students can work independently or as groups, contributing to Padlet discussions relating to each patient case. Within tutorials, designed sequentially from Week 9 to 12 (2 cases per tutorial), students work together to plan and present their clinical assessment and management of each case, with facilitation and probing from tutorial staff. Within class discussion is facilitated to explore student views and clinical reasoning whilst reflecting on best evidence based practice (Hour 1). Clinical skills practice is then facilitated where students select skills to practice in relation to the outlined case (Hour 2).

In this formative assessment, students select a recent news media item (print, electronic, multimedia, social media etc.) and conduct a short (500-700 word) critical reflection that draws on the foundational theoretical and disciplinary concepts from the course.

Students travel to a relevant cultural institution or public space (e.g. gallery, museum, landmark), imagining they are appointed as industry experts, curators, attachés or tour guides. In groups, each student delivers a brief presentation on an assigned piece (e.g. artwork, artefact, or monument) so as to replicate professional presentation contexts.

Informed by an active learning pedagogy, this technique sees students co-create an online wiki to which contributions are individually marked. Students work collegiately to prosecute an overall argument that responds to a set question, but receive marks for the quality of their individual input; which addresses potential discrepancies in contribution.