Final Sharing Reviews

Overview

Today students finalise their written or multimodal literary reviews and present them to the class for peer feedback. Students will analyse how language features and literary devices shape tone and meaning in their chosen text, then use feedback to strengthen clarity and impact.

Learning intentions

• Students will present their literature review clearly to a class audience.
• Students will give and receive respectful peer feedback focused on language features, literary devices, and text structure.
• Students will justify how sentence patterns and imagery create tone and meaning in their review.
• Students will reflect on feedback and make a final improvement to their review.

Success criteria

• I can present my review with a clear point of view and an engaging introduction.
• I can identify at least two language features or literary devices I used, and explain the effect (tone/meaning).
• I can give specific peer feedback using sentence starters and evidence from the review.
• I can make one targeted edit after feedback to improve clarity or impact.

Curriculum links

• Analyse how language features and literary devices create tone and meaning and effect.
• Explain how language positions readers to respond and form viewpoints.
• Share opinions about the language features, literary devices and text structures that contribute to style.
• Plan, create, edit and refine written or multimodal texts for an audience and purpose.
• Explain how points of view and ideas represent values drawn from cultural or historical contexts in literature.

Lesson structure (45 minutes)

1. 0–5 min · Entry routine + goal check. Teacher posts the WALT and success criteria; students open their review drafts and highlight one sentence where tone is created (e.g., sentence pattern, word choice, active/passive). Students do a quick solo check: “What tone am I aiming for? What word/structure creates it?”

2. 5–12 min · Mini-lesson: feedback that helps. Teacher models two examples of peer feedback: one vague (“good job”) and one specific (“Your use of imagery in ‘…’ makes the scene feel unsettling because …”). Teacher revisits sentence pattern effects (e.g., active vs passive; terse vs complex syntax). Students practise on a short exemplar paragraph (teacher-provided) by writing one feedback sentence and one improvement question.

3. 12–20 min · Gallery set-up + peer pairing. Teacher arranges pairs/groups and explains the “Review Radar” checklist:

• Tone/meaning evidence (imagery or tone words)
• Language feature focus (sentence pattern, active/passive, syntax complexity)
• Structure (clear claim + reasons + concluding judgement)
• Viewpoint positioning (how the reader is guided to respond) Students swap devices/papers (or share multimodal slides) and prepare a feedback sheet for their peer.

4. 20–30 min · Peer presentations (first round). Teacher runs short presentations: each student speaks for ~1–2 minutes, then receives peer feedback. Students use the feedback sheet to respond with at least: one “Glow” (strength), one “Grow” (next edit), and one question about effect (“What does this sentence make the reader feel, and how do you know?”).

5. 30–38 min · Edit time: apply one piece of feedback. Teacher signals edit timing and provides an “Edit Menu” on the board: add a device explanation, adjust sentence pattern for clarity, strengthen imagery, reorder one sentence/paragraph, or refine the viewpoint statement. Students revise their review using only one targeted improvement, keeping a copy of what changed.

6. 38–45 min · Final share-outs + exit check. Teacher invites 3–4 students to share a single best sentence or their concluding judgement; class gives one quick verbal affirmation and one micro-suggestion. Students complete a brief exit ticket: “My review’s tone/meaning effect is created by …; after feedback I improved …”

Resources

• Students’ review drafts (print or digital)
• Peer feedback sheets with sentence starters
• “Review Radar” checklist (projected)
• Highlighters or annotation tools (paper/digital)
• Timer for short presentations
• Optional device access for multimodal presentations and audio playback
• Dyslexia-friendly reading options: audio recordings of model excerpts, large-print feedback sheets, and speech-to-text drafts where available

Assessment

• Formative: Teacher listens during peer presentations, noting evidence of tone/meaning analysis (AC9E8LE05/AC9E8LE03).
• Formative: Peer feedback quality using the “Glow/Grow/Question” structure and presence of specific language/devices evidence.
• Summative-in-lesson: Exit ticket shows targeted revision and a clear link between language feature/device and effect.

Differentiation

• Support for students needing scaffolds: sentence starters for feedback (“I noticed…”, “This creates a feeling of… because…”, “I suggest you could… to make…”), and an “Edit Menu” limited to two choices.
• Support for dyslexia: provide model sentences in audio, allow reading from large-print cards, and permit speech-to-text or typed responses with font supports.
• Extension for advanced learners: require students to integrate a cultural context justification into their judgement (e.g., how values or perspectives shape what the reader believes is important) and refine syntax for a specific rhetorical effect (AC9E8LE01/AC9E8LE05).
• Multimodal/video support: allow a checklist-based editing plan (title, key claim, one example of imagery, one sentence-pattern/tone explanation, concluding judgement) and provide a short teacher walkthrough of trimming/captions before editing time.