Questions on feedback communication:

Name of peer assessed student: Sam Hunt

Name of peer assessor: Jack Eley
Date of peer assessment: 17 / 10 / 22

Was the feedback presented in a clear manner? Give at least three examples of why/why not.
1. Yes, I was given a tick in every box as I had completed all of the work.
2. Yes, we talked about whether each part of the work was completed or not.
3. Yes, as when giving each other feedback we were clear with whether or not to give
each other a tick or not.

Was the feedback presented in a polite manner? Give at least three examples of why/why not.
1. Yes, as when giving feedback we were polite to each other with the way we
presented our feedback.
2. Yes, I was told where I could improve my work in an inoffensive manner.
3. Yes, as we didn’t have any arguing about any of our feedback and no feelings were
hurt.

Was the feedback accurate? Give at least three examples of why/why not.
1. Yes, as when I was given the feedback verbally, it matched what was written on
the sheet

2. Yes, as when I received the feedback and gave feedback it linked accurately to the
source material (the work being assessed)
3. Yes, as the in feedback I was able to tell exactly what I was being given feedback
on.

What suggestions were given for completing/improving the work? Give at least three
examples and say whether you understood them fully or not.
1. The only suggestion for completing/improving my work was to add more
references for my research, as I only used 1 website for my information. I
understood this and know that I could improve my work by cross referencing more
websites.
2. I believe that I could also improve my work by adding more detail to some areas,
such as task 2 section 3 where I could have gone into more depth.
3. I also think I could improve my Weebly page by formatting it better.
 Write a little about how the experience of getting peer feedback could have been
improved by the person delivering it? Think about the questions above if this helps.
(Minimum 200+ words)
I think that the experience of receiving peer feedback was made a lot easier due to being
friends with Jack as it allowed us to give and take feedback more comfortably. However,
the experience of getting peer feedback could have been improved by us spending more
time on the feedback as he did have to leave halfway through our session, but it didn’t
stop us from completing each other’s forms for the work. Another improvement that I
think could be made is if he would give me more critical feedback on my work rather than
mostly just saying that it was all solid work and without giving me much criticism on my
weaker points in my work. I also believe that I could have done the same as I could have
been harsher with my marking while still remaining polite. Overall however, I believe that
our peer feedback was generally good, but we could have been more critical of each
other.

And finally, think about how the experience of both delivering and receiving
feedback/verbal/written communication can be applied to Esports. Think about team
dynamics, fostering a positive environment, giving clear and measurable targets, etc.
(Minimum 300+ words)
In a team game, for example Team Fortress 2, a competitive team of 6s typically needs a
medic, demoman, 2 soldiers and 2 scouts. In the team, 1 soldier is referred to as the
pocket, and will stay near the medic at all times to protect him, while the other is a
roamer, who’s role is to take aggressive flanks around the enemy team to surprise them
and get a key pick on a member of the enemy team, usually directly going up against the
enemy pocket and their medic. The demoman is used for area denial, with his high
damage sticky bombs and pipe launcher. The 2 scouts serve the same roles as the
soldiers, being a pocket and flanker. The differences between the soldiers and scouts,
however, is that due to being projectile based damage, the soldiers have a harder time
dealing damage to faster moving targets with rockets, whereas the scouts with their high
move speed of 133% compared to the soldiers 80%, and their high damage hitscan
scattergun makes them ideal for chasing down low health targets. For the team to
function properly as unit, there needs to be near constant communication between each
member, such as when a medic dies either on the enemy or your team, it changes the
tide of the game not only for the medic no longer healing low health targets, but because
his Übercharge, and ability that allows the user to become invincible for 8 seconds, is
reset to 0%. This creates a new Über dynamic, as the enemy team will have theirs first
and therefore most likely win the team fight. Another reason that feedback is important is
that after a game it is important for the team to go back to their gameplay and assess
together what they need to do to improve and what they could do next game to gain an
upper hand. This could include either having a scout run a different class, such as a spy or
a sniper to deliberately focus on getting the essential kill on the enemy medic, to create a
better advantage for their team.