Diagnostic pre-test
Sit a short test before you study, to find out what you actually need to study.
Before you revise harder, find out what you actually know.
Compare your work to a standard. Simulate a mark scheme. Diagnose the gap instead of guessing which chapter to reread.
Especially useful after a disappointing mark, or the week before an exam when time is scarce.
Sit a short test before you study, to find out what you actually need to study.
Answer questions designed to catch the specific wrong models people hold in your subject, and find out which ones you're carrying.
Face questions that separate memorised from understood: the inventory style that catches fluent misconceptions.
Have the difficulty adjust to your performance in real time, so you stay at the edge of what you can do.
Continue until a defined criterion is met, not until time is served, so "I'm done" means evidence, not a clock.
Mark your own work against the rubric before seeing any feedback: catching gaps while you're still the first examiner.
Have your work marked the way an examiner would mark it, strictly, against the scheme, with the marks you didn't get explained.
Compare your work against examples at several grades, so you can see what the difference between bands actually is.
Rank three anonymised exemplars of differing quality and justify the order: building the evaluative criteria you'll need before you write.
Assign your own grade first, then defend it against the AI's independent grading, so calibration happens in argument, not in passive receipt of a number.
Build the marking criteria before attempting the task, so you know what "good" means while there's still time to aim at it.
Ask what the feedback itself missed, so you don't treat every comment as complete or authoritative.
Have one piece marked by harsh, lenient, and rubric-strict graders, then analyse the differences, so you learn where grades are stable vs noise.