Workshop & Peer Review

The draft is easy.
The workshop
is the work.

Workshop is Kova's peer review and creative writing tool — run live in class or assigned out of class. Professors upload any piece of writing and students workshop it through guided dimensions, inline comments, or both. Add AI-assisted creative writing prompts personalized to each student's interests, for courses where the draft itself is the assignment — so students write about a world they care about while hitting the same objectives.

Request a demo See how it works
COMM 350 · Peer Review · Live in class
Persuasive Memo · Q4 Budget Reallocation
Apex should redirect the $340K overage into product development. The ROI on the new feature set outweighs near-term brand spend. Delaying the launch risks losing the Q4 window.
💬 D. Cole · inline comment
Which product line? Too vague for a CFO — give a deliverable and a revenue number.
📐 Dimension: Specificity · 2 / 5
Feedback targets the argument's weakest point. Author should revise to include concrete figures.
🪞 Author reflection · J. Park
D. is right — revision adds the API integration and its $180K ARR impact. I wrote for someone who already knew the context.
Inline comments + dimensions mode
Live in class or async
See it live

Two minutes of
live peer review.

Two modes, one platform

Peer review any piece.
Or generate one.

Workshop runs as structured peer review on any assignment — or as AI-assisted creative writing that flows straight into the review round. Live in class or assigned out of class.

01
📝
Peer
Review
Workshop's core capability: upload any piece of writing — a student's own draft, an assigned reading, or a published piece — and peers give structured feedback against a rubric you define. Two review modes: guided dimensions (score-based criteria) and inline commenting (highlight a passage, leave a note). Or both.
  • Any assignment — student drafts, course readings, or any text
  • Guided dimensions: define criteria, reviewers score each one
  • Inline commenting: highlight a specific passage, leave a note
  • AI-assisted prompts help reviewers give sharper, specific feedback
  • Role-gated: students can't see reviews until their own is done
  • Author reflections close the loop on what they're revising and why
02
✨
Creative
Writing
For courses where the prompt itself is the assignment: Kova generates AI-assisted "CW beats" grounded in your course material — a specific character, constraint, and moment built from the same companies, cases, and texts students are already studying. Too specific to fake. Per-student variation available.
  • AI-assisted contextual prompts built from your course material
  • Per-student prompt variation — each writer gets their own angle
  • Constraints built in: POV, word count, required story elements
  • Drafts autosave across sessions until your deadline locks them
  • Flows straight into peer review once submissions close
  • Run live in class or assigned out of class
How it works

From prompt
to revision
in one round.

You set the prompt and the rubric. Kova runs the submission window, the peer review round, and the reflection — and hands you a workshop that ran itself.

01
You set the assignment
Upload any piece of writing, choose an AI-assisted CW beat from your course material, or write your own prompt. Choose your review mode — dimensions, inline comments, or both — and set the deadline.
02
Students write & submit
Drafts autosave across sessions and devices. Submissions lock at your deadline — nothing is lost, and nothing can be submitted late without a record of the timestamp.
03
Peer review opens
Kova assigns anonymized pieces. Reviewers score guided dimensions, leave inline comments on specific passages, or both. AI-assisted prompts available to sharpen vague feedback before it submits.
04
Author reflects
Students read the feedback they received — dimension scores, inline comments, and all — then write a reflection: what they're revising, what they're defending, and why.
05
You see everything
Every piece, review, and reflection in one dashboard. AI-assisted grading on review quality. Low-effort feedback flagged. An AI class-wide insight before your next round.
Use cases

Works across
every discipline.

"Creative writing" doesn't mean fiction class. Any concept worth understanding can be written from inside someone's head.

📣
Marketing
Customer-voice narratives
Instead of describing a target customer, students write from inside one — the moment they encounter the product and decide whether it earns their attention.
"You're a small business owner who just received Meridian's new invoicing platform. Write the five minutes where you decide whether you'll actually switch."
🚀
Entrepreneurship
The founder's journal
Students write a journal entry from a founder's perspective at a pivotal moment — forced to reconcile what they're telling investors with what they actually believe.
"Write NovaPay's founder's journal entry the night before the Series B pitch — including the part they're not telling the board."
👔
Management & Org Behavior
Leadership under pressure
The conversation a manager doesn't want to have. Students write the scene — what gets said, what doesn't, and what it costs the person saying it.
"Write the scene where Apex's regional manager tells her team that two roles are being eliminated — and what she chooses not to say."
🩺
Human Ecology & Public Health
The other side of the policy
Policy memos describe programs from above. This flips the lens — students write the household, clinic, or kitchen table the policy actually lands on.
"Write a day in the life of a family navigating a new childcare subsidy program — from their kitchen table, not the policy memo."
🎒
Education & Ed Psych
Inside the classroom
The moments teaching theory doesn't cover. Students write from inside a classroom decision that no rubric fully prepares anyone for.
"Write the three minutes before a first-year teacher decides whether to call a parent about something they saw in class."
⚖️
Ethics & Leadership
The dilemma from inside
Not an argument about the dilemma — the scene of living it. Students write the moment before the decision, when the easy framing falls apart.
"Write the five minutes before a hospital administrator decides which patient gets the last ICU bed."
AI-generated prompts

A prompt too
specific to fake.

Generic creative writing prompts produce generic AI output — and professors can tell. Kova's "CW beats" are built from your course material: the same companies, numbers, and vocabulary students have been using all semester.

🎯
Grounded in your course, not a prompt bank
Beats reference the same case companies, figures, and terminology from your course material — not "write a story about conflict." A generic AI draft is obviously generic next to the actual assignment.
🔀
A fresh batch every time
Generate a new set of beats in seconds, regenerate any that don't fit, or write your own and let Kova format it into a full assignment with rubric and deadline.
📐
Constraints built into the prompt
Point of view, tense, word count, and required story elements are part of the beat itself — so a submission that ignores the assignment is easy to spot at a glance.
See it in action
CW Beat Generator · FIN 301 · Week 6
Course context
Week 6 · Capital structure — NovaPay case (equity vs. convertible debt, $8M ARR, Series B). Format: short fiction, 350–450 words, first person.
✨ CW Beat — Option 1
Write the five minutes before NovaPay's CFO walks into the board meeting to recommend the convertible note — knowing their co-founder has spent the week quietly meeting with the equity investor.
✨ CW Beat — Option 2
Write the voicemail NovaPay's founder almost doesn't leave for the lead investor — the one where they admit the $8M ARR figure includes a contract that might not renew.
Professor
Using Option 1 — assigning to section, due Thursday, rubric attached.
3 beats generated
↻ Regenerate any
What's included

Everything the
workshop needs.

Not a dropbox. A structured workshop environment built to make feedback land.

💬
Inline commenting
Reviewers highlight a specific passage and leave a note directly on it. Authors see exactly which sentence prompted the feedback — not just a general comment about the piece.
📐
Guided dimensions
Define rubric criteria — argument, evidence, voice, specificity — and reviewers score each one. Scores feed AI-assisted grading and professor analytics automatically.
✨
AI-assisted CW beats
Contextual creative writing prompts generated from your course material. Per-student variation available so each writer gets a slightly different angle on the same concept.
🤖
AI-assisted grading
Peer review quality scored automatically against your rubric. Low-effort or off-rubric feedback flagged. You review, override anything you want, and move on.
🪞
Author reflections
After all reviews land, students respond to the feedback they received — what they're revising, what they're defending, and why. The step no AI can complete in advance.
🔒
Role-gated workflow
Students can't see peer submissions until they've turned in their own, and can't see reviews until their review is complete. No peeking, no free-riding on others' feedback.
Professor view

See the whole
workshop, at once.

Every submission, every review, and every reflection — organized in one dashboard before the next round opens.

✓
Submission and review completion at a glance — who's done, who isn't
✓
Inline comments and dimension scores visible side-by-side for every piece
✓
AI-assisted grading on peer review quality — approve, override, or add a note
✓
Author reflections show what each student actually took from the feedback they received
✓
Low-effort reviews flagged automatically — "Good job!" with no rubric criteria addressed
✓
AI workshop insight — pattern across all reviews, ready before the next round
div>
Professor view · Workshop Round 2
22
Submissions
61 / 66
Reviews complete
19
Reflections in
Review & reflection quality
91
Maya R. — reflection
"James caught something I'd missed — I'm rewriting the dialogue so Halvorsen contradicts himself out loud instead of leaving it all internal..."
88
James K. — peer review
"The pacing slows right where the tension should peak — consider cutting the second flashback and trusting the dialogue to carry the reveal..."
58
Alex T. — peer review
"Good job, I liked it!" ⚠ rubric criteria not addressed
AI workshop insight: Dimension scores strong on Argument (avg 4.1/5) but weak on Specificity (avg 2.4/5) — inline comments cluster around para 2–3. A 5-min class focus on citing specific evidence before the next round could raise quality significantly.
Argument avg
4.1 / 5
Evidence avg
3.7 / 5
Specificity
2.4 / 5 ⚠
Also from Kova
Kova-Built Custom
Simulations
Need something purpose-built? Kova's team builds it with you — custom career arcs, budget simulations, story-branch scenarios, real industry data, and multi-course program arcs. Describe what you need; we handle the build.
→ Custom simulations & budget sims
→ Multi-course or program-wide arcs
→ Real industry data & custom organisations
→ White-label & dedicated faculty support
Explore custom builds →
The best revisions
start with a real reader.

See a Workshop round built around your course material — before the demo. No commitment.

Request a demo See Deliberation Boards