AI-supported writing.
Evidence for assessment.
Students write with AI support. Educators review the submission, recorded activity and optional reflections against their own criteria.
What convinced you this supports your argument?
Reflect with the Companion.
An optional study partner invites students to explain, question, and make an idea their own.
Support the work. Invite reflection. Give educators the context to assess.
Writing support and
assessment evidence.
Each layer has a distinct job. Together, they connect the student’s work with AI to a richer evidence base for educators.
Task Assistant
A familiar AI assistant beside the working document. Students explore ideas, ask questions, and develop their work within educator-defined boundaries. In-workspace activity builds the assessment record.
Companion Peer
A thoughtful study partner that invites students to explain and evaluate ideas after meaningful pastes. Reflection stays optional: students can respond when it helps, or keep writing.
Friction Report
On submission, Friction brings together recorded activity, saved drafts, exact conversations and document excerpts. A clearly labelled AI review connects evidence to the educator’s criteria for human assessment.
The contested duty of care in algorithmic decision-making
Assess the learning
behind the work.
A polished submission tells only part of the story. Universities need a way to understand how students question, evaluate, and apply AI-generated ideas.
A foundation for assessing AI-assisted learning across subjects and faculties.
Context for feedback and academic judgement, grounded in the recorded work.
A place to use AI thoughtfully and show the contribution behind a submission.
As AI becomes part of academic work, the assessment question changes: how did the student arrive at this answer?
Friction brings the writing process into view. Students work with AI, reflect on their choices, and submit a record that helps educators connect the final work to the learning process.
Familiar for students.
Meaningful for educators.
Educators set the direction. Students do the work. The three layers connect both experiences through a shared assessment record.
A · Student flow
Work with the Task Assistant
Draft a response, explore ideas, and ask AI for support in the same workspace.
Think it through with the Companion
An optional conversation invites the student to explain how a passage connects to their own argument.
Student decides whether to respond
Keep writing, reply when useful, or skip. Conversations are recorded; skipping is not evidence of misconduct.
Submit the work with its context
Layer 3 brings the recorded process together in the Friction Report.
B · Educator flow
Set the assessment and AI boundaries
Define the brief, select criteria, and decide whether to enable optional Companion reflection.
Review the Friction Report
Read the submission alongside recorded activity, saved drafts, and exact conversations.
Evidence is mapped to rubric
Document and process criteria use separate evidence. Each AI interpretation links to the sources a human can review.
Feedback grounded in evidence
Use the submission and recorded sources to discuss the student's work. Academic judgement remains with the educator.
More context.
Better-informed judgement.
A readable, criteria-aligned account of the recorded work, with source evidence that educators can inspect. Academic judgement stays with the educator.
The Friction Report arrives with the submission. It doesn’t replace the essay — it sits beside it, surfacing the process the essay conceals.
Clear section navigation, readable evidence and exact transcripts support review on screen or in print. AI interpretations are labelled and linked to their sources; they are not grades or authorship verdicts.
- 01Concise, clearly labelled AI review
- 02Criteria-aligned evidence panel
- 03Recorded session time and activity counts
- 04Exact optional Companion conversations
- 05Paste evidence and saved draft changes
- 06Linked sources and explicit evidence limits
Friction] Report
A criteria-aligned review with linked evidence.
Three sessions and seven paste events were recorded. One passage matched a Task Assistant response; other paste origins could not be established. Review the recorded excerpts alongside the submission before drawing conclusions.
From an idea
to a working platform.
Friction won the challenge track at the 2026 EduX Oceania Hackathon — designed, built, and deployed in five days. The demo below was the winning submission.
Plan a class pilot
with Friction.
Tell us about your course, class size and assessment. We can discuss pilot setup, research collaboration or investment.
Talk to the team →Explore the platform →