The marking sheet included on the Methods of Feedback tab shows examples of comments markers might make as a way of communicating what is good about the assignment and what needs improvement. Being proactive with these comments is the only way to learn and grow.
However, you need to be confident with interpreting the feedback provided. This does get easier with experience, but we appreciate that markers' comments can feel vague or confusing. Below, we will break down some common feedback phrases, explaining what they mean and what you can do to improve.
Click through the dropdown headings to start decoding your feedback!
One of the most important skills to master at university is critical thinking. Depending on the assignment, markers are often looking for more than mere description. Instead, they want you to engage with a range of evidence, evaluate strengths and weaknesses, and consider the topic in depth. These comments above indicate a lack of depth, suggesting that the marker is looking for a greater level of engagement with the evidence and the topic. Description is a necessary means of providing context, but an overly descriptive piece of writing is going to prevent you from achieving the higher marks that you want.
Put another way, you need to answer not just the 'what,' but the 'so what?'
Make sure the reader understands what is relevant about the discussion you are crafting: its implications, why the claims matter, how the available evidence/literature/data supports your thesis statement.
Top tip: In your rough draft, include some sentences that begin with 'This matters because' and/or 'The relevance of this is [...].' You might cut those starter phrases from your final submission, but using them in the rough draft will remind you to move beyond summary/description.
Our 'Critical Writing' workshop (embedded below) will provide you with strategies to improve the depth and clarity of analysis in your work.
Above, the comments shown in the first two bullet points indicate a lack of independent reading. This means you are relying too heavily on sources supplied directly by your instructor (for example, 'essential texts' on the module reading list). These sources are of course great to reference, but unless the assessment brief says otherwise, the expectation exists that you will also use the library catalog and appropriate databases to discover (and reference) relevant articles, books, data sets, etc. beyond those your instructor recommends.
One of the biggest challenges when it comes to university is getting your head around a diverse range of ideas. This requires patience, curiosity and plenty of reading. Academic sources, such as books and articles, are the building blocks of a typical academic assignment. They help you to explore and develop ideas, and the more depth you can achieve in your assignments, the higher your marks are likely to be.
Explore the training options available for finding information to develop your skills in this area.
Comments such as those in the third and fourth bullet points, above, suggest a problem with the quality of your evidence/references rather than the quantity. Citing Wikipedia, for example, is almost never a good idea! Similarly, rather than citing a news article that summarises a scientific or healthcare breakthrough, you should instead find the original scholarly article/report on which the news article is based: going to the original academic source is considered more reliable, as a news report might accidentally misrepresent or overstate nuanced findings.
The training resources linked above will help build your skills in searching for reliable evidence and using databases. Additionally, the CRAAP framework (video below) provides a quick way to evaluate evidence if this concept is new to you.
These marker comments usually suggest that transitions and signposting in your essay are either absent or unclear. If you are receiving many comments along this line, then aim to be direct and assertive in your use of phrases and sentences that guide the reader from one point to the next (e.g. 'Having analysed the financial explanations for protest XYZ, I will now examine mass media's role').
Check out the Manchester Phrasebank's 'Signalling transitions' section to explore transition templates you can incorporate into your writing.
When writing assignments with higher word counts, it is also important to consider how signposts can help the reader follow along from one section to the next.
A signpost lets you either refer back or preview forward.
Here is an example of signposting at the start of a longer essay's third major section: 'The first section of this work analysed contemporaneous explanations of [historical tragedy ABC], whereas the second section examined dominant perspectives in present-day scholarship. The following section will challenge dominant discourse through the application of theoretical lens XYZ, which has been underutilized in the literature to date.' Note how the first sentence refers back to remind the reader of what the essay has achieved thus far; then, the second sentence previews forward to prepare the reader for what comes next.
Top tip: If you are struggling with how to transition and signpost, practice identifying these techniques at play 'in real life' by highlighting any examples you spot when reading academic articles. Observing effective uses of these techniques will build your confidence in where and how to deploy them in your own writing.
It can be disheartening to lose marks on grammatical mistakes, typos and awkward phrasing. Markers are eagle-eyed and often pick up on these errors, resulting in comments like the ones above – even the dreaded question mark. More often than not, confusion or incoherence can be avoided by thoroughly editing and proofreading your work. Granted it takes time and patience, but editing your work can focus your attention on the flow, structure and coherence of your writing.
Check out the English for Academic Purposes (EAP) toolkit for help with grammar and voice.
Check out the Manchester Academic Phrasebank for sentence templates and examples that can help improve the clarity and authority of your writing.
Our Refine Your Writing: Better Proofreading training sequence (embedded below) takes approximately 45 minutes to complete. If you are consistently losing marks because your writing is 'hard to follow' or contains errors, the strategies you will learn via this training should help.
Whilst you’re expected to use lots of academic sources in your writing, you should avoid extensive quotations. This can vary depending on the expectations of your school and/or department and the conventions of your discipline, but over-relying on quotes can undermine your own voice and authority. Establishing your own voice is an important part of developing your own style as a writer. This doesn’t mean ignoring the views of other people, but incorporating them in a coherent way that forms a narrative. Regular quotes can be distracting and disruptive, forcing the reader to move between different styles of writing.
Whilst maintaining the authors’ original views, paraphrasing allows you to maintain a consistent style that binds different voices together. Paraphrasing and summarising in your own words can also help to reduce wordiness by cutting out unnecessary content.
Take a look at our Paraphrasing guide for tips on how to paraphrase.
Comments such as these suggest problems with how you are approaching argumentation in your writing. As already established, critical analysis is an essential part of university, and argumentation and analysis go hand in hand.
In an academic assignment, an argument is a position that you forward. The main body of your assignment should work through a range of evidence that persuades your reader towards the cogency of your argument. It’s a good idea, where suitable, to also counter that argument with alternative evidence, but the argument stands at the centre of an assignment and provides a focal point for your reader. When markers refer to a ‘weak’ argument, then it might imply that the analysis, discussion and/or evidence is lacking in support of the argument. Alternatively, a complete absence of an argument can result in an aimless piece of writing – a sure way to disengage your reader.
Most academic essays should feature a clear thesis statement, or central argument, around which the work is developed. Check out our Crafting the Introduction guide to learn more about thesis statements.
Next, you need to make sure the body paragraphs of your essay present logical pairings of claims and relevant evidence.
Comments like 'need to back this up' suggest that a claim was made in the writing, but insufficient facts/literature/data were presented to prove or support the claim. You can improve this issue in future work as you edit and rewrite: as you read through your draft, ask yourself (again and again and again), 'How can I PROVE this point?' Build a solid case using reliable sources!
On the flipside, comments like 'unclear claim' or 'what are you actually arguing' may suggest that you are incorporating facts, data and ideas from external sources, but you aren't articulating how those references connect to and support part of your overall argument. When editing and rewriting, examine the sentences surrounding any paraphrased or quoted material: is the evidence presented alongside a clear claim, or are you leaving the reader to 'fill in the blanks' as to its relevance?
Top tip: Topic sentences and takeaway points help frame the focus of each paragraph, ensuring your argument develops from start to finish in a logical way. See the 'Structure and paragraphs' dropdown for more.
When an instructor says a paragraph is 'incoherent,' they mean that its sentences don't add up to a consistent, logical whole.
A paragraph shouldn't jump between too many points of focus.
For example: 'Public surveys indicate a majority of voters support drugs policy reform. Party ABC is more likely to reform drugs policies than Party XYZ. Reforms enacted in Country X demonstrate one shape new laws could take.' While these sentences are each about 'drug policy reform,' broadly, the specific focus pivots much too quickly: 1) public perceptions, 2) domestic policy/parties, and finally 3) an international example. If each of these points is important to the overall argument, the writer should consider devoting a paragraph to each, individually. This would let them develop and engage with the ideas in a focused fashion.
Each paragraph of an essay is like a link in a chain, and you want your paragraphs to be as well defined and solid as a chain's links. Would you trust a chain if half of its links were misshapen and soft? Probably not! There isn't just one 'right' way to shape a paragraph, but there is a go-to formula you can rely on to craft paragraphs that are coherent and clear:
For a deeper dive into topic sentences, takeaway points, and strong paragraphs, watch our Basics of Structure webinar, below.
Marker feedback related to 'citations' and 'referencing' tends to fall into one of two categories. It's important that you understand which problem your marker is flagging because the solutions are different.
1) Firstly, you might receive comments like these alongside in-text citations or your bibliography entries:
These comments suggest that although you are trying to credit external sources you have used, you aren't following the correct rules for how to cite. The correct way to cite sources varies between disciplines because they use different style guides. For example, if a Psychology student and a Linguistics student each wanted to reference the exact same book, the two students' essays would cite that book using different formats! This is because most Psychology modules follow the APA style guide whereas Linguistics modules follow the Harvard style guide.
Use our citing and referencing page to determine which style guide you should follow in your discipline. You can likely find this information in your course handbook or on Blackboard, too.
Many students lose points due to inconsistent and incomplete citations, but this can be an easy area in which to improve, once you get the hang of it. It does call for strong attention to detail, but unlike most areas of writing, there IS a clear right answer and wrong answer when it comes to citation formatting! Think of citations like those paint-by-number crafts: once you know the style guide to follow and the source type you're referencing, you just need to 'paint in' the correct details. If you do this carefully and accurately, you will receive all possible marks for this part of the rubric.
Use Cite Them Right Online to find tutorials and templates that will let you format, copy and paste accurate references with ease.
2) Secondly, you might receive feedback that sounds more like this:
Here, although the marker is still using the terms 'citation' and 'referencing,' they are pointing to problems much bigger than formatting consistency. The issues in this case have to do with quality of evidence, argumentation, and/or critical analysis.
This can be confusing because you might (understandably!) interpret 'needs better reference' as meaning 'you need to do a better job formatting this reference.' In this case, however, the 'better' likely refers to the reliability and quality of the literature/evidence itself: the marker is saying, 'you need a BETTER piece of literature to support the claim you're making.' The feedback 'quality of citations is lacking throughout' has a similar meaning. The marker isn't just commenting on how you have formatted/proofread the references: they are commenting on your selection of external sources, suggesting there needs to be more academic rigour.
If you are consistently receiving feedback along this line, check the Finding high-quality evidence, literature and/or data dropdown and the Argumentation dropdown for further suggestions.
Finally, the vagueness of marker feedback can make it tough to tell WHICH type of citation/referencing improvement you need to focus on. If in doubt, consider visiting your instructor during their office hours to discuss and clarify how you can improve.
Comments like these can be very disappointing when you felt good about the work you submitted. Bear in mind that in many cases, such comments don't mean your writing was 'bad.' They instead suggest a mismatch between what you produced and the original assignment expectations.
For example, imagine the essay prompt asked you to critically compare two methods for delivering continuing professional development (CPD) in your field. Let's say you did an excellent job identifying and analysing similarities between the two methods. A marker might observe that you didn't entirely fulfil the brief because you neglected to identify and analyse key differences between the methods, despite your good work with the similarities. This is because the assignment verb 'compare' generally implies the need to 'contrast' as well.
Another area where writers sometimes stray from the brief is evidence/literature. You might be asked to use a certain amount of literature; specific theorists or sources; evidence/data of a certain type; etc. You need to pay careful attention to those requirements: it's possible to write a fantastic essay that scores poorly because it builds its arguments using the wrong kind of evidence for the brief.
To improve in this area, remember to engage in frequent reflection throughout the writing process.
Don't just look at the assignment prompt while you're planning: revisit it while you are drafting, rewriting, and proofreading to ensure you have hit the key criteria.
Check out our Understanding the Assignment guide to learn some strategies for dissecting academic prompts and making a positive, focused start on written assessments.
