4.1
Feedback sheets
Example 1: Coursework assignment Feedback sheet (Law)
Obligations 2 – Coursework assessment task: Feedback Form
EXAM NUMBER:
Provisional Mark:
Knowledge and understanding:
Excellent
Good
Satisfactory
Needs improvement
Unsatisfactory
Does your Task show that you know what the key issues are in the area you are discussing? Have
you selected relevant primary and secondary sources? Do you demonstrate that you understand the
relationship between cases and other sources?
Comments:
[See the Generic Feedback for examples of issues such as:
Have they identified the leading case correctly?
Have they set out the reasons why this is the ‘leading case’ on the issue?
Do the selection of further sources (case and article) demonstrate understanding of the issues in the
‘Lease v Licence’ distinction?
Is understanding of the arguments in the cases and article demonstrated clearly?]
Organisation and Writing:
Excellent
Good
Satisfactory
Needs improvement
Unsatisfactory
Have you structured your work in a clear manner which is relevant to the Task? Do you distinguish
relevant and irrelevant issues in your sources? Do you summarise the key issues and arguments
clearly? Are these (and your own views) presented in a logically ordered manner? Is your writing
appropriate to the nature of the Task? Is it clear and comprehensible? Do you reference primary
(e.g. cases and legislation) and secondary (e.g. journal articles) sources in a recognised, scholarly
manner?
Comments:
[Evaluation]
The task is [adverb] structured overall.
[You have [not] identified the key [issues] [arguments] in the [cases] [article] very well. [For example
….]
You have summarised the [case] [article] but have not being very selective in the issues which you
have included. Some of these are [irrelevant] [less relevant] to the ‘Lease v Licence’ issue. [For
example ….] You need to identify and focus on the issues most pertinent to the Task.
Your use of language is [not] [not always] [sufficiently formal] for the nature of the task. [For
example ….]
Your writing style is [not] [not always] sufficiently clear. [For example ….] This may be in part
because some of your [sentences] [paragraphs] are rather long.
The quality of the referencing is [strong] [not consistent] [not always in line with OSCOLA norms].
[For example ….]
Evaluation:
Excellent
Good
Satisfactory
Needs improvement
Unsatisfactory
Includes reflective elements ….
Have you approached the sources critically and analytically, rather than merely summarising them?
Can you evaluate the credibility and / or validity of sources and explain what the implications are for
your work? Have you considered how well the sources which you have selected enable you to
perform the Task to a high standard? Have you analysed the strengths and weaknesses of your
approach to the Task and the tools which you have used?
Comments:
You have summarised the main points/arguments in the [cases] [article] but have not [always]
analysed these critically. [For example ….]
You have [not] recognised issues relating to the quality of sources, such as credibility and/or validity.
[For example ….]
You have described your research process, but have not reflected upon [its strengths and
weaknesses] [how you might approach such a task differently in the future].
You have described your research process but not considered [why you selected this process] [any
other approaches which might have taken].
A practical next step
Something which we think you might like to consider doing to support future submissions.
Look at the ‘Generic Feedback’ document provided for this task to see if there are issues which you
recognise in your own work.