Feedback Forms for Assessed Essays - Arts and Social
Sciences Working Party Report and Guidelines
The Working Party on feedback on Assessment was set up to consider the current feedback
practices of Departments, with the aim of providing some kind of guidance or recommendation.
Following discussion, it was agreed that the diverse forms of assessment for which formal written
feedback is given preclude the generation of a ‘one size fits all’ feedback form. Instead, the
Working Party decided to draft guidelines on the construction of feedback forms and their return
to students, and to construct a feedback form which would be an illustrative example of the
guidelines put into practice, and could be used by those who found it useful. The attached forms
are for discursive and problem-based essays, for use in the Law School.
Constructing feedback forms
Feedback forms aim to give constructive (and timely) feedback to students in a format that is
easily to understand. The form’s structure and content should, at the very least, not make
academics spend more time on constructive feedback than they would in the form’s absence.
Ideally, the form should make the process of giving feedback quicker and easier, by providing
aide-memoires in the form of headings, and simple tick-boxes for spelling etc., to avoid writing
the same comments again and again. There should be sufficient space for comments, but not so
much that examiners feel obliged to fill up the space. If the form has been drafted successfully to
meet the needs of a particular type of assessment and those using it, examiners ought not to feel
that they need to think about what the headings mean, or to shoe-horn their comments to comply
with the form. It is not necessarily the case that the first form constructed and trialled meets these
criteria. It is crucial that thought goes into the construction of the form, that feedback is given by
those using the form, and that adjustments are made where necessary.
Things that may influence the form’s make-up:

Is feedback for a discursive essay, problem-based essay (e.g. a legal problem for which a
student is asked to provide advice), an oral presentation, or something different?

The learning outcomes to be demonstrated in the assessment.

What academic stage have the students undertaking this assessment reached? A form used
for Level 6 and 7 students (3rd year and taught Masters) may require more emphasis on
analysis than a form for Level 4 (1st year) students.

Comments boxes or Likert scales? The former give more flexibility to examiners, but
require more time than the latter. However, an adequate form made up of Likert scales (or
tick boxes, e.g. ‘structure: poor, adequate, good’) is very difficult to construct, may
encourage summative rather than formative feedback, and is frustrating for academics and
students when its construction is not quite right.
Issues to consider
Examiners must understand the formative purpose of feedback, and be consistent in giving
formative feedback, even with the 110th essay of a particular batch.
Students must understand that feedback does not consist of a proof-read plus re-structuring of
their essay. They must be willing to access feedback and reflect on their writing, standards for
marking (class descriptors), the examiner’s comments, and how they can improve in future.
Optimal use of feedback requires a significant degree of independence.
It should be made clear to students that academic judgment is not subject to appeal, and that
feedback does not constitute reasons that are grounds for appeal.
Students need to be made aware of the above points, and reminded of them in a number of
different ways. An obvious method of disseminating information is the student manual provided
to all undergraduates/postgraduates. Additional means include Blackboard, departmental web
pages, and assessment notice boards within departments.
When feedback forms become the norm in the modal sense (frequently occurring), they may soon
become the norm in a prescriptive sense (all academics ought to use them). It should be made
clear to staff and students in a Department whether use of the forms is optional or mandatory.
It is important to remember that the QAA’s Code of Practice, and in particular, principle 12,
(http://www.qaa.ac.uk/public/COP/COPaosfinal/genprin.htm#fsp) enjoins institutions to consider
when feedback may not be appropriate. ‘Appropriateness’ may relate to practicalities as well as
desirability of feedback.
Is feedback to be made available to students (e.g. to collect), or to be delivered to them (e.g. by
post)? Students who participated in the fora facilitated by Roz Old favoured delivery of feedback,
but they were unaware of the logistical, financial and staffing problems posed by this. Existing
practice within the Faculty varied: in some departments, feedback sheets were posted in trays,
identifiable by student registration number. In others, feedback was distributed by academics at
scheduled times, with the attendant problems of students attempting to obtain feedback outside
these times. In practical terms, making feedback available for students to collect is the easiest
option, but departments must be satisfied that this does not pose a problem for anonymity: it may
be possible for students to identify the feedback of another student by registration number (e.g.
those intercalating). It is necessary to keep copies of feedback forms distributed by this method, in
case they go astray. At the end of semester 1, the Law School posted feedback for short fat
modules to students, and returned feedback by collection for long-thin modules.
It is desirable to keep copies of all feedback sheets in the same way that assessed work is stored
for a set period of time.
For feedback to be most beneficial, it needs to be available to students shortly after submission.
Undergraduate students in particular said that they benefited from receiving some kind of grade,
rather than just receiving comments. However, assessed work may need to be seen by the external
examiner, and the mark given may be altered. In these circumstances, it may be thought advisable
not to give a percentage mark. Departments may decide not to give any indication of grade, or to
indicate a classmark, or to indicate borderline or clear classmarks, as the Law School has done
this semester (see attached form).
Attached documents:
Feedback Forms - Draft Academic Guidelines, Law School
Formal Feedback on written work: Draft Guidance for Students
Assessed Essay Feedback Form
Problem-Based Essay Feedback Form
Feedback Forms - Draft Academic Guidelines, Law School
Aims of feedback

To give a useful indication to students of the standard of their work, including the reasons
why their work is of a certain standard

To help students to improve in future.
Making feedback worthwhile
We are required to give feedback to students for various reasons, including pedagogical and
practical considerations (for example QAA requirements). How can we make the process
worthwhile, for students and academics?
-
for Students
Input from student fora on feedback (Law School and HUBS) raised the following important
points:

legibility
This very simple example of good practice is apparently something that few academics achieve,
and was felt to be one of the main barriers to useful feedback. Students were justifiably indignant
that they were required to submit legible work, usually word-processed, but that our comments
were indecipherable.
The students thought academics should be required to word-process feedback. From an
academic’s point of view, word-processed feedback might be impossible (e.g. where marking is
done on a train, or in a place with no computing facilities) or undesirable (e.g. for those with
computer-related physical problems such as RSI, or those who find it preferable or quicker to
mark by hand), but legibility is attainable by all. One point to bear in mind is that different styles
of handwriting may be as much an issue as sloppiness and speed. For those who do prefer to
word-process, the feedback forms are available in electronic format and can be used as templates
(by saving as a template - .dot file).

Formative comments
Comments should be helpful. This goes without saying, but the fora students were able to give
real examples of bad practice. ‘Helpful comments’ does not necessarily exclude negative
comments. The crucial issue is that the comment can help the student to learn. If the structure of
an essay is bad, we can explain that it could be improved by an introduction and logical argument
rather than points discussed at random. Likewise, students do not always consciously realise why
something they’ve done is good - if they’ve come up with an excellent structure for a tricky
question, tell them so. The ‘Suggestions for improvement’ box on the form is intended to remind
those marking to make at least one constructive comment.

Timely feedback
The formative nature of feedback is much diminished if it is not received shortly after the piece of
work was submitted, and before the next piece is due. For example, feedback on essays should be
available before exams, or before the next deadline for an essay. In the case of taught
postgraduates taking short, consecutive modules (e.g . MBA students), feedback should be
received for one module before the next is begun. The Law School’s current guidelines for non-
assessed work are that return of work (and feedback) should take place within 3 teaching weeks of
submission (the guidelines for assessed work are to be considered by L&TC).

A fair minimum
Academic styles vary, but every student should get a minimum of helpful feedback.
-
for Academics
The Arts and Social Sciences Working Party on feedback raised the following points.

Practicability
We appreciate the need to give feedback to students, but have significant constraints on our time.
A feedback form or template must, at the least, not make us spend more time on our constructive
feedback than in the form’s absence. Ideally, it should make the process quicker and easier, by
providing aide-memoires in the form of headings, and simple tick-boxes for spelling etc. to avoid
writing the same comments again and again. There should be sufficient space for comments, but
not too much. If the form has been drafted successfully to meet the needs of a particular type of
assessment and those using it, examiners ought not to feel that they need to think about what the
headings mean, or to shoe-horn their comments to comply with the form. If this is not the case,
please let Learning and Teaching Committee know.

Legibility
Illegible feedback doesn’t just waste students’ time. If a student can’t read what you have written,
s/he can’t make use of the effort you’ve put in. S/he may need to consult you to ask what you’ve
written, which may double the time you have spent marking and giving feedback to one student. If
this extra discussion is multiplied by the total number of pieces of assessed work, the impact on
your time is significant.
Other points
Please remember to keep Class Descriptors (available in the Undergraduate Handbook and on the
s drive) and Learning Outcomes (in your module handbook) in mind when marking. Some of the
categories on the form (Knowledge, Analysis, Research, Communication (of ideas)) correspond to
typical learning outcomes.
Bev Clucas
Law School
January 2004
Formal Feedback on Written Work: Draft Guidance for
Students
Whenever you submit a piece of written work (either assessed or non-assessed, excluding exams),
we aim to give you feedback on this to help you understand what you have done well and not so
well, and how you can improve in the future. Depending on the circumstances, formal feedback
will be given via a feedback form, or by comments on your essay, or both. You are also likely to
receive informal feedback from time to time.
We aim to make feedback:

Constructive

Available within a reasonable time of submission of the work (current guidelines for nonassessed pieces is the availability of feedback within three teaching weeks)

Legible, though not necessarily word-processed.
Feedback does not consist of proof reading (e.g. identification of all grammatical errors within a
piece), or re-writing of the essay by the examiner.
To gain the maximum benefit from feedback, you need to do the following:

Obtain the feedback (methods of collection may differ - you will be notified by your
lecturer or tutor). Your tutor will make feedback available within a reasonable time, but it
is your responsibility to access this.

Read the comments and relate them to your work (you should have kept a draft to which
you can refer).

Read the Learning Outcomes in your Module Handbook, to understand the minimum that
is expected of you in each module.

Read the Class Descriptors in your Undergraduate Student Handbook, to understand the
standard expected of a particular range of marks.

Think about what you need to do and know in order to improve your work next time.
Feedback on non-assessed written work
Will have a percentage mark.
Your tutor may, but need not, use a feedback form on non-assessed work.
Your essay will be returned to you. There may be feedback on the essay itself.
Feedback on assessed work
Will have an indicative grade, which may be subject to change by the external examiner.
Your essay will not be returned to you.
You will be notified of the final mark after all assessments for that module have been processed.
For Semester 1 short fat modules, this will be in early February. For all other modules, this will be
in mid-June.
The feedback form
The headings of the main sections should be self-evident.
In the smaller boxes:
‘Writing style’ refers to fluency of style and economy of expression.
‘Communication’ concerns communication of ideas. It may be the case that a student’s writing
style and/or grammar is poor, but s/he effectively communicates his or her thoughts, or vice versa.
The meaning of the other small boxes should be obvious.
Law School
Assessed Work Feedback Form - Essay
Registration No.
Module:
Please read the following in conjunction with the Law School Class Descriptors, Guidelines on Feedback (in
the Undergraduate Student Handbook and displayed outside Room 444 Wilberforce), and learning outcomes
for modules (in handbooks) and relevant degree programme. Comments below also relate to the current
stage of your studies.
Structure (e.g. intro, conclusion, signposting, logical development of argument)
Knowledge (e.g. of law, of theorists and commentators, depth, breadth, accuracy, relevance)
Analysis (e.g. depth, relevance)
Research (e.g. breadth, depth, reading, use of 1ry & 2ndry sources, range of sources, recent developments)
Referencing & citation of sources and bibliography
Suggestions for improvement
Writing Style
Poor
Adequate
Good
Grammar
Poor
Adequate
Good
Communication
Poor
Adequate
Good
Spelling
Poor
Adequate
Good
Presentation
Poor
Adequate
Good
Legibility
Poor
Adequate
Good
2:1/1st
1st
Indicative Grade: please note this may be subject to alteration by the external examiner.
Fail
Fail/3rd
3rd
3rd/2:2
2:2
2:2/2:1
2:1
Law School
Indicative Grade: please note this may be subject to alteration by the external examiner.
Fail
Fail/3rd
3rd
3rd/2:2
2:2
2:2/2:1
2:1
2:1/1st
1st
Law School
Assessed Work Feedback Form - Problem
Registration No.
Module:
Please read the following in conjunction with the Law School Class Descriptors, Guidelines on Feedback (in
the Undergraduate Student Handbook and displayed outside Room 444 Wilberforce), and learning outcomes
for modules (in handbooks) and relevant degree programme. Comments below also relate to the current
stage of your studies.
Structure (e.g. intro, conclusion, signposting, logical development of argument)
Identification of issues (e.g. clarity, comprehensiveness)
Knowledge of relevant rules (e.g. depth, breadth, accuracy)
Application of the rules to the facts (e.g. clarity, comprehensiveness)
Research (e.g. breadth, depth, reading, use of 1ry & 2ndry sources, range of sources, recent developments)
Referencing & citation of sources and bibliography
Suggestions for improvement
Writing Style
Poor
Adequate
Good
Grammar
Poor
Adequate
Good
Communication
Poor
Adequate
Good
Spelling
Poor
Adequate
Good
Presentation
Poor
Adequate
Good
Legibility
Poor
Adequate
Good
2:1/1st
1st
Indicative Grade: please note this may be subject to alteration by the external examiner.
Fail
Fail/3rd
3rd
3rd/2:2
2:2
2:2/2:1
2:1
Law School
Indicative Grade: please note this may be subject to alteration by the external examiner.
Fail
Fail/3rd
3rd
3rd/2:2
2:2
2:2/2:1
2:1
2:1/1st
1st