Immuno feedback

1. Faculty of Health and Wellbeing - Department of Biosciences
ASSESSED WORK FEEDBACK FORM
Student Name: Alex Maynard
Student ID number:
Module Title: Immunology and Microbiology
Title of coursework Essay
Marker: Mel Lacey
MARK*:
55%
Strengths:
Use of figures
Engaged with some current literature.
Understanding shown
Weaknesses:
no structure and the flow of the essay
major errors in reference list
lacks depth and detail
Suggestions for Improvement:
This essay has lots of small spelling and grammar errors that would be pick up in word processing spell
checks. I've not taken any marks off for this but do try and make use of spelling checks etc, as lots of little
errors makes the essay seem rushed and its harder for me to read (and you might lose mark in future
assignments)
Use more journal articles to increase depth and complexity in essay,
Increase depth and depth, increase specific bacterial species and their effects on the microbiome.
Think about the flow of the essay and the narrative that you are telling the reader
Student comments for Feed-forward (how will you use this feedback to improve your future work?):
I will use this feedback to greatly improve my essay structure as well as referencing and citation format.
SIGNATURE
M. lacey DATE: 4.1.20
*Unratified mark.

2. Indicator 80-100% 70-80% 60-69% 50-59% 40-49% 20-39% 0-20% mark
Knowledge and
Understanding
/25
Shows advanced
understanding of key
subject area. Excellent
level of originality with a
wide range of relevant
literature accessed.
Excellent grasp of
relevant literature and
sound understanding
of subject area.
Evidence of originality.
Good understanding
of the area.
Appreciation of
wider implications,
and a serious
attempt to engage
with breadth of
relevant literature
Satisfactory
understanding of
subject area.
Evidence of a
reasonably sound
engagement with
relevant literature.
May contain errors
in understanding.
Superficial or
inconsistent grasp of
material. Evidence
of some
understanding of
subject area. Limited
research and major
errors in accuracy.
Partial answer with
major omissions.
Poor understanding.
Scarce amount of
research.
Little or no attempt
to address the
question. Brief or
wholly irrelevant
answer.
Argument and
Analysis
/25
Outstanding critical
analysis and effective
integration with own
ideas and independent
thought.
Good standard of
intelligent, critical
thought and argument.
Clear evidence of
informed, independent
thinking.
Relevant and well
focused material.
Evidence of some
independent thinking
and critical analysis.
Mainly relevant
material, although
with a largely
descriptive focus.
Limited evidence of
critical analysis.
An obvious attempt
to answer the
question but may
lacks relevance. Too
descriptive with no
critical analysis.
Unfocused.
Insufficient
engagement with the
question.
No understanding of
the issues and little
attempt to address
them
Use of tables,
figures and
diagrams
/20
Outstanding use of
appropriate number of
tables, figures and
diagrams that enhance
the text. Discussed in
text and sources
correctly cited.
Good use of
appropriate number of
tables, figures and
diagrams that enhance
the text. Referred to in
text and sources
correctly cited.
Good use of some
appropriate tables,
figures and
diagrams, referred to
in text, sources
correctly cited.
Tables, figures and
diagrams are used
but with errors e.g.
not fully discussed in
text, sources not
cited or material not
very relevant to text.
Several figures or
diagrams, but mainly
not relevant to text,
not discussed in the
text or sources not
cited.
A couple of figures
or diagrams; but
mainly irrelevant, not
referred to at all in
text or sources not
cited.
No tables, figures or
diagrams
Organisation &
communication
/10
Outstanding structure
and organisation
throughout. Well
focused.
Excellent structure.
Clear and coherent.
Strong introduction
paragraphs and
conclusion. Flows well.
Good structure and
planning. Clear and
coherent. Good
paragraphs,
introduction and
conclusion.
Some evidence of
planning, but does
not flow smoothly.
Satisfactory level of
coherence.
Weak structure and
organisation needs
significant
improvement. Lacks
coherence and
clarity in many areas
Organisation and
structure is poor.
Answer lacks focus.
Incoherent, and
lacks clarity
throughout.
Very poor
organisation with no
structure or focus.
Citations and
Referencing
/10
Excellent and
appropriate use of
citations throughout.
Strong list of high
quality sources.
Reference list complete
without errors.
Appropriate use of
citations throughout.
Good list of high
quality sources.
Reference list
complete without
errors.
Use of citations
generally
appropriate with a
good list of quality
sources. Reference
list complete with
minor errors.
Generally correct but
needs some
attention. e.g.
sources not always
appropriate or
mistakes in
reference list
Some incomplete or
incorrect citations,
use of inappropriate
sources, incomplete
or not properly laid
out reference list.
Few or no proper
citations. Reference
list inadequate.
No referencing
*Evidence of
approach to using
sources/10
Excellent systematic,
objective approach to
choosing and using
literature, clearly
evidenced
Good systematic
approach to choosing
and using literature,
clearly evidenced
Good approach to
choosing literature,
with appropriate
evidence
Satisfactory
approach to
choosing literature,
evidence of
Superficial approach
to literature choice
with limited evidence
Inadequate
approach to
literature choice
No evidence of how
literature was
chosen

3. approach may be
limited
*fill in the form to evidence the final section and add it at the end of your essay, after the reference list