If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Unhelpful feedback
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
I got my first piece of work back from my optional history module today and I wasn't impressed. Firstly I was disappointed with the mark, but I hadn't expected a first lol. But I was mainly angry with the feedback.
The tutor started the first sentence of feedback with 'This source analysis demonstrates that you have not worked hard enough'. Oh really? So those three days I spent on this analysis, what do you suggest I was doing? Playing Tetris? She then goes on about the amount of sources I used and how I have bad spelling, sentence structure and how she doesn't like my style of writing. She also says that my arguments were wrong in the context of the entire piece. Now here is my list of arguments back to her feedback:
1) There are over 200 students enrolled on this module, therefore finding books to use is bloody hard so obviously resorting to the internet is somewhat necessary.
2) The online journal resource thingy was taken down for maintenance during one of the days I was working on the analysis which again made it hard and when it was put back online it kept crashing on me.
3) My degree is in literature and creative writing, and you're telling me that I can't spell or construct sentences? Especially given that the majority of my literature work has been put in the highest band for spelling, punctuation and grammar.
4) My department has never had a problem with my style of writing so I fail to see what it is that the history department find so abhorrent about it.
5) Fair enough, I didn't consider the document as a whole. Perhaps if I had known that we were meant to, I would've. The last time I did history was in year nine! They assume that everyone on the course is familiar with how the history department does things. I even asked her if this piece of work was meant to be done how my analysis for literature was done. She said yes but there should be more historical context than looking at the literary side of it. She did not state that I should use the whole document, so I assumed that we need only analyse the extract we had been given, as had been the case when I did an analysis on the Declaration of Independence in my literature module.
:mad: I don't really know what the point of this thread was, I just wanted to rant. I don't think that starting the feedback with a personal opinion is very professional. She said that I could discuss it with her if I wanted, but I know my hot headed-ness on this matter will get the better of me. I was wondering if talking to my advisor might be a better idea?
Thanks for reading this, sorry I went on such a rant.
The tutor started the first sentence of feedback with 'This source analysis demonstrates that you have not worked hard enough'. Oh really? So those three days I spent on this analysis, what do you suggest I was doing? Playing Tetris? She then goes on about the amount of sources I used and how I have bad spelling, sentence structure and how she doesn't like my style of writing. She also says that my arguments were wrong in the context of the entire piece. Now here is my list of arguments back to her feedback:
1) There are over 200 students enrolled on this module, therefore finding books to use is bloody hard so obviously resorting to the internet is somewhat necessary.
2) The online journal resource thingy was taken down for maintenance during one of the days I was working on the analysis which again made it hard and when it was put back online it kept crashing on me.
3) My degree is in literature and creative writing, and you're telling me that I can't spell or construct sentences? Especially given that the majority of my literature work has been put in the highest band for spelling, punctuation and grammar.
4) My department has never had a problem with my style of writing so I fail to see what it is that the history department find so abhorrent about it.
5) Fair enough, I didn't consider the document as a whole. Perhaps if I had known that we were meant to, I would've. The last time I did history was in year nine! They assume that everyone on the course is familiar with how the history department does things. I even asked her if this piece of work was meant to be done how my analysis for literature was done. She said yes but there should be more historical context than looking at the literary side of it. She did not state that I should use the whole document, so I assumed that we need only analyse the extract we had been given, as had been the case when I did an analysis on the Declaration of Independence in my literature module.
:mad: I don't really know what the point of this thread was, I just wanted to rant. I don't think that starting the feedback with a personal opinion is very professional. She said that I could discuss it with her if I wanted, but I know my hot headed-ness on this matter will get the better of me. I was wondering if talking to my advisor might be a better idea?
Thanks for reading this, sorry I went on such a rant.
Post edited by JustV on
0
Comments
I'm rubbihs I never read my assignment feed back sheets. I just look at my mark then the feedback gets hidden in a draw
Points 1 & 2 are just excuses. They have no real value in an argument. The rest of your points though are fairly valid, and if marks have been deducted for stuff where you have been largely praised in other classes then I probably would want to know why and where that fits against the marking scheme.
I know they are excuses but she is saying I don't have enough sources and the sources genuinely weren't easy to get hold of so I had to make do with what I did have.
As for the online journal. You don't have to access it through your university catalogue, you can just go onto the journal website itself and access it from there. That's what I always do when my uni's system fucks up.
You might have an argument about spelling and punctuation. However, there is a technique in answering history questions and being good at English Lit is neither here not there tbh.
Sorry to be harsh like but that's the way things work ime.
Structuring analytical arguments of sources and history is very very different to the doing literature stuff. It's apparent from what you're saying in many ways that you're kind of missing the differences between the two at the moment, so if you can go through what the history department look for you could probably gain a lot from it.
(1) and (2) are just excuses, reasonably good ones, but by giving them you are acknowledging that the sources you used weren't as good as they could have been.
The spelling thing should be pretty clear cut, either the word is right or wrong, or you've got some from/form kind of slip ups that don't show on a spell check.
The sentance construction and style looked for by a history marker will be very different to that looked for by an english marker, so that kind of explains that one.
Starting the feedback with a personal opinion may not be the best plan in the world, but if the work gives out that overall impression then it's well worth the marker stating that.
By all means rant away, it's good to rant, but also try and learn from it and accept that if you're doing more history stuff you're going to have to adapt your history work to that style rather than the literature style.
As with any feedback, ask them to substantiate their opinions, point out where they felt you demonstrated these not-so-good qualities in your work. If they can't, then the feedback isn't worth the paper it's printed on.
The first two, as everyone has said, are excuses. Sadly that's life.
I have another piece of work and an exam for this module, so hopefully they will go better.
I don't think I will be doing any more history modules (apart from one in my final year, but it's run by my department anyway.) I'm only on this one because creative writing isn't offered in the second semester and the only modules we could do were history, philosophy, music or a continuation lit unit for a module I hadn't studied.
I will try to see the marker when I remember where her office is
Meh.
Eek! Severer is a no no! :no:
Well, you're not Shakespeare, so you don't get that luxury.
Severer just makes me think of an axe-wielding zombie. I agree with the teacher.
Axe-wielding zombie? I guess I was close enough, it was a document about how witches copulate with the devil and how they use their magic!
Anyway, I guess the only thing is to do the next essay and hope the exam goes well (whenever it is!)
The ironic thing is, my last literature essay was accused of being too historical...