Applying marking criteria to a written response

Three issues cost marks. First, the response is under the required length, so it cannot demonstrate the range of language the criteria reward. Second, accurate but repetitive structures show control without variety; language criteria typically reward range as well as accuracy. Third, the inserted idioms are memorised and topic-mismatched, so they read as grafted-on rather than integrated, and examiners are likely to discount them. Memorised phrases are unreliable because they only help if they fit the topic, the genre, and the surrounding grammar. A phrase that fits one prompt may be irrelevant or awkward in another, and the next task uses a different topic and genre. The safe strategy is to learn flexible structures and vocabulary that can be adapted, not fixed sentences to insert.

Feedback should name the problem and point to a strategy, not supply replacement sentences. For length, the student should plan a paragraph structure before writing so the word count is met by developed ideas rather than padding. For repetition, she should identify her three most-used sentence openings and practise two alternatives for each, then apply them in a short rewrite of one paragraph only. For the idioms, she should test each memorised phrase against the new prompt: if it does not fit the topic or genre, it stays out. Transfer matters because the next task is a different topic and genre; the goal is a reusable planning routine and a bank of adaptable structures, so the student can meet the criteria independently rather than relying on prepared text.