A surprising number of lost marks come not from weak writing but from answering a slightly different question from the one that was set. Ten minutes spent properly reading the brief and marking criteria is the best investment you can make in any assignment.
Step 1: Find the real question
Underline three things in the assignment question:
- The command word: what you are being asked to do (see below).
- The topic: what you are writing about.
- The limits: any focus, such as a time period, region, theory, case study or population.
For example, in “Critically evaluate the effectiveness of minimum wage policy in reducing in-work poverty in the UK since 2010”, the command is critically evaluate, the topic is minimum wage policy and in-work poverty, and the limits are the UK and since 2010. An answer about the US, or about unemployment, misses the question however good it is.
Step 2: Understand the command word
| Command word | What it asks you to do |
|---|---|
| Describe / outline | Set out the main features clearly. Rarely enough on its own at university level. |
| Explain | Make clear how or why something happens. |
| Analyse | Break the topic into parts and examine how they relate. |
| Compare / contrast | Identify similarities and differences, and what they mean. |
| Discuss | Consider different views and reach a reasoned position. |
| Evaluate / assess | Weigh strengths and weaknesses and make a judgement. |
| Critically evaluate | Judge the quality of the evidence and arguments themselves, not just what they say. |
| To what extent… | Reach a nuanced judgement. The answer is rarely “completely” or “not at all”. |
Words like critically, evaluate and to what extent signal that marks depend on your judgement, so description alone will cap your grade.
Step 3: Map the learning outcomes
Most briefs list the module learning outcomes being assessed. Treat them as a checklist. If an outcome says you should be able to “apply theoretical frameworks to organisational case studies”, your answer must visibly apply a named framework to a case. Markers literally look for evidence of each outcome.
Step 4: Read the marking criteria as instructions
UK marking criteria describe what work looks like in each grade band. At undergraduate level the bands are usually First (70+), 2:1 (60–69), 2:2 (50–59) and Third (40–49). Master’s programmes typically use Distinction (70+), Merit (60–69) and Pass (50–59), though some institutions differ.
Compare the descriptions for the band you’re aiming for and the one below it. The differences are your targets. Typical phrases separating higher bands include:
- “Sustained critical analysis” rather than “some analysis”
- “Wide range of relevant, high-quality sources” rather than “adequate sources”
- “Original insight” or “a clear, well-supported argument”
- “Accurate, consistent referencing”
Step 5: Turn it into a plan
Before you start drafting, write a one-paragraph answer to the question: your overall position, in plain English. Then list the three to five points that support it, the evidence for each and where each learning outcome will be met. Allocate a rough word count to each section so the most important points get the most space.
Step 6: Check against the criteria before you submit
Once you have a draft, re-read the marking criteria and ask honestly which band your work sits in, and what specifically would move it up. This is also the point where outside feedback is most useful: a fresh reader can see gaps you can’t.
Getting support
If you want a second pair of eyes on a brief or a draft, our assignment support includes brief breakdowns, planning sessions and written feedback mapped to your marking criteria. For longer pieces, see coursework support or report writing help.