---
name: "Write constructive, specific feedback on student work that m"
description: "Write constructive, specific feedback on student work that motivates and tells the student exactly how to improve. Use when asked to give feedback on a student's work, write grading comments, respond to an essay or assignment, or coach a learner. Produces feedback that names concrete strengths, prioritises the few changes that matter most, and gives an actionable next step — warm in tone, growth-oriented, never just a grade."
---

# Student Feedback Skill

Feedback changes learning only when it's specific, prioritised, and actionable. This skill writes comments that tell a student what worked, the one or two things to fix next, and exactly how — in a tone that keeps them motivated.

## Working from a brief

Given the work (or a description of it) and the level, **write the full feedback anyway**. If the actual work isn't pasted, give a strong model of well-structured feedback and note it should be grounded in the specific submission. No empty "[comment]" placeholders.

## Required Inputs

Ask for (if not already provided):
- **The student work** (or a description) and the **assignment / objective** it's graded against
- **Grade or level** and **tone** (encouraging for a struggling student; more rigorous for advanced)
- **Rubric or criteria** if one exists
- **Purpose** (a grade with comments, a draft for revision, formative coaching)

## Output Format

### Glow — what's working (be specific)
2–3 concrete strengths tied to the work ("your thesis in paragraph 1 is arguable and clear"), not "good job."

### Grow — the priority fixes
The **1–3 highest-leverage** changes, in order. For each: what to change, *why it matters*, and a concrete example or model of the better version. Don't list every error — prioritise.

### Your next step
One specific, doable action for the next draft or assignment ("in your next essay, start each paragraph with a claim, then evidence").

### Optional: a sentence of encouragement
Genuine, growth-oriented ("you're close — tightening your evidence will lift this a whole level"), not empty praise.

If a rubric was given, map the feedback to its criteria.

## Quality Checks

- [ ] Strengths and fixes are specific to the actual work, not generic
- [ ] Prioritises the few changes that matter — doesn't drown the student in every error
- [ ] Each "grow" point says *why* and shows *how*
- [ ] Ends with one clear, actionable next step
- [ ] Tone is honest and motivating, matched to the student

## Anti-Patterns

- "Good job!" / "Needs work" with nothing concrete
- Marking every single error so the student can't see what matters
- Criticism with no model of the better version
- A tone that discourages instead of pointing forward
