Feedback Strategies - CLA Teacher's Manual

Feedback Architecture

Use this standard structure for all written feedback. It's predictable, comprehensive, and builds on the principles above.

Standard Feedback Structure

Component	Content	Length
Paragraph 1: Strengths	Identify what student did well. Be specific. Reference their work directly.	1-2 sentences
Paragraph 2: Primary Growth Area	ONE main area to improve. Explain why it matters. Show example from their work. Show what better looks like.	3-5 sentences
Paragraph 3: Secondary Growth Area (optional)	Only if there's a major secondary issue. Follow same structure as primary. Keep brief.	2-3 sentences
Paragraph 4: Next Steps & Growth Message	Tell student what to do with feedback. Encourage revision. End with growth message.	2-3 sentences
Grade or Rubric Score	Always provide. Show criteria. Connect to feedback.	1-2 sentences

Example End Comment

STRENGTH: "Your rule synthesis is excellent. You've correctly integrated the elements from all cases into one coherent rule statement."

PRIMARY GROWTH AREA: "Your application section is where you show legal thinking. Right now, you're making assertions without showing facts. Instead, use fact-matching: Cite the specific fact, explain why it matters, and connect it to the legal standard. Here's what stronger application looks like: 'The fact that [specific detail] breached [legal requirement] because [connection to rule].'"

NEXT STEPS & GROWTH MESSAGE: "Please revise your application section using the fact-matching model. You'll notice your analysis becomes much stronger. Your rule synthesis is already strong. Now you're building application skills—that's where real growth happens."

GRADE: "Grade: B+ (87%). Your rule synthesis (A) is strong. Your application (B) is developing. Focus on fact-specific application."

Comment Library Setup

A comment library saves time and ensures consistency. Create a Google Doc or Word document with comment categories. Use keyboard shortcuts to insert them during grading. Personalize each with 1-2 custom sentences.

Rule Statement Comments

[RS-Complete] "Your rule statement includes all four elements, which shows you thoroughly synthesized the cases."
[RS-Incomplete] "Your rule statement is missing one element. Specifically, [element] is required by [cases]. Revise to include: [correct element]."
[RS-Inaccurate] "Your rule statement says [student version]. The cases actually say [correct version]. Here's why the difference matters: [explanation]."
[RS-Synthesized] "You've integrated the rules from all three cases into one coherent statement. That's solid synthesis."
[RS-Unsynthesized] "You've listed three cases. Now integrate them into one rule: [better version]."

Application Comments

[App-Conclusory] "You state [conclusion]. Now show me how facts prove it. Cite the facts, explain why they matter, and connect to the legal standard."
[App-Concrete] "Strong application. You cite specific facts and explain how they prove the element. This is exactly right."
[App-FactLight] "Add more facts. You state the element is met, but don't cite which facts show this. Revise: [specific fact] + [because] = [element]."
[App-Counterargument] "Strengthen by addressing the other side. [Other side] might argue [counterargument]. Your response: [stronger analysis]."

Organization Comments

[Org-CREAC] "Your CREAC structure is clear. Each component (Conclusion, Rule, Explanation, Application, Conclusion) is present and does its job."
[Org-MultiIssue] "You have two separate issues here. Each needs its own CREAC paragraph. Separate these into two distinct analyses."
[Org-Flow] "Improve transition between ideas. Connect these sentences with 'therefore,' 'however,' or another transition to show how they relate."

Writing Comments

[Write-Passive] "Replace passive voice with active. Instead of '[passive sentence],' write '[active sentence].'"
[Write-Wordiness] "Tighten this sentence. Instead of '[wordy version],' write '[concise version].'"
[Write-Pronoun] "Use the defendant's name instead of 'he' for clarity. Throughout your paper, use names instead of pronouns."

Topic-Specific Comments

[Negligence-Duty] "Duty analysis: Discuss whether harm was foreseeable. Did the defendant know (or should the defendant have known) of the risk?"
[Negligence-Causation] "You need both cause-in-fact and proximate cause. Cause-in-fact: But-for the defendant's action, would the harm have occurred? Proximate cause: Was the harm a foreseeable result?"
[Contract-Consideration] "You're missing consideration. What did the [party] give up? What did they gain? Both parties must exchange something of value."
[Title VII-Because] "Different treatment alone isn't discrimination. The treatment must be BECAUSE of a protected characteristic. What evidence shows that the [characteristic] motivated the decision?"

Using Your Library Efficiently

Personalize: Don't just copy/paste. Customize each comment with 1-2 personal sentences referring to the student's specific work.

Mix library with personal: Use about 60% library comments and 40% personalized feedback.

Update constantly: As you identify new patterns, add new comments to your library.

Feedback for Problem Set Submissions

Strategy: Read for holistic understanding, then comment (don't grade yet). Identify 2-3 main themes. Write end comment synthesizing these themes. Grade using rubric. Final check: does grade match your feedback?

Use comment library aggressively (60% library, 40% personalized). Batch grade 4-5 assignments at a time for consistency.

Protecting Your Time

Budget 3-4 hours per full problem set batch. Batch grade 4-5 assignments. Prioritize rule accuracy, application quality, CREAC structure. End comments: 3-5 paragraphs max, focusing on 2-3 main themes.