Student Writing Feedback Coach

Provide detailed, growth-oriented feedback on the following student writing:

**Assignment Context**:
- Assignment type: [e.g., "Argumentative essay" / "Research paper" / "Literary analysis" / "Personal narrative" / "Lab report"]
- Assignment prompt/question: [PASTE THE ASSIGNMENT PROMPT, e.g., "Argue whether social media has a net positive or negative effect on democratic participation. Use at least 4 scholarly sources."]
- Course level: [e.g., "10th grade English" / "College freshman composition" / "Graduate seminar"]
- Rubric criteria (if available): [LIST KEY CRITERIA, e.g., "Thesis clarity (20%), Evidence use (25%), Organization (20%), Analysis depth (20%), Mechanics (15%)"]

**Student Context**:
- Known strengths: [e.g., "Strong voice, creative openings, good vocabulary"]
- Areas for growth: [e.g., "Struggles with paragraph transitions and integrating quotes smoothly"]
- Feedback tone: [encouraging / balanced / direct]

**Student's Text**:
```
[PASTE THE FULL STUDENT TEXT HERE]
```

**Provide feedback following this structure:**

### Part 1: Overall Impression (2-3 sentences)
Start with a genuine strength. Identify one specific thing the student did well, citing a particular passage or choice. Then state the single most important area for improvement that would have the biggest impact on the paper's quality.

### Part 2: Higher-Order Feedback
Address these dimensions in order of importance. For each, provide:
- A clear assessment (what is working and what is not)
- A specific example from the student's text (quote the relevant passage)
- A concrete revision suggestion (not "improve this" but "try restructuring this paragraph by leading with your claim, then presenting the evidence, then explaining how the evidence supports the claim")

**Dimensions:**
1. **Thesis and Central Argument**: Is the thesis clear, specific, arguable, and maintained throughout? Does every paragraph connect back to it?
2. **Evidence and Support**: Does the student use sufficient, relevant, credible evidence? Are quotes and data integrated smoothly or dropped in without context? Is there analysis after each piece of evidence, or does the student let evidence "speak for itself"?
3. **Organization and Flow**: Does the paper follow a logical structure? Do paragraphs have clear topic sentences? Are transitions between ideas smooth and purposeful, or abrupt?
4. **Analysis Depth**: Does the student explain, interpret, and extend ideas, or merely summarize and describe? Where does the paper stay on the surface when it should go deeper?
5. **Audience Awareness**: Is the writing appropriate for the intended audience and assignment type? Does the register match the context?

### Part 3: Lower-Order Feedback
Address only the 2-3 most frequent or impactful patterns. Do not list every grammar error. For each pattern:
- Name the pattern (e.g., "comma splices," "inconsistent tense," "pronoun-antecedent disagreement")
- Show 2 examples from the text
- Explain the rule briefly
- Provide the corrected version

### Part 4: Revision Priority List
Give the student a numbered list of 3-5 revision steps, ordered from highest impact to lowest. Each step should be specific enough that the student knows exactly what to do:
- NOT: "Improve your transitions"
- YES: "Rewrite the opening sentence of paragraphs 3, 4, and 6 to explicitly connect each paragraph's main idea to the previous paragraph's conclusion. Use a transition phrase that signals the logical relationship (e.g., 'however,' 'building on this,' 'in contrast')."

### Part 5: Rubric Alignment (if rubric was provided)
Map the feedback to each rubric criterion with a provisional score or rating and a brief justification. Identify which criterion has the most room for improvement.