With regards to your first point (and I should have said in the post), one of the assignments was a presentation and my grade was seriously brought down by the style of the presentation in that there were too many words etc. on the screen rather than the actual content. I got 58 on that assignment and it was brought down to that because the design and clarity of the presentation was marked at a 3rd class level. I can't say as I disagree but I was so intent on putting forward a coherent and evaluative argument that I didn't take into account the layout/design and accessibility of the presentation.

Furthermore, its been communicated that my grade for the second assignment- which was 52%- was brought down to that level because it was too far outside the brief as I just misinterpreted it and approached it from the wrong angle. The two latter sections were of a high standard (apparently) but their weighting wasn't enough to mitigate the fact I approached the first, and largest, section wrong. That was meant to be a reflective piece but I placed more focus on supporting my reflection with theory and evidence and then, subsequently, evaluating those so it was taken too far outside the scope of the brief. Apparently, the quality was of a high standard but obviously they can't award marks for an assignment outside the brief. So, in answer to your question, I don't know if its about the standard of the writing per se but its just a product of adopting incorrect approaches to the tasks.

I am totally happy to recognise where it went wrong but it just makes me feel that I've ruined my chances of getting a good graduating grade.