On the lower technical school and middle technical school no or few papers were asked and I don't remember any comments on my use of langue with those educations. This was however the case with my higher professional education for social work and service. My guiding teacher once made the remark that I wrote on a certain level and that I had a 'sacral' use of language [she said "profane" but meant to my conviction the opposite]. I know that when not necessary I never wrote my papers in the I-form, in contrary to most or all of my fellow students.
After this education I once applied at ThiemeMeulenhof for the function of writer of texts for the middle professional education for social work. The assessment matrix mentioned that a clear line was lacking, that the use of language was difficult to follow now and then, that it was sometimes too confused, and that facts were suggested where opinions were the case. The advice was a rejecting because I would not write on middle professional education level.
At the education philosophy of the Radboud University I got from the teacher of the course 'history of modern philosophy' the feedback that I wrote high-flown. He regretted this because he was very positive about the content handling of the subjects.
My bachelor thesis for the above mentioned education was about authenticity in Heidegger's thought and my use of language I let in form explicitly connect closely to this thought. This I also did with my master thesis which was about a Heideggerian mysticism. My guiding professor of both thesis's however wanted to see a 'neatly mowed lawn' and even got frustrated when he during a guidance session tried to arrange my use of language sentence by sentence.
I have published many texts and the reader thereof can form his own judgement.