Efficiency gains arising from the use of electronic marking tools that allow tutors to select comments from a statement bank are well documented, but how students use this type of feedback remains under explored. Natural science students (N = 161) were emailed feedback reports on a spreadsheet assessment that included an invitation to reply placed at different positions. Outcomes suggest that students either read feedback completely, or not at all. Although mean marks for repliers (M = 75.5%, N = 39) and non-repliers (M = 57.2%, N = 68) were significantly different (p < 0.01), these two groups possessed equivalent attendance records and similar submission rates and performances in a contemporaneous formatively assessed laboratory report. Notably, average marks for a follow-up summative laboratory report, using the same assessment criteria as the formative task, were 10% higher for students who replied to the original invite. It is concluded that the repliers represent a group of assessment literate students, and that statement bank feedback can foster learning: a simple "fire" analogy for feedback is advanced that advocates high-quality information on progress (fuel) and a curricular atmosphere conducive to learning (oxygen). However, only if students are assessment literate (ignition) will feedback illuminate.