The ABCs

My hypothesis: failure often comes from an inattention to things on the basic level, not from an inability to reach too high. So:

failing to distinguish between fiction and non-fiction, or between denotation and connotation. Reading in a literal-minded, unimaginative way, or else thinking everything is allegorical, and not seeing what's literally in front of their faces.

not knowing the basics of prosody or form. Students readings a sestina and saying it's "very repetitive." (Jaime Gil de Biedma's "Apología y petición"). Never have I had a grad student know what a sestina is when faced with that poem.

ignoring basics like the "intentional fallacy."

not knowing what a thesis is, how to develop one.  Not developing an argument in a paper, or knowing that a paper has to have an argument. Basic organizational flaws like telling you "this paper will argue that" at the 2/3 mark of the paper. Having a bad title or none at all.  

This is high-school stuff, essentially, or freshman English. Now we also recognize the paper that does everything right at the high school level, but doesn't rise high enough for grad work or professional publishing. The point of all the basic stuff is to be able to present the intellectual content well, but I don't know how to teach someone how to have intellectual content in the first place. It turns out to be difficult for most people to generate interesting ideas about literature.