Resources for
academics and university staff
Everything you need for each step
of your study abroad journey
Artificial intelligence has the potential to improve speed, consistency and detail in feedback for educators grading students’ assignments, writes Rohim Mohammed. Here he lists the pros and cons based on his experience
You may also like
Popular resources
With adaptive learning platforms and automated administrative tasks now commonplace, artificial intelligence (AI) is no newcomer to the world of education. But one area that is sparking debate is its potential role in marking student assessments. Could AI save educators valuable time or does it risk compromising the human element central to learning?
The arguments for turning grading over to AI include time management and consistency, but these should be weighed against factors such as ethical implications and AI hallucinations. Perhaps there is a middle ground, where AI could act as a lecturer’s assistant rather than a replacement?
When I put AI to the test – as outlined further on in this article – the results were illuminating. But first let’s look at general arguments for and against.
Exploring the potential of AI in grading, I put theory into practice. I uploaded my assessment rubric to ChatGPT-4 and compared the AI tool’s grading with my own. The results were instructive. The AI over-scored by as much as 20 per cent. While this gap highlighted current limitations, it also revealed a valuable opportunity: whether AI could be trained to better align with human judgement.
Through iterative learning, I guided the AI to reflect on its grading in comparison with mine. Over time, this process produced grades that more closely matched. However, challenges persisted. The AI frequently exhibited “hallucinations”, fabricating details and incorrectly commenting on elements of student work. These inaccuracies, coupled with a tendency towards overconfidence, required constant double-checking. So, instead of saving time, the experiment often demanded additional effort to verify and correct the AI’s output.
Given these limitations, I concluded that AI is far from ready to take over the grading process entirely. However, as an assistive tool, it holds promise. With careful training and human oversight, AI can complement educators’ efforts, offering a glimpse of its potential to enhance the grading process rather than replace it.
A balanced approach may lie in using AI as a tool to assist educators rather than replace them. Here are potential models:
As AI evolves, the question isn’t whether it should play a role in grading but how that role should be defined. Key considerations include:
AI has the potential to revolutionise grading, offering speed, consistency and detailed feedback. However, its limitations and ethical implications cannot be overlooked. A collaborative approach – where AI acts as an assistant rather than a replacement – may strike the right balance, preserving the human touch that remains integral to education. Ultimately, the goal should be to enhance the learning experience for students while supporting educators in their vital roles.
Rohim Mohammed is a lecturer of digital marketing at University College Birmingham.
If you would like advice and insight from academics and university staff delivered direct to your inbox each week, sign up for the Campus newsletter.
Register for free
and unlock a host of features on the THE site
