I am not clear on the methodology of this study. How many students in total were being marked? I particularly found this confusing “Every judgement involves 2 scripts. So if you do 26 judgements, you will see 52 scripts. This means every script was seen twice by Amaryllis” What is a judgment? is that feedback with a mark? The way that this is written it sounds like that two scripts, produced by a two different students, are getting one set of feedback? If she is looking at every script twice how is this 10% of the total. I think this bit could have been clearer
One thing I find particularly encouraging is that the discussion is moving beyond "Can AI mark?" to "What kind of marking actually improves learning?"
A score alone has limited value. The real opportunity is helping students understand why they lost marks, which misconception led to the error, and what conceptual change is needed next.
For me, that's where AI becomes most interesting—not as a replacement for teacher judgment, but as a tool for making student thinking more visible and feedback more precise.
Does the parallel teacher/ AI originate in a type of peer marking? Usually with less experienced teachers it would be the norm for a more experienced teacher to sample some of their assessments. I thought it was an interesting case study. It also reminded me how subjective we can be. I was immediately irritated by the phrase ' bear with me'. I know it's not a new one . It appears in Shakespeare's Julius Ceasar but here it feels too chatty. But that me being subject and maybe the whole piece was intended to be informal. Or possibly it was all a Shakespearen theme as the German soldier exited stage left pursued by a bear!
I'm guessing you're referring to the use of the phrase ' no man's land'. I think that would be a conversation that, as a teacher, you'd need to have with the student. Although the phrase is most associated with the 1st WW it was occasionally used in the 2nd WW so it would be interesting to know in what context the student found the phrase.
I am not clear on the methodology of this study. How many students in total were being marked? I particularly found this confusing “Every judgement involves 2 scripts. So if you do 26 judgements, you will see 52 scripts. This means every script was seen twice by Amaryllis” What is a judgment? is that feedback with a mark? The way that this is written it sounds like that two scripts, produced by a two different students, are getting one set of feedback? If she is looking at every script twice how is this 10% of the total. I think this bit could have been clearer
This might make it clearer
https://help.nomoremarking.com/en/article/how-long-does-it-take-to-assess-one-classs-essays-using-comparative-judgement-lrxp0m/
One thing I find particularly encouraging is that the discussion is moving beyond "Can AI mark?" to "What kind of marking actually improves learning?"
A score alone has limited value. The real opportunity is helping students understand why they lost marks, which misconception led to the error, and what conceptual change is needed next.
For me, that's where AI becomes most interesting—not as a replacement for teacher judgment, but as a tool for making student thinking more visible and feedback more precise.
Does the parallel teacher/ AI originate in a type of peer marking? Usually with less experienced teachers it would be the norm for a more experienced teacher to sample some of their assessments. I thought it was an interesting case study. It also reminded me how subjective we can be. I was immediately irritated by the phrase ' bear with me'. I know it's not a new one . It appears in Shakespeare's Julius Ceasar but here it feels too chatty. But that me being subject and maybe the whole piece was intended to be informal. Or possibly it was all a Shakespearen theme as the German soldier exited stage left pursued by a bear!
Did the AI not pick up on the fact that the student seems to be describing the first world war in 1940?
I'm guessing you're referring to the use of the phrase ' no man's land'. I think that would be a conversation that, as a teacher, you'd need to have with the student. Although the phrase is most associated with the 1st WW it was occasionally used in the 2nd WW so it would be interesting to know in what context the student found the phrase.