Search and Filter

Repository Feedback

Your feedback helps us improve the repository's content relevance and usability. Please share your thoughts to help us better serve researchers and practitioners.

Submit feedback

Submit a research study

Contribute to the repository:

Add a paper

CoGrader: Transforming Instructors' Assessment of Project Reports through Collaborative LLM Integration

Date
Publisher
arXiv
Grading project reports are increasingly significant in today's educational landscape, where they serve as key assessments of students' comprehensive problem-solving abilities. However, it remains challenging due to the multifaceted evaluation criteria involved, such as creativity and peer-comparative achievement. Meanwhile, instructors often struggle to maintain fairness throughout the time-consuming grading process. Recent advances in AI, particularly large language models, have demonstrated potential for automating simpler grading tasks, such as assessing quizzes or basic writing quality. However, these tools often fall short when it comes to complex metrics, like design innovation and the practical application of knowledge, that require an instructor's educational insights into the class situation. To address this challenge, we conducted a formative study with six instructors and developed CoGrader, which introduces a novel grading workflow combining human-LLM collaborative metrics design, benchmarking, and AI-assisted feedback. CoGrader was found effective in improving grading efficiency and consistency while providing reliable peer-comparative feedback to students. We also discuss design insights and ethical considerations for the development of human-AI collaborative grading systems.
Study at a glance
  • Question: How can an AI tool help instructors grade complex student project reports collaboratively and fairly?
  • Setting and data: Six instructors
  • Method: Formative study and tool development
Why it matters

Grading project reports is time-consuming, and instructors struggle to maintain fairness across multifaceted criteria. While AI can automate simpler grading tasks, existing tools fall short on complex metrics that require an instructor's educational insights.

Key findings
  • In a study with six instructors, a collaborative AI grading tool was found effective in improving grading efficiency and consistency.
  • The collaborative AI grading system provided reliable peer-comparative feedback to students on their project reports.
  • AI tools often fall short when assessing complex criteria like design innovation and practical knowledge application without an instructor's educational insights.

Summary drafted with AI from the paper’s abstract and may contain errors. See the full paper for details.

What is the application?
Who is the user?
Who age?