Using artificial intelligence, more commonly referred to as AI, to write essays and solve problems as a student is strictly prohibited, and using AI to cheat has been a problem that is increasingly concerning in high schools. Teachers lecture their students about the importance of creating original work and figuring out problems independently so the idea of AI grading student essays naturally raises eyebrows as well.
Okay, so I’m supposed to pour my heart and soul into an essay, and then a computer reads it? It just feels weird. Does it even get what I’m trying to say? But at the same time, waiting for essay feedback is the worst. Will AI grading finally mean I get my results back faster? Maybe I can actually use the feedback before the next essay is due.
When students write their own work, they develop communication and language skills that will be needed after graduation. Conversely, manual grading takes an excessive amount of time and effort with little benefit for teachers. Because of this, some educators are beginning to upload their rubrics onto AI platforms (like No Red Ink) that scan through assignments and grade based on the teacher’s rubric.
When students submit their work, the technology provides them with feedback much faster and helps them get grades uploaded sooner. But, as grading with AI becomes more common, some students find it hypocritical that teachers grade essays using the very same technology that students are forbidden to use.
Senior Kamryn Archuleta has noticed that some of her own essays have been graded with AI, and she has seen a difference in both the quality of feedback and the accuracy of grading.
“I feel teachers should use AI to go back, review, or double check,” said Archuleta. “I don’t think that teachers should use AI to grade essays. AI can help reduce the chance of bias, but I feel like AI can’t always capture the creativity of a student’s work. For grading things such as multiple choice tests, [AI] can be effective and consistent, but with essays, it can’t capture the true meaning and can’t give meaningful feedback.”
Using technology to scan over assignments that require less personal feedback such as tests and study guides can provide accurate grading and give teachers more time to complete other important work. Grading creative work with AI would clearly save a lot of time for teachers, but it does have its setbacks. If teachers use AI for suggestions instead of solely relying on it, they could ensure that grading is fair and nuanced.
English teacher Lacy Krell has found AI lacking in its ability to give proper feedback.
“I’ve used BriskIt, but I have found that I spend more time correcting AI feedback than I would have just doing it myself,” said Krell.
There is no doubt that AI has advanced greatly in recent years and is fairly dependable for a number of uses, but it cannot be trusted to fully understand subjective works and grade specific writing styles. AI can be an excellent tool to check mechanics and suggest edits on essays, but it cannot read and understand like a human teacher.
As technology continues to develop, more resources will be available to both teachers and students in order to make learning and grading more efficient. Unless policy is changed, it is likely that more teachers will continue to grade with AI. Ultimately, innovative grading tools will give teachers more time to focus on lesson planning and student connections, but there is always a chance that unrestricted reliance could diminish the quality of feedback and accuracy.
