Monroe Grading Agent: AI-Powered Automated Assignment Grading in Higher Education
Downloads
Automated grading has emerged as a valuable approach to address the heavy workload and consistency challenges of manual grading in higher education. Instructors often spend countless hours evaluating student assignments, which can delay feedback and introduce subjective inconsistencies. Prior research highlights the efficiency and objectivity of AI-assisted grading, noting its potential to reduce grading inconsistencies by up to 44% (Yigit et al., 2024) and deliver faster, more scalable feedback (Wang et al., 2022). This paper introduces the Monroe Grading Agent (MGA) – an AI-powered desktop application developed to automatically grade student semester assignments by comparing submissions against the assignment instructions. MGA utilizes TF-IDF vectorization, cosine similarity, and a novel cube-root scaling method to provide fairer, partial-credit-based grading. Evaluated using realistic Monroe University assignment data, MGA demonstrates significant improvements in grading efficiency, scoring consistency, and feedback richness. A before-and-after analysis shows that MGA can drastically reduce grading time while maintaining scores comparable to human evaluators. The system also generates structured feedback aligned with assignment criteria. The paper features GUI screenshots, contextualizes MGA within the broader automated grading literature, and explores implications for teaching faculty. It concludes by outlining future enhancements including LMS integration, rubric-based scoring, and support for programming assignments, positioning MGA as a practical and scalable solution for modern academic environments.
Barnett, T. (2023). AI in higher education: Cautionary perspectives. Educational Theory, 72(4), 389401.
Kumar, R. (2023). Faculty members’ use of artificial intelligence to grade student papers: a case of implications. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 19(9).
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979023-00130-7
Silvestrone, S., & Rubman, J. (2024, May 9). AI-Assisted Grading: A Magic Wand or a Pandora’s Box? MIT Sloan Teaching & Learning
Technologies .
Wang, E. L., Matsumura, L. C., Litman, D., Correnti, R., & Zhang, H., et al. (2022). Contributions to Research on Automated Writing Scoring and Feedback Systems. RAND
Corporation.
Xiang, C., Wang, Y., Zhou, Q., & Yu, Z. (2024). Graph semantic similarity-based automatic assessment for programming exercises. Scientific Reports, 14, Article 10530.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-61219-8
Yigit, M., Gobrecht, E., & Hinz, O. (2024). Beyond human subjectivity and error: AI in grading. Frontiers in Education, 9, 1534582.
Zou, D., Xie, H., & Cheng, G. (2023). Automated essay scoring versus human scoring: A correlational study. Computers & Education, 191, 104640.
Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education – where are the educators? International
Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16, Article 39
Gobrecht, A., Tuma, F., Möller, M., Zöller, T., Zakhvatkin, M., Wuttig, A., Sommerfeldt, H., & Schütt, S. (2024). Beyond human subjectivity and error: A novel AI grading system. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.04323.
Ludwig, S., Mayer, C., Hansen, C., Eilers, K., & Brandt, S. (2021). Automated essay scoring using transformer models. arXiv preprint
arXiv:2110.06874.
Ormerod, C. M., Malhotra, A., & Jafari, A. (2021). Automated essay scoring using efficient
transformer-based language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2102.13136.
Messer, M., Brown, N. C. C., Kölling, M., & Shi, M. (2023). Automated grading and feedback tools for programming education: A systematic review. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.11722.
Taylor, P. (2024, September 6). Challenges of using AI to give feedback and grade students. Inside Higher Ed.
Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education – where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16, Article 39.
The RAND Corporation. (2022). Contributions to research on automated writing scoring and feedback systems. RAND Corporation.
MIT Sloan Teaching & Learning Technologies. (2024, May 9). AI-assisted grading: A magic wand or a Pandora’s box? MIT Sloan.
SpringerOpen. (2023). A meta systematic review of artificial intelligence in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education.
Springer. (2021). An automated essay scoring system: a systematic literature review. Artificial Intelligence Review.
RAND Corporation. (2022). Contributions to research on automated writing scoring and feedback systems. RAND Corporation.
SpringerOpen. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education – where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education.
Springer. (2021). An automated essay scoring system: a systematic literature review. Artificial Intelligence Review.
SpringerOpen. (2023). A meta systematic review of artificial intelligence in higher education.
International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education.
RAND Corporation. (2022). Contributions to research on automated writing scoring and feedback systems. RAND Corporation.
MIT Sloan Teaching & Learning Technologies. (2024, May 9). AI-assisted grading: A magic wand or a Pandora’s box? MIT Sloan.
