I was thinking more about grading. From my personal experience most grading exercises pertain to correcting common mistakes students make with respect to the material. If I could have a technology that I train to replicate my responses to these common mistakes that would save me a lot of time. 1/
It would allow me to instead focus on uncommon mistakes that need more attention. This is based on my experience in STEM courses. It may be different in others, in which case those departments are free to make decisions which best align with their needs. 2/2
I get that folks have mixed experiences with grading, but as a former grad student, and as a former undergrad who was taught by grad students, both instances had rich learning opportunities that made a huge impact in my development. It's scary and sad to hear someone reduce it to mechanics.
Especially if your role is to teach a kind of thinking. LLMs cannot think or understand... but they can give authoritative feedback? It might solve the 'problem' of marking for those who see no pedagogical value in it.
Comments