Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper introduces a configurable LLM-as-Judge pipeline designed for question-level marking in educational contexts, grounded in authorized curriculum artefacts and marking guidelines. By systematically aligning LLM outputs with educational standards, the pipeline enhances the consistency and transparency of automated assessments, crucial for high-stakes exam preparation. Preliminary evaluations indicate that the pipeline achieves marking outcomes comparable to human tutors while providing justifications that are more traceable to official curriculum standards.
Achieving human-level marking consistency, this LLM-as-Judge pipeline enhances educational assessments by grounding AI evaluations in official curriculum standards.
Generative AI and large language models (LLMs) are increasingly applied to question generation and automated assessment. However, deploying LLMs in preparation for high-stakes exams requires more than prompt engineering; it demands software pipelines that systematically ground model outputs in authorised curriculum artefacts and marking guidelines issued by education authorities. This paper presents a curriculum-grounded, configurable LLM-as-Judge pipeline for question-level marking, co-developed with an industrial partner, to support exam preparation for university admission. The pipeline identifies the relevant topics, subtopics, and cognitive demand of a question, and assembles verifiable and authorised context to support LLM judgement. Curriculum intent is operationalised through concrete syllabus artefacts, including prescribed verbs and outcomes, performance band descriptors, glossary definitions, and marking-guideline principles. A staged LLM workflow is employed to first generate question-specific rubrics, capturing structured expectations of performance, and then derive and evaluate marking criteria used to allocate marks to student responses. This design improves consistency, transparency, and alignment with official marking practices. Preliminary evaluation shows that the proposed LLM-as-Judge pipeline delivers marking outcomes comparable to human tutors, while yielding justifications that are more traceable to authorised curriculum artefacts and marking standards. The pipeline has also been integrated into an online study platform, where early deployment data provide initial insights into operational usage and manual overrides.
