LLM Performance on a Real, Double-Marked GCSE Benchmark

We introduce a dataset of 32,534 double-marked real student responses to GCSE mock exams (GCSEs are the UK's national exams, taken at age ~16), spanning 328 questions across five subjects and including handwritten work. We test whether off-the-shelf large language models agree with examiners as closely as the two examiners agree with each other. We find that models overwhelmingly agree well with the examiner consensus across subjects, with the top performing models agreeing more closely with examiners than examiners agree with each other. Models achieve high scores for subjective tasks like English essay marking, as well as handling complex and messy handwritten Maths paper scripts. Agreement is uniform near the examiner line, and not massively discriminated by model size, providing cost-effective automated marking solutions.

Leveraging BART to Assess CS1 C++ Programming Assignments using Rubric-based Criteria

This paper investigates rubric-aware, multitask fine-tuning of transformer models for automated grading of introductory C++ programming assignments, with the goal of producing grade predictions that better reflect instructor grading behavior than general-purpose LLMs. Using multi-semester CS1 data, student submissions are paired with numeric scores, letter-grade buckets, and assignment rubrics, then preprocessed into unified sequences for transformer input. A BART encoder-decoder with LoRA adaptation is trained to jointly predict numeric grades and grade buckets, augmented with a distribution-matching term to align predicted and empirical grade distributions, an evaluation dimension often overlooked in prior work. Experiments compare single-task and multitask training, hard one-hot versus fuzzy and boundary-based soft labels, and rubric versus no-rubric conditions, with additional T5 and pairwise-pretrained variants. Results show that multitask BART with boundary-based soft labels and rubric context achieves lower mean absolute error and stronger grade-distribution alignment than single-task, hard-label, or code-only baselines. Fully fine-tuned T5 further improves distributional fidelity, while pairwise pretraining reduces numeric error at the cost of minority-class sensitivity. Collectively, the findings suggest that calibration-aware, rubric-guided training produces more instructor-like grading behavior than accuracy-optimized alternatives.

GradeLegal: Automated Grading for German Legal Cases

Grading German legal exam solutions faces growing volumes and a shortage of qualified graders, delaying feedback and creating a bottleneck. At the same time, it is a high-stakes expert task, since state exam grades strongly influence career outcomes in Germany. Despite this practical relevance, literature lacks systematic studies on effective methods for grading legal exams. To address this gap, we investigate whether large language models (LLMs) can support the automated grading of German legal case solutions in criminal and public law, thereby enabling scalable feedback and student self-testing. We present a systematic evaluation of 27 proprietary and open-source LLMs, benchmarking prompting strategies that incrementally add task-related information, such as a sample solution and a grading rubric. Using quadratic weighted kappa (QWK), reasoning-oriented LLMs can approximate expert grading in public law when given a sample solution and a grading rubric (up to 0.91), compared to 0.60 in criminal law, suggesting a harder grading task in criminal law. Beyond single-model grading, ensembling improves agreement by up to 0.15 over its best member and can offer an alternative to stronger closed-source single models. In addition, our findings suggest that effective prompt design and model selection are necessary for reliable LLM-based grading of legal exams.