journal article·2026-01-08Open access

Can ChatGPT Replace the Teacher in Assessment? A Review of Research on the Use of Large Language Models in Grading and Providing Feedback

Marcin Jukiewicz, Michał Wyrwa

Applied Sciences· Volume 16· Issue 2

Abstract

This article presents a systematic review of empirical research on the use of large language models (LLMs) for automated grading of student work and providing feedback. The study aimed to determine the extent to which generative artificial intelligence models, such as ChatGPT, can replace teachers in the assessment process. The review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines and predefined inclusion criteria; ultimately, 42 empirical studies were included in the analysis. The results of the review indicate that the effectiveness of LLMs in grading is varied. These models perform well on closed-ended tasks and short-answer questions, often achieving accuracy comparable to human evaluators. However, they struggle with assessing complex, open-ended, or subjective assignments that require in-depth analysis or creativity. The quality of the prompts provided to the model and the use of detailed scoring rubrics significantly influence the accuracy and consistency of the grades generated by LLMs. The findings suggest that LLMs can support teachers by accelerating the grading process and delivering rapid feedback at scale, but they cannot fully replace human judgment. The highest effectiveness is achieved in hybrid assessment systems that combine AI-driven automatic grading with teacher oversight and verification.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning · Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education · Student Assessment and Feedback

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Logic and Cognitive Science, Faculty of Psychology and Cognitive Science, Adam Mickiewicz University, Szamarzewskiego 89, 60-568 Poznań, Poland

Funding

Polish National Science Centre

References (76)

Show source-provided references
1. Jukiewicz, M. (2025). How generative artificial intelligence transforms teaching and influences student wellbeing in future education. Front. Educ., 10.10.3389/feduc.2025.1594572 ↗
2. Transformative effects of chatgpt on modern education: Emerging era of ai chatbots10.1016/j.iotcps.2023.06.002 ↗
3. How understanding the limitations and risks of using chatgpt can contribute to willingness to use10.1186/s40561-024-00322-9 ↗
4. Effect of chat gpt on the digitized learning process of university students10.59670/jns.v33i.411 ↗
5. Hung, J., and Chen, J. (2023). The benefits, risks and regulation of using chatgpt in chinese academia: A content analysis. Soc. Sci., 12.10.3390/socsci12070380 ↗
6. The usefulness of chatgpt for psychotherapists and patients10.1057/s41599-023-02567-0 ↗
7. Introducing counsellme: A dataset of simulated mental health dialogues for comparing llms like haiku, llamantino and chatgpt against humans10.1016/j.etdah.2025.100170 ↗
8. Assessing the use of chatgpt as a psychoeducational tool for mental health practice10.1002/capr.12759 ↗
9. Chatgpt in education: Methods, potentials, and limitations10.1016/j.chbah.2023.100022 ↗
10. Revolutionizing higher education: Unleashing the potential of large language models for strategic transformation10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3400164 ↗
11. Chatgpt in education: A blessing or a curse? A qualitative study exploring early adopters’ utilization and perceptions10.1016/j.chbah.2023.100027 ↗
12. Davis, R.O., and Lee, Y.J. (2024). Prompt: Chatgpt, create my course, please!. Educ. Sci., 14.10.3390/educsci14010024 ↗
13. A cross-disciplinary examination of the instructional uses of chatgpt in higher education10.1177/00472395231196532 ↗
14. Li, M. (2025). The impact of chatgpt on teaching and learning in higher education: Challenges, opportunities, and future scope. Encyclopedia of Information Science and Technology, IGI Global Scientific Publishing. [6th ed.].10.4018/978-1-6684-7366-5.ch079 ↗
15. A systematic review of large language models and their implications in medical education10.1111/medu.15402 ↗
16. The future of grading programming assignments in education: The role of chatgpt in automating the assessment and feedback process10.1016/j.tsc.2024.101522 ↗
17. Chatgpt prompts for generating multiple-choice questions in medical education and evidence on their validity: A literature review10.1093/postmj/qgae065 ↗
18. Gen Z and generative AI: Shaping the future of learning and creativity10.47760/cognizance.2024.v04i10.001 ↗
19. Navigating the integration of generative artificial intelligence in higher education: Opportunities, challenges, and strategies for fostering ethical learning10.4103/abhs.abhs_122_24 ↗
20. Reimer, E.C. (2024). Examining the role of generative ai in enhancing social work education: An analysis of curriculum and assessment design. Soc. Sci., 13.10.3390/socsci13120648 ↗
21. Combining human and artificial intelligence for enhanced ai literacy in higher education10.1016/j.caeo.2024.100184 ↗
22. Analyzing k-12 ai education: A large language model study of classroom instruction on learning theories, pedagogy, tools, and ai literacy10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100295 ↗
23. A comprehensive overview of large language models10.1145/3744746 ↗
24. An automated essay scoring systems: A systematic literature review10.1007/s10462-021-10068-2 ↗
25. The prisma 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews10.1136/bmj.n71 ↗
26. Prisma 2020 explanation and elaboration: Updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews10.1136/bmj.n160 ↗
27. Prisma-s: An extension to the prisma statement for reporting literature searches in systematic reviews10.1186/s13643-020-01542-z ↗
28. The mixed methods appraisal tool (mmat) version 2018 for information professionals and researchers
29. Grévisse, C. (2024). Llm-based automatic short answer grading in undergraduate medical education. BMC Med Educ., 24.10.1186/s12909-024-06026-5 ↗
30. Jiang, Z., Xu, Z., Pan, Z., He, J., and Xie, K. (2023). Exploring the role of artificial intelligence in facilitating assessment of writing performance in second language learning. Languages, 8.10.3390/languages8040247 ↗
31. Li, Z., Lloyd, S., Beckman, M., and Passonneau, R.J. (2023, January 6–10). Answer-state recurrent relational network (asrrn) for constructed response assessment and feedback grouping. Proceedings of the Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2023, Singapore.10.18653/v1/2023.findings-emnlp.254 ↗
32. Hackl, V., Müller, A.E., Granitzer, M., and Sailer, M. (2023). Is gpt-4 a reliable rater? evaluating consistency in gpt-4’s text ratings. Front. Educ., 8.10.3389/feduc.2023.1272229 ↗
33. Azaiz, I., Deckarm, O., and Strickroth, S. (2023). Ai-enhanced auto-correction of programming exercises: How effective is gpt-3.5?. arXiv.10.3991/ijep.v13i8.45621 ↗
34. Measuring original thinking in elementary school: Development and validation of a computational psychometric approach10.1037/edu0000844 ↗
35. Schleifer, A.G., Klebanov, B.B., Ariely, M., and Alexandron, G. (2023, January 13). Transformer-based hebrew nlp models for short answer scoring in biology. Proceedings of the 18th Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications (BEA 2023), Toronto, ON, Canada.
36. Evaluating the role of chatgpt in enhancing efl writing assessments in classroom settings: A preliminary investigation10.1057/s41599-024-03755-2 ↗
37. Chang, L.-H., and Ginter, F. (2024, January 26–27). Automatic short answer grading for finnish with chatgpt. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vancouver, BC, Canada.10.1609/aaai.v38i21.30363 ↗
38. Dong, D. (2024). Tapping into the pedagogical potential of infinigochatic: Evidence from iwrite scoring and comments and lu & ai’s linguistic complexity analyzer. Arab. World Engl. J. (AWEJ) Spec. Issue Chatgpt, 124–137.10.24093/awej/ChatGPT.8 ↗
39. Thomas, D.R., Lin, J., Bhushan, S., Abboud, R., Gatz, E., Gupta, S., and Koedinger, K.R. (2024, January 18–20). Learning and ai evaluation of tutors responding to students engaging in negative self-talk. Proceedings of the Eleventh ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale, Atlanta, GA, USA.10.1145/3657604.3664700 ↗
40. Gao, R., Guo, X., Li, X., Narayanan, A.B.L., Thomas, N., and Srinivasa, A.R. (2024, January 15). Towards scalable automated grading: Leveraging large language models for conceptual question evaluation in engineering. Proceedings of the Machine Learning Research, FM-EduAssess at NeurIPS 2024 Workshop, Vancouver Convention Center, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
41. A comparative analysis of the rating of college students’ essays by chatgpt versus human raters10.26803/ijlter.23.2.23 ↗
42. Jin, H., Kim, Y., Park, Y.S., Tilekbay, B., Son, J., and Kim, J. (2024, January 18–20). Using large language models to diagnose math problem-solving skills at scale. Proceedings of the Eleventh ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale, Atlanta, GA, USA.10.1145/3657604.3664697 ↗
43. Ai-assisted marking: Functionality and limitations of chatgpt in written assessment evaluation
44. Cohn, C., Hutchins, N., Le, T., and Biswas, G. (2024, January 20–27). A chain-of-thought prompting approach with llms for evaluating students’ formative assessment responses in science. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vancouver, BC, Canada.10.1609/aaai.v38i21.30364 ↗
45. Investigating sampling impacts on an llm-based ai scoring approach: Prediction accuracy and fairness
46. The revival of essay-type questions in medical education: Harnessing artificial intelligence and machine learning
47. Comparing scoring consistency of large language models with faculty for formative assessments in medical education10.1007/s11606-024-09050-9 ↗
48. Can we use gpt-4 as a mathematics evaluator in education? Exploring the efficacy and limitation of llm-based automatic assessment system for open-ended mathematics question10.1007/s40593-024-00448-4 ↗
49. Grandel, S., Schmidt, D.C., and Leach, K. (2024, January 20). Applying large language models to enhance the assessment of parallel functional programming assignments. Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Large Language Models for Code, LLM4Code ’24, Lisbon, Portugal.10.1145/3643795.3648375 ↗
50. Navigating the data frontier in science assessment: Advancing data augmentation strategies for machine learning applications with generative artificial intelligence10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100265 ↗
51. Menezes, T., Egherman, L., and Garg, N. (2024, January 8–10). Ai-grading standup updates to improve project-based learning outcomes. Proceedings of the 2024 on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 1, Milan, Italy.10.1145/3649217.3653541 ↗
52. Classification of reflective writing: A comparative analysis with shallow machine learning and pre-trained language models10.1007/s10639-024-12720-0 ↗
53. Zhuang, X., Wu, H., Shen, X., Yu, P., Yi, G., Chen, X., Hu, T., Chen, Y., Ren, Y., and Zhang, Y. (2024, January 11–16). Toree: Evaluating topic relevance of student essays for chinese primary and middle school education. Proceedings of the Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics ACL 2024, Bangkok, Thailand.10.18653/v1/2024.findings-acl.342 ↗
54. Sonkar, S., Ni, K., Tran Lu, L., Kincaid, K., Hutchinson, J.S., and Baraniuk, R.G. (2024, January 8–12). Automated long answer grading with ricechem dataset. Proceedings of the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, Recife, Brazil.10.1007/978-3-031-64302-6_12 ↗
55. Van Rensburg, H.E., Snyman, D.P., Drevin, L., and Drevin, G.R. (2023, January 19–21). Using chatgpt to encourage critical ai literacy skills and for assessment in higher education. Proceedings of the ICT Education, Gauteng, South Africa.10.1007/978-3-031-48536-7 ↗
56. Can chatgpt effectively complement teacher assessment of undergraduate students’ academic writing?10.1080/02602938.2024.2301722 ↗
57. Agostini, D., Picasso, F., and Ballardini, H. (2024, January 25–28). Large language models for the assessment of students’ authentic tasks: A replication study in higher education. Proceedings of the CEUR Workshop Proceedings, Bolzano, IT, USA.
58. From play to understanding: Large language models in logic and spatial reasoning coloring activities for children10.3390/ai5040093 ↗
59. Lin, N., Wu, H., Zheng, W., Liao, X., Jiang, S., Yang, A., and Xiao, L. (2024, January 12–16). Indocl: Benchmarking indonesian language development assessment. Proceedings of the Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2024, Miami, FL, USA.10.18653/v1/2024.findings-emnlp.280 ↗
60. Quah, B., Zheng, L., Sng, T.J.H., Yong, C.W., and Islam, I. (2024). Reliability of chatgpt in automated essay scoring for dental undergraduate examinations. BMC Med Educ., 24.10.1186/s12909-024-05881-6 ↗
61. Henkel, O., Hills, L., Boxer, A., Roberts, B., and Levonian, Z. (2024, January 18–20). Can large language models make the grade? An empirical study evaluating llms ability to mark short answer questions in k-12 education. Proceedings of the Eleventh ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale, Atlanta, GA, USA.10.1145/3657604.3664693 ↗
62. Fine-tuning chatgpt for automatic scoring10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100210 ↗
63. An assessment framework of higher-order thinking skills based on fine-tuned large language models10.1016/j.eswa.2025.126531 ↗
64. Comparing chatgpt’s correction and feedback comments with that of educators in the context of primary students’ short essays written in english and greek10.1007/s10639-024-12912-8 ↗
65. Grading exams using large language models: A comparison between human and ai grading of exams in higher education using chatgpt10.1002/berj.4069 ↗
66. Gonzalez-Maldonado, D., Liu, J., and Franklin, D. (March, January 26). Evaluating gpt for use in k-12 block based cs instruction using a transpiler and prompt engineering. Proceedings of the 56th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1, SIGCSETS 2025, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.10.1145/3641554.3701910 ↗
67. Qiu, H., White, B., Ding, A., Costa, R., Hachem, A., Ding, W., and Chen, P. (2024, January 15–18). Stella: A structured grading system using llms with rag. Proceedings of the 2024 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (BigData), Washington, DC, USA.10.1109/BigData62323.2024.10825385 ↗
68. Gpt-4 in education: Evaluating aptness, reliability, and loss of coherence in solving calculus problems and grading submissions10.1007/s40593-024-00403-3 ↗
69. Utilizing large language models for efl essay grading: An examination of reliability and validity in rubric-based assessments10.1111/bjet.13494 ↗
70. Human versus machine: The effectiveness of chatgpt in automated essay scoring10.1080/14703297.2025.2469089 ↗
71. Zhu, M., and Zhang, K. (2025). Artificial intelligence for computer science education in higher education: A systematic review of empirical research published in 2003–2023. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, Springer.10.1007/s10758-025-09859-1 ↗
72. A systematic literature review on large language models applications in computer programming teaching evaluation process10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3584060 ↗
73. A systematic literature review of empirical research on chatgpt in education10.1007/s44217-024-00138-2 ↗
74. Exploring the application of chatgpt in esl/efl education and related research issues: A systematic review of empirical studies10.1186/s40561-024-00342-5 ↗
75. A systematic rapid review of empirical research on students’ use of chatgpt in higher education
76. Jukiewicz, M. (2025). A systematic comparison of Large Language Models for automated assignment assessment in programming education: Exploring the importance of architecture and vendor. arXiv.