No More Marking Helpdesk
  • English
Go to website
Back
Articles on:What is AI-enhanced CJ?
Super-charging Comparative Judgment

Categories

  • GDPR
  • What is AI-enhanced CJ?
  • GCSE Mock Calendar
  • Getting Started
  • Users
  • National Tasks
  • Custom Tasks
  • Candidates
  • Scanning
  • Typed Tasks
  • Judging
  • Results
  • Audio Feedback
  • Feedback Reports
  • Common Issues
  • Subscription
  • Writing Progression
  • Writing Hub
  • Automark
  • Oracy
  • CJ Lightning
  • CJ Dynamo
  • What is AI-Enhanced Comparative Judgement (CJ)?
    AI-Enhanced CJ is a specific method for assessing student writing that combines the strengths of human judgment with the speed of Artificial Intelligence, using the established technique of Comparative Judgement. Here's how it works: Core Method - Comparative Judgement: Instead of assigning an absolute mark (like 7/10 or Grade B), judges (both human and AI) are shown two pieces of student writing side-by-side and simply decide which one is "better." This process is repeated many times. 2Few readers
  • Human judging with AI transcriptions
    Some students' handwriting can be hard to read, which can lead to human teachers judging their work unfairly. We have a new AI feature that will help overcome this human bias. Human judges can now easily view a typed transcript of each students' response. The transcript is generated by AI. At the bottom left of each response are two new buttons, which look like this. Click on them to toggle beFew readers
  • Setting Up AI Judging
    If you are taking part in a national task with AI judging, you need to Accept the AI GDPR and then you can request that some proportion of your decisions are completed by AI. Here is what you need to do. Click on your judging panel: (https://storage.crisp.chat/users/helpdesk/website/-/2/d/5/d/2d5d0b5095261a00/screenshot-2025-04-30-at-12464y9aj3t.png =400x92) You will now see a slider. By default, if you have acceptedFew readers
  • Monitoring AI Agreement
    Whereas in the past we used a statistic called judge infit to monitor judging quality, when you only make a few judgements and the majority are made by AI, the infit statistic is no longer reliable. We propose instead that you use the AI agreement report to monitor judging quality. You can see the agreement per teacher on the judging dashboard: (https://storage.crisp.chat/users/helpdesk/website/-/2/d/5/d/2d5d0b5095261a00/screenshot-2025-06-09-at-155053y63nk.png =400x371) The column AI agreeFew readers

Not finding what you are looking for?

Chat with us or send us an email.

  • Chat with us
  • Send us an email
© 2025 No More Marking Helpdesk