An inbox with a clear next step.
See what is available, assigned to you, in progress or waiting for review. Preparation, ownership and the next action stay visible, so your team can pick up the right work.
EDUMARK / MARKING STUDIOGive every decision
Give every decision
the attention it deserves.
A calmer place to mark. Bring the learner’s work, assessment criteria, feedback and review into one connected workflow. Let AI help with the first pass. Keep the judgement with your people.
Mark online or in a document. AI assistance is optional and in Beta.Marking StudioIllustrative example
EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICEGood judgement starts with the evidence.
In reviewOriginal submission01 / 03
QUESTION 01
How did the evidence inform your recommendation?
I compared the absence data with feedback from our team. The figures showed when absence increased; the interviews helped explain why.
I considered three options against cost, impact and how easily we could change course. This led me to recommend a small pilot before making a wider change.
1 Evidence linked to AC 2.1
Criteria & feedbackAC 2.1
Use evidence to inform decisions
AI suggestion · unconfirmed
The response connects quantitative data with staff feedback and explains the recommendation.
MARKER FEEDBACK
You explain how the two sources informed your decision. Develop the comparison by discussing the limitations of each source.
Draft savedA person reviews and confirms the decision.
Original work in view Feedback in context Checks beside the evidence People own the decision
ROOM TO THINKEverything you need.
Everything you need.
One piece of work at a time.
From choosing the next submission to writing the final feedback, the studio keeps the detail close and the next step clear.
The original, always in context.
Review the submitted work alongside the question, criteria and evidence. Move through the assessment without losing sight of what the learner actually submitted.
Feedback where it makes sense.
Record marks or criterion outcomes, write feedback against the work and bring the overall response together. Saved drafts let you return to the decision you were making.
A useful starting point. Yours to review.
Where AI is enabled, inspect proposed marks, rationale and feedback against the available evidence. Accept, adjust or reject suggestions as part of your own review.
SUBMITTED WORKThe original
MARKING COPY
Your feedback.Their work.
AC 2.1 · Marker feedback
A clear connection between the evidence and your recommendation.
Returned to the submission
YOUR WAY OF WORKINGAt home in the studio.
At home in the studio.
Or in your document.
Some markers prefer to work on screen. Others think best with a document in front of them. There is room for both.
- 01
Choose your marking method
Work in EduMark, or download a marking copy where the assessment allows it. Supported copies can carry AI suggestions with them.
- 02
Bring the marked work back
Upload your completed copy. Follow its progress and see anything that needs attention as the marking is recorded against the submission.
- 03
Keep the review connected
The work stays part of the same marking and moderation journey. Check the recorded result and returned file before release.
Document actions depend on assessment settings, permissions and file support. Review the output and any flagged content during Beta.
CONFIDENCE, WITH CONTEXTThe mark is only
The mark is only
part of the decision.
Understand the submission, involve the right people and keep a clear record of how the result was reached.
Integrity belongs beside the work.
Review available similarity and AI-content reports alongside the submission. Assignment rules determine whether a concern holds work, requests resubmission or flags it for review.
Explore EduMark IntegrityA clear route through review.
Use second marking, reconciliation and moderation when configured. Named reviewers and explicit release steps keep responsibility visible throughout the process.
Explore EduMark JourneysHistory that stays with the attempt.
Keep recorded decisions, feedback and corrections in context. Review earlier attempts when work is resubmitted, without confusing an old result with the current submission.
Explore writing history & replayAI suggests. Your people decide.
AI Beta can support marking; a named human confirms the decision. Integrity reports inform a review. They do not decide whether misconduct occurred.
A FEW PRACTICAL QUESTIONSBefore you
Before you
step inside.
Can we mark without AI?
Yes. Mark in EduMark using your own judgement, or use the document workflow where the assessment allows it. AI assistance is optional. Your assessment settings and permissions determine which actions are available.
Does AI make the final decision?
No. AI Beta offers proposed marks and feedback for a person to review. A named human confirms the marking, and the assessment’s moderation and release rules still apply. An integrity score is a signal for review, not a finding of misconduct.
Can markers work in a document?
Where enabled, download a marking copy, add marks and feedback, then upload the marked work. EduMark records the returned marking and shows its progress or anything that needs attention. Supported copies can include AI suggestions. Document support varies, so check the returned file and any flagged or unmapped content.
How does it fit with moderation and resubmissions?
Marking Studio keeps the submission attempt, recorded decisions and feedback together. Second marking, reconciliation and moderation are available when configured. Corrections and resubmissions follow the assessment’s rules, keeping earlier attempts and their decisions in context.
Can we try it with our own assessment?
Yes. Open a demo organisation to explore the workflow, or start a trial to try your own assessment, grading criteria and review process with your team.
LESS ADMIN. MORE ATTENTION.Bring your next assessment.
Bring your next assessment.
See how marking could feel.
Explore the workflow in a demo, or try your own assessment with your team.