We believe in transparency. Rather than making vague claims, we publish real accuracy data — tested against official examiner marks — so you can decide for yourself.
| Metric | Graded Pro | Human Markers* |
|---|---|---|
| Quadratic Weighted Kappa | 0.97 | Varies by subject |
| Correlation with examiner | 0.97 | ~0.70 |
| Average error — structured questions | 0.26 marks | Not published |
| Average error — essay questions | ~2 marks | 5.6 marks |
| Statistically different from examiner? | No (p = 0.12) | Yes |
*Human marker data from a Cambridge Assessment study: 200 English scripts marked by a chief examiner were independently re-marked by experienced markers. Graded Pro results are based on 387 questions across IGCSE Higher Maths (13 students) and GCSE English Language Paper 2, compared against official examiner marks. No mark schemes or student work were adjusted in any way.
All results are from real examination papers, compared against the actual marks awarded by the official examiner. The only inputs were the students' work and the official mark scheme — nothing was adjusted or modified.
Our system excels on questions with defined correct answers — the kind that make up the majority of assessments. Across 356 structured questions in both maths and English:
Whether it's a 1-mark calculation or an 11-mark multi-step problem, the AI consistently matches professional marking standards.
Levelled questions — where markers use band descriptors to assess quality — are harder for any marker, human or AI. Our system uses a structured levelling process modelled on how trained markers work: identify the best-fit level, then position within it.
AI marking is not a replacement for your professional judgement — it's a tool that handles the heavy lifting so you can focus on what matters.
Short-answer questions, calculations, retrieval tasks, and structured responses across all subjects. On these question types, the AI marking is highly reliable and ready to use as-is.
Extended writing and essay-style responses at the very top of the mark range. The AI occasionally under-marks the strongest responses by a few marks. A quick review of your highest-performing students' work is good practice.
Use AI marking to get a fast, accurate first pass across a full class set. Moderate a sample — just as you would with any marking — and adjust where needed. Teachers who use this approach typically report saving 50–70% of their marking time.
Our accuracy benchmarks are based on formal examination papers, but Graded Pro is built for everyday marking across all types of student work. The same AI that matches chief examiner standards on exam scripts delivers consistent, rubric-linked feedback on:
Wherever there's a rubric or mark scheme, Graded Pro delivers accurate, detailed feedback — whether the stakes are high or the goal is simply helping students learn from their work.
We continuously test and improve our marking accuracy. We don't claim perfection — no marker, human or AI, achieves that. What we do promise is transparency about where the system performs well and where it has limitations, so you can use it with confidence.
Sign up for a free trial with 150 free credits and test it on your own papers.
Start Free TrialNo credit card required
Teacher Free
Try Graded Pro risk free
$0
150 Credits Free
50 FREE Credits / Month - Max 50
Full Graded Pro Toolkit
Email Support
Single User
Teacher Pro
Best Choice for Busy Teachers
$25
6000 Credits
No Expiration Date
Access to all Features
Priority Email Support
Single User
School Account
Whole School or Departments
Custom Quote
Pooled Credits
No Expiration Date
All Features + User Dashboard
Dedicated Manager
Multiple Users
The number of credits needed to mark each student's work depends on the amount of text and images submitted, whether the work is handwritten or typed, and the level of feedback required.
Basic task
1¢
~3 credits
In-depth task
~3¢
8–10 credits
Full exam marking
~10¢
~30 credits
Weekly grading for 125 students (e.g. 5 classes) requires around 4,500 credits per month.