← Part of our AI marking platform
AI marking in schools and colleges
Cut workload without handing grades to a black box. Feedback Flows follows your mark schemes, respects UK data expectations, and keeps final grades with qualified educators.
- GCSE, A-Level & vocational
- ICO registered
- Teacher-in-control review
- DPA-ready for schools
What AI marking in schools looks like
In a typical department, a teacher uploads a Year 10 mock set or a coursework draft pack, selects the shared rubric, and lets AI draft criterion-level comments and suggested bands. They then skim borderline scripts, edit tone where needed, and release feedback when ready—often the same day instead of the following weekend. Students still receive comments written against the school’s descriptors, not generic praise from a chat window.
For teachers focused on reclaiming evenings, see AI marking for teachers and AI feedback for teachers. For the product-wide overview, start with the AI marking platform guide.
Why UK schools look for AI marking
Department for Education workload surveys consistently show marking and feedback among the top time sinks for teachers. Generic AI chat tools are not built for assessment: they ignore your rubric, produce vague praise, and create moderation risk. UK schools need AI marking that aligns to GCSE, A-Level, BTEC, and vocational criteria—not a one-size-fits-all paragraph generator.
Feedback Flows applies your descriptors, supports batch cohort marking, and exports evidence for internal QA—whether you are a single department pilot or a MAT rolling out consistent practice trust-wide. Compare approaches in our article AI marking vs manual marking.
GCSE, A-Level, and vocational use
Secondary English, humanities, sixth form, FE and ITP teams use the same teacher-in-control workflow.
Mock and exam seasons
Batch-mark extended responses against the same rubric across a year group.
Coursework and NEA drafts
Formative feedback before final submission, with teacher review on every script.
Vocational & EPA-ready evidence
Structured comments that support internal QA and external sampling.
Cross-department consistency
Shared rubric libraries for MATs and federations.
Learner packs and follow-up
Targeted worksheets from rubric gaps, not generic revision lists.
Integrity alongside marking
Optional style comparison and reference checks in the same platform.
Privacy, ICO registration, and school DPAs
This is the canonical home for Feedback Flows’ UK school data and governance detail.
UK schools must scrutinise how pupil data is processed. Feedback Flows Ltd is ICO registered. Student submissions are handled over encrypted connections; we do not sell data or use your content to train public AI models. Schools (or training providers) remain the controller of student data; we process it on your instructions under our Data Processing Agreement.
Read our Privacy Policy, legal hub, and governance articles on AI in schools: best practices and safe and responsible AI in classrooms before rollout.
Teacher-in-control marking
AI drafts suggested marks and feedback; you edit, moderate, and publish. That model fits departmental sampling, trust QA calendars, and awarding-organisation expectations that AI must not determine outcomes alone.
AI marking for MATs → For ITPs →How to pilot AI marking in a department
Pick one assignment type and one rubric your team already trusts.
Compare AI drafts to a human-marked sample—band fit and comment usefulness.
Agree moderation rules with your department or phase lead.
Brief staff and, where policy requires, inform students or parents.
Scale to batch marking, then widen to other year groups or subjects.
Choosing a vendor? Read how to choose AI marking software in the UK.
Frequently asked questions
Try AI marking in your school
Free welcome credits for individual educators; custom pricing for schools and trusts.