Evidence-backed feedback drafts, guided by your academic judgement.
LecturerMate helps turn briefs, rubrics, submissions and marking guidance into editable feedback drafts, evidence maps, moderation notes and student-facing draft comments — with you in control of the final mark.
Not an auto-grader. LecturerMate supports drafting and review; the final academic decision stays with you.
- •Clear rationale linking findings to literature
- •Method section addresses validity concerns
- •Limited critical comparison of competing models
- •Conclusions partially supported by results
A strong submission with a confident method and clear analytical voice. To reach a higher band, broaden the comparative critique and tighten the link between results and final conclusions.
You can often judge the band quickly. Writing the evidence-backed rationale takes the time.
Lecturers spend hours linking comments to criteria, finding supporting evidence, preparing moderation rationale and shaping feedback that is useful for students. LecturerMate helps prepare the draft paperwork — you keep the judgement.
Before LecturerMate
- Manual evidence gathering
- Rewriting feedback repeatedly
- Moderation rationale takes time
- Feedback consistency can vary
With LecturerMate
- Draft evidence map aligned to criteria
- Editable rationale generated
- Student-facing feedback draft prepared
- Lecturer reviews, edits and approves
A workflow built around lecturer judgement.
- STEP 01
Upload brief, criteria and submission
Use your existing assessment materials. LecturerMate adapts to rubrics, learning outcomes, descriptors or other marking guidance.
- STEP 02
Draft evidence map generated for review
Criteria, learning outcomes or descriptors are mapped to relevant passages and signals where evidence is available.
- STEP 03
Review provisional mark and rationale
Check the suggested band, supporting evidence and points that may limit a higher mark.
- STEP 04
Edit, confirm and approve
Adjust wording, add private notes and confirm the final grade as the lecturer.
Built around academic judgement.
LecturerMate supports feedback drafting and review. It does not replace institutional marking policies, moderation requirements or final academic judgement.
Lecturer confirms every grade
No feedback is treated as final until the lecturer has reviewed and approved it.
Draft outputs are editable before use
Edit the mark, rationale, evidence points, private notes and student-facing feedback before approval.
Student-facing feedback is kept separate
Student-facing feedback drafts are kept separate from marks, confidence language and internal moderation notes where possible.
Private marker notes stay internal
Keep moderation notes, uncertainty, borderline reasoning and internal checks separate from the student-facing copy.
Evidence map supports moderation
Draft rationales can be linked back to criteria and submitted work to support review.
Usage history supports review
Credit usage and generation status are recorded to help users understand activity during the pilot.
A clearer evidence trail to support each feedback draft.
Evidence map
Suggested links between criteria and relevant passages in the submission.
Rubric analysis
Draft criterion-level analysis based on the marking guidance provided.
Moderation summary
A structured rationale prepared for review, moderation and second marking.
Student-facing feedback draft
Plain-language draft feedback that can be reviewed and edited before sharing.
Private marker notes
A separate space for internal reasoning, risks, uncertainties and checks.
Usage history
A record of generated drafts and credit activity to support pilot review.
Designed for controlled academic workflows.
Assessment materials, drafts and feedback are tied to the user workspace. LecturerMate is designed around clear ownership, editable drafts and lecturer approval before anything is treated as final.
- Uploaded files and generated drafts stay linked to the user workspace.
- Drafts are editable before approval.
- Student-facing feedback can be separated from internal moderation notes.
- Usage records can support review during the pilot.
- Identifier masking is best-effort and does not guarantee full anonymisation.
- Only upload material you are permitted to process.
Reduce time spent drafting rationale.
Spend more time applying judgement.
Bring an assessment in, review an evidence-mapped draft, and stay in control of every mark you confirm.