The buzz around “live marking” in education is undeniable. The promise of instant feedback, real-time engagement, and personalized learning seems alluring. But beneath the shiny surface, a closer look reveals both potential and pitfalls.

While live marking can offer immediate feedback and a chance for students to clarify misunderstandings, it raises questions about its long-term efficacy and practicality. The sheer volume of assessments, especially in large classrooms, might be overwhelming for educators, potentially leading to a superficial review rather than thorough feedback. Furthermore, the pressure to deliver instant feedback could compromise the depth and quality of assessment, impacting student learning.

Live marking also raises concerns about the potential for anxiety and pressure on students. The constant presence of the teacher’s gaze can be intimidating, potentially hindering creativity and critical thinking. Moreover, the immediacy of the feedback might lead to a focus on achieving the “right” answer rather than fostering a growth mindset.

Instead of blindly embracing live marking, a more nuanced approach is crucial. We must consider its potential benefits alongside its limitations. Integrating live marking with other assessment strategies, such as peer feedback and self-reflection, could create a more balanced learning experience.

Ultimately, the “cutting edge” label should not overshadow the importance of thoughtful design and implementation. Focusing on building a learning environment that nurtures deep understanding, encourages critical thinking, and supports student well-being should be our primary goal.