Governing AI-Assisted Assessment in Marketing Education: A Role-Based Typology and Pratical Guidelines

This article examines how marketing educators and programs can govern artificial intelligence (AI) used for assessing student work. AI denotes the broader category of computational systems that predict, classify, interpret, or support decisions; generative AI (GenAI) denotes the subset of those systems that produces new content, such as feedback, rubric interpretations, assessment summaries, and grade rationales. The distinction matters because governance requirements follow from the authority an output is permitted to exercise rather than from whether the system is generative. Marketing provides a particularly revealing context because its assessments often require students to integrate analytical evidence, creative choice, audience-sensitive communication, and defensible managerial judgment. Drawing on research on marketing education, assessment, legitimacy, procedural justice, and algorithmic judgment, the article develops a role-based typology of AI-assisted assessment. The typology distinguishes five roles (Assistant, Evaluator, Arbiter, Monitor, and Governor) according to the authority AI exercises over assessment judgment and the scope across which its consequences extend. Legitimacy determines the governance burden associated with each role, including requirements for explanation, oversight, evidence, accountability, and contestability. The article then provides practical guidelines for classifying AI uses and determining whether a particular role is defensible given the learning objective, assessment stakes, and institutional context.