Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study reviewed empirical research on generative artificial intelligence (GenAI)–based automated scoring using the Context–Intervention–Mechanism–Outcome framework. Descriptive quantitative evidence mapping synthesized findings from 47 studies published between 2023 and 2025. The results showed that research focused largely on tertiary English as a Second or Foreign Language context and English academic writing, with rubric-based and hybrid human–artificial-intelligence scoring models dominating current practice. Evidence indicates that several studies reported substantial agreement with human raters, while individual studies also described improvements in scoring efficiency and feedback delivery. However, reliability remained sensitive to several factors, and concerns persisted regarding score instability, higher-order writing assessment, fairness, transparency, and ethics. The review suggests that GenAI-based scoring has substantial potential but also presents important risks that require careful implementation and thorough consideration of its implications.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jessie Saraza Barrot (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: