evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice

Crowdmark — Canadian AI-Assisted Grading Platform Scaled Campus-Wide at the University of Waterloo

Canada · Waterloo · See the Canada profile

Crowdmark, a Toronto-founded grading platform, digitises exam marking with bulk-comment tools and analytics. Waterloo adopted it campus-wide after a pilot; vendor case studies cite faster grading, though headline time-savings are self-published, not independently audited.

Crowdmark — Canadian AI-Assisted Grading Platform Scaled Campus-Wide at the University of Waterloo

Details

Promoter
Crowdmark Inc. / University of Waterloo
Period
2012 founded (Toronto); 2014–15 Waterloo pilot; campus-wide from July 2015; case studies published 2018–2024
Keywords
higher education, grading and assessment technology, exam digitisation, feedback analytics

Description

Crowdmark is an online assessment and grading platform founded in 2012 in Toronto by University of Toronto mathematics professor James Colliander and Martin Muñoz. It lets instructors scan or collect digital student work, then grade question-by-question across an entire class at once, reuse comments from a shared library, and export analytics on item-level performance.

The University of Waterloo piloted Crowdmark for roughly 12 months before running a public request-for-proposals process; it selected Crowdmark in July 2015 and now offers it free to instructors campus-wide, integrated with the university's learning management system and with Odyssey exam-logistics software. Waterloo's Centre for Teaching Excellence publishes its own guidance page recommending the tool and citing an approximate 50% reduction in grading time, alongside faster feedback and more consistent marking across teams of multiple teaching assistants.

Separately, Crowdmark's own published case study reports that grading teams at Northwestern University (21,000 students, departments including Economics, Mathematics, Physics, Chemistry and Psychology) saved approximately 16,660 hours of grading time, a roughly 40% reduction, alongside fewer regrade requests attributed to richer, faster feedback. These headline figures originate from vendor-published case studies and named faculty testimonials rather than an independently audited or peer-reviewed trial, so they should be read as illustrative rather than causally proven. Waterloo's own guidance is candid that adoption has real costs: paper exams still require scanning, teaching assistants need training to grade consistently, and digital submission tends to raise students' expectations for feedback detail.

Read the full analysis: https://uwaterloo.ca/crowdmark/

Implementation

Implementation detail (cost, timeline, staffing, conditions for success) is not yet available for this practice.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Attachments

Similar practices you may find useful