A learning platform for quantitative courses
Providing conceptual feedback to students and grades for teaching team review.
For problems grounded in physics or logic.
- Math
- Physics
- Chemistry
- Engineering
- Economics
Consistent. Fair. Auditable.
Make the grading standard visible to the whole course team, with feedback a student can act on.
What a student receives
- The $12,000 arrives in year 8. Bring it to year 0 using 12,000 ÷ 1.08⁸ before adding it to the other present values.
- Course reference: time value of money — single future payment.
“Partial process correct” leaves the important part unsaid.
Which concept did the student demonstrate? What is still missing? A useful rubric makes that distinction explicit, instead of leaving it in the grader’s head.
Read our grading commitments →Concepts specific to the question
In the example above, all cash flows must be compared at the same point in time. The feedback names the missing step: discount the future salvage value.
Errors that recur across questions
Arithmetic slips, transcription errors, and missing units need explicit course rules, too. Reuse those rules where they apply, with the concept and its credit kept distinct.
A missing concept and an arithmetic slip call for different feedback.
One course standard, whoever joins the grading team.
Course materials, explicit criteria, and reviewed decisions give the team a shared basis for feedback and grades. New graders can inspect the standard and the reasoning behind it.
- Consistent
- A reviewed rule applies across matching work. When staff change a rule, affected responses can be checked again.
- Fair
- Credit follows what the work demonstrates. An equivalent method should receive equivalent credit.
- Auditable
- The work, applied rubric criterion, feedback, and staff ruling stay connected so a decision can be inspected and corrected.
See what needs attention across the class.
When feedback names a concept, the course team can see where that gap recurs. A class summary brings those patterns together to help staff decide what to revisit.
See the class summary →Meet Leaf, the agent doing the work.
Leaf prepares the rubric, feedback, and proposed grades from your course materials. Course staff resolve judgment calls, review the results, and decide when to release them.
Follow one assignment →See it on your course’s work.
Start with one assignment, relevant course materials, and one staff reviewer. Inspect the rubric, conceptual feedback, proposed grades, and decisions together.