# An LLM -Powered Assessment Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) For Higher Education

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.06141 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.06141/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Agentic RAG, agents and memory, one of 15 directions in Retrieval-augmented generation.
- Builds on 4 of its 44 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 5 Jan 2026.

## Placed in

- Retrieval-augmented generation / [Agentic RAG, agents and memory](https://mlsanity.com/rag/agentic-rag-agents-and-memory/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 4 of 4)

- [Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.11401/) (2020)
- [Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Large Language Models: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.10997/) (2023)
- [A Survey on Large Language Models for Recommendation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.19860/) (2023)
- [GAIDE: A Framework for Using Generative AI to Assist in Course Content Development](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.12276/) (2023)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Providing timely, consistent, and high-quality feedback in large-scale higher education courses remains a persistent challenge, often constrained by instructor workload and resource limitations. This study presents an LLM-powered, agentic assessment system built on a Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) architecture to address these challenges. The system integrates a large language model with a structured retrieval mechanism that accesses rubric criteria, exemplar essays, and instructor feedback to generate contextually grounded grades and formative comments. A mixed-methods evaluation was conducted using 701 student essays, combining quantitative analyses of inter-rater reliability, scoring alignment, and consistency with instructor assessments, alongside qualitative evaluation of feedback quality, pedagogical relevance, and student support. Results demonstrate that the RAG system can produce reliable, rubric-aligned feedback at scale, achieving 94--99% agreement with human evaluators, while also enhancing students' opportunities for self-regulated learning and engagement with assessment criteria. The discussion highlights both pedagogical limitations, including potential constraints on originality and feedback dialogue, and the transformative potential of RAG systems to augment instructors' capabilities, streamline assessment workflows, and support scalable, adaptive learning environments. This research contributes empirical evidence for the application of agentic AI in higher education, offering a scalable and pedagogically informed model for enhancing feedback accessibility, consistency, and quality.