In a large humanities lecture, Antigone is often the first serious text students meet. Enrollment can run into the hundreds, and each student owes a paper on Sophocles. The professor and a small team of teaching assistants then face a pile that no one can read carefully in a single week.

The challenge is not only volume. Different graders often read the same paper differently, so a student's score can depend on which TA they happened to get. Students notice, and so do department chairs.

At the college level, expectations also rise. Professors want evidence of close reading, engagement with the text in translation, and an ability to connect the play to broader questions of law and ethics.

These practices help large courses grade Antigone papers with more consistency and less strain.

Standardize Before the Papers Arrive

Consistency is built in advance, not during grading. Share a detailed rubric with every TA, and hold a norming session where everyone scores the same three or four sample papers. Discuss disagreements until the group agrees on what each level looks like.

• Distribute a rubric with clear descriptors at each score level
• Score sample papers together and compare results
• Write down the decisions made about borderline cases
• Agree on how to handle unusual interpretations of the play
• Set a shared timeline and a common comment style

Keep Comments Focused and Specific

Students in big courses rarely get much personal attention, so each comment carries weight. Limit feedback to the two or three most important issues, and tie them to rubric criteria. A student can act on a targeted note far more easily than on a page of scattered remarks.

Point to a specific passage or paragraph when possible. Vague praise and vague criticism both leave students guessing.

Check for Drift Across Graders and Time

Even with norming, scoring drifts as graders tire or as they meet unusual papers. Periodically have graders swap a few papers and compare results. Large gaps signal that the rubric or the training needs another look.

AI-assisted grading can serve as an additional consistency check by applying the same rubric to every paper. Instructors can compare its output with human scores to spot outliers worth a second read.

Use Feedback to Support Learning, Not Only Ranking

Even in a 300-student course, feedback can help students grow. Consider allowing a short revision for papers below a threshold, and use tools to speed up the first round of comments. Faster turnaround means students can apply feedback to the next assignment rather than forgetting it.

Professors and TAs who adopt these habits often find that grading becomes more predictable and less stressful. Students, in turn, tend to see the process as fair and transparent.