Short answer: no — and you shouldn't want it to. Feeding a pupil's actual work into a public AI tool risks a data protection breach if it's identifiable, and produces weak feedback anyway: the AI hasn't seen your lesson, your success criteria, or the child's starting point. Marking is judgement, and the judgement stays with you.
What AI legitimately does around marking
Plenty. It can build banks of specific, actionable feedback phrases for common error types that you select from instead of writing fresh each time. It can turn the patterns you noticed after marking a set of books into a structured whole-class feedback sheet. It can draft an answer key alongside a quiz to speed the checking. All of this makes marking faster without AI ever seeing a child's work. Our feedback guide covers each technique.
What about dedicated marking platforms?
Purpose-built AI marking tools with proper education data terms exist and are a legitimate procurement decision for a school — through a DPIA and your DPO, per our procurement checklist. That's a considered school-level choice, entirely different from a teacher pasting Year 4 writing into ChatGPT.