How to set up who can grade an assessment — and how to design it so the grading itself is consistent.
Any assessment with subjective responses — short answer, file upload, video coaching — depends on a human grader. Who's eligible to grade determines two things: whether grading happens on time, and whether two learners doing equivalent work get equivalent scores.
Without the right setup, grading can produce either bottlenecks (one person responsible for hundreds of submissions) or inconsistency (different graders applying different standards).
The Grading Process
Continu doesn't assign each submission to a specific grader. Instead, you define who's eligible to grade — manager, buddy, assigned graders, or any combination — and any eligible grader can pick up any submission. The first eligible grader to complete a score is the grader of record. The submission is done from there; no other grader needs to touch it.
More eligible graders means more capacity (more people available to clear the queue), not load-balanced assignments. Pick the right grader sources and the right number of people for the work.
Who Can Grade an Assessment
Continu supports three grader sources. You can enable any combination.
1. Manager Grading. The learner's assigned manager is eligible to grade their submission.
Used for skill demonstrations where the manager is closest to the capability — a sales rep's pitch graded by their sales manager, a support agent's scenario response graded by their team lead. Requires that managers are set up in Continu (via SCIM, HRIS sync, or direct assignment).
2. Buddy Grading. The learner's designated buddy is eligible to grade their submission.
Used for peer-learning programs and partner programs where you need grading capacity beyond the manager. Common in onboarding programs (a more senior peer reviews new hire work) and partner programs (a regional buddy grades partner submissions). Requires that each learner has a buddy assigned in Continu.
3. Assigned Graders. A list of specific users designated as eligible graders for this assessment. Any user on this list can grade any submission to this assessment.
Used for centralized programs where you want consistent grading — a compliance certification graded by a small expert team, a sales certification graded by enablement, a technical assessment graded by SMEs. This is the highest-control option and the one to use when grading consistency matters more than capacity.
Setting Up Assigned Graders
The assigned graders list is set per assessment. To add graders:
1. Click + Add Graders. Opens the grader picker.
2. Search for the user. You can search by Name, Department, Location, Team, or other user attributes. Useful for adding entire grading teams at once (e.g., all members of the Enablement department).
3. Add them to the list. Click the + icon next to a user to make them an eligible grader. Add as many as the assessment needs.
To remove a grader, click the red trash can icon next to their name. Removal takes effect immediately — they're no longer eligible to pick up new submissions. Already-graded submissions stay graded.
Notifications
Each grader source has a matching notification toggle:
Notify Managers of Grading. Manager gets a notification (email + Slack, depending on integration) when a direct report's assessment is ready to grade.
Notify Buddy of Grading. Buddy gets the same notification when their buddy's submission is ready.
Pair the grader toggle with its notification toggle. Without the notification, eligible graders don't know there's work to do — submissions can sit in the queue and learners wait for feedback they don't know is pending.
Configuration Pitfalls
Eligible Graders Without a Rubric. The most common source of grading inconsistency. Two graders applying their own internal standards to the same response will produce different scores. Write the rubric before turning on grader automations. For video coaching especially, the rubric is what makes "good" objective.
Mixed Grader Sources Without Calibration. Enabling Manager + Buddy + Assigned Graders at the same time creates three different grader populations who may apply three different standards. If you mix sources, run a 15-minute calibration with all graders walking through the rubric and 2–3 sample responses before the program goes live.
Single Grader as Bottleneck. When only one person is eligible to grade on a high-volume program, there's no one else to pick up the work and submissions back up. Either expand the grader list to 3–5 people, or restrict the assessment volume (cap enrollment, stage cohorts).
Notifications Without an SLA. The notification creates an expectation that an eligible grader will respond. A defined SLA — 5 business days is common — communicated to both graders and learners keeps grading timely and predictable.
Adding Graders Mid-Program Without Calibration. A new grader joining an active program may apply different standards than the calibrated team — and since they're immediately eligible to pick up submissions, that inconsistency can land fast. Calibrate any grader added mid-program before they start grading.
Where This Fits
Grader settings live inside the assessment's Settings tab, alongside the toggles that decide what a learner sees (grade, correct answers, retakes). Configure the learner-facing settings first — those decide what the assessment is — then come back to grader settings to decide who scores it.
See Also
- Assessments: Designing Knowledge Checks That Are Useful — strategic anchor for the broader framework.
- Assessment Settings — the learner-facing settings (grade visibility, retakes, certificates).
- Setting up Grading Criteria for Video Assessments — the rubric piece that makes grading consistent.
- Grade a Video Assessment — the actual grading automation once a submission lands.
Eligible graders determine whether grading is on time and on standard. Design before you launch.