Time: ~15–20 min on one student's feedback the first time; ~3–5 min per student with practice
Pairs with: Evaluating AI-Generated Feedback: A Five-Part Protocol
What this is for
A one-page printable reference of the five-part evaluation protocol. Keep it beside the Review & Transform screen until the protocol becomes a habit. The full reasoning behind each check is in Evaluating AI-Generated Feedback: A Five-Part Protocol.
Before sending any AI-generated feedback, run all five checks
1. Student-Focus Check
Does this feedback serve THIS student, or any student?
- Individual context — reflects this student's level, progress, struggles?
- Actionability — vocabulary, prerequisites, complexity match this student?
- Tone — matches what this student needs (encouragement / challenge / reassurance / direct critique)?
- Cognitive load — number of improvement areas right for this student? (2–3 ceiling)
- Relational warmth — recognisable as coming from you?
- Growth acknowledgment — progress, risk, or difficulty visible?
2. Curriculum-Sensitivity Check
Right language for the framework students are being taught in?
- Terminology accuracy — Criterion A / Row A / marking scheme / AO + command words, as appropriate
- Standards alignment — addresses the criteria/AOs this assignment is marked against
- Assessment preparation — helps the student succeed on the curriculum's own assessments
- Curriculum-specific skills — IB ATL, AP disciplinary practices, etc.
- Progression stage — expectations match where students are in the course
3. Grade Verification
Does the suggested score actually fit the descriptor and the work?
- Initial agreement — read the suggested grade. Match your impression?
- Criterion-by-criterion — open the descriptor; compare to the writing
- Reason for override (if disagreeing) — note the reason in one line
- Feedback–grade alignment — tone matches the grade?
4. Essential Teacher Additions
What does this feedback need that only you can know?
- Personal knowledge — recent conversations, prior work, current circumstances?
- Classroom context — discussions, lessons, peer examples, resources?
- Relational elements — specific praise, acknowledgment of difficulty, observation?
- Strategic guidance — upcoming lessons, resources to consult, office hours?
5. Red Flags — STOP if any appear
- ⛔ Factual claim about the work that is wrong
- ⛔ Tone that would undermine the relationship
- ⛔ Any hint of bias or stereotype
- ⛔ Comments focused on the student as a person rather than the work
- ⛔ Wrong curriculum terminology
Reflection
After each batch, note one pattern:
Something the system did well: ______________________________
Something I had to adjust: ___________________________________
Patterns that recur usually point back to the rubric or template setup, not the individual feedback.