Why it works
Generative AI can produce feedback and suggest scores quickly, which can reduce the grading burden, but it does not truly understand a student, a context, or the nuance of the work, and it can be confidently wrong or generic. The responsible approach treats AI as a first-draft feedback tool the teacher always reviews and personalizes, keeps high-stakes grading decisions with the teacher, and protects student data.
The research: ISTE guidance on AI; research on feedback quality.
The run-of-show
Choose your slot. The agenda, timings, and length update to match.
The core activity: use AI to draft feedback, safely
Teachers leave having drafted and personalized AI-assisted feedback while keeping grading decisions their own.
- Pick a set of student work.
- Use AI to draft feedback on common patterns or to generate feedback options.
- Review and personalize every piece, correcting anything off.
- Keep the grading decision and any high-stakes judgment with you, and protect student data.
Facilitator notes
- Use AI as a reviewed drafting aid, and always personalize.
- Keep grading decisions human, and protect student data.
- Watch for generic or wrong feedback.
Adapt it
- <b>Elementary:</b> quick feedback drafts, teacher personalizes.
- <b>Secondary:</b> feedback on common errors and comment-drafting.
- <b>All settings:</b> reviewed, personalized, data-safe.
Participant handout
One page for every teacher. Print it, or save it as a PDF.
AI for Feedback: draft, review, personalize
<b>A reviewed aid:</b> draft feedback, personalize every piece, keep grading decisions and judgment yours.
- The student work:
- How I use AI to draft feedback:
- How I review and personalize every piece:
- How I keep the grading decision mine:
- How I protect student data:
Make it stick
Drafts, not decisions:
- AI drafts, you judge.
- Always personalize.
- Bring an AI-assisted feedback approach that worked to the next PLC.