AI for Formative Assessment: Feedback That Fuels Growth

AI for formative assessment is not about robots grading kids while you sip coffee in the corner.

It is about something quieter and more powerful. Turning those tiny moments of "Do they actually get this?" into clear, actionable information you can use right away, without sacrificing your planning period or your sanity.

If you have ever stared at a stack of exit tickets at 5:30 p.m. and thought, "There has to be a better way," you are exactly who this is for.

Why AI for formative assessment matters right now

The gap between what students need and what time allows

Students do not learn in nice, clean unit chunks. They learn in half-understandings, misconceptions, and "I thought I got it, but now I am not sure."

To teach well, you need frequent, low-stakes checks for understanding. Not just for grades, but to adjust instruction tomorrow, or even in the next 10 minutes.

The problem is not that teachers do not know how to do this. You already use exit tickets, thumbs up/down, quick writes, mini whiteboards, and quick quizzes.

The problem is time.

You have 30 students, 5 periods, multiple preps, and a handful of students with IEPs that ask for very specific accommodations. Each kid needs slightly different feedback. You might even know exactly what you want to say to them. You just cannot say it 150 times per week in writing.

That gap, between what students really need and what time allows, is exactly where AI for formative assessment can help.

How better formative checks change learning, not just grades

Formative assessment is not a grading strategy. It is a steering wheel.

When your checks for understanding are frequent, targeted, and clear, three things happen:

1. You catch misconceptions when they are still tiny.
2. Students start seeing learning as a process, not a judgment.
3. You make smarter choices about what to reteach, skip, or extend.

Imagine a unit on fractions.

Without strong formative checks, you might discover at the test that 40 percent of your class never really understood equivalent fractions. Everyone feels bad. You reteach in a rush. Pacing goes out the window.

With strong, quick formative checks, you notice on day 2 that students can shade models but cannot explain why 2/4 and 1/2 are equivalent. You regroup them the next day and target that exact gap. The final assessment stops being a surprise. It becomes confirmation.

AI will not care more about your students than you do. It can, however, help you generate and process those day-to-day checks so you can use your energy on what only humans can do. Interpret. Encourage. Coach.

The hidden cost of doing all formative assessment by hand

Where your planning time really goes

Think about your last unit.

How much of your planning time went to designing questions, exit tickets, quick quizzes, and rubrics, instead of actually thinking:

• Which misconception will probably show up here?
• How will I respond if half the class misses question 3?
• What will I do for the 3 kids who are already ready to move on?

Most teachers underestimate how much time dies in the "blank page" phase.

Staring at a Google Doc. Trying to think of six decent questions that are not all the same level. Repeating the same type of feedback comment in different words. Copying and pasting "Remember to show your work" for the 24th time.

This is real cognitive load. It is not glamorous. It does not always require your professional judgment. It just eats your time.

What gets lost when feedback is rushed or inconsistent

When you are rushing, your feedback gets shorter and more generic. Students notice.

"Good job." "Check your work." "Need more detail."

That is not feedback. That is noise.

Worse, it is inconsistent. One student gets a rich, specific comment because you had a minute to think. Another gets "careful" because you were on quiz number 112 and needed to leave.

Over time, students decide feedback is not especially useful. Or they believe the story that "I am just bad at math" or "I am not a good writer," because the pattern they see is a grade and a vague comment, not clear next steps.

This is the quiet cost of doing everything manually. It is not just your energy. It is the quality and equity of feedback kids receive.

AI will not solve inequity on its own. But it can reduce the randomness of who gets your best thinking and who gets your fastest comment.

What AI can (and can’t) do for your quizzes, rubrics, and feedback

Turning your curriculum into quick checks for understanding

Here is where AI actually shines.

Feed it your curriculum, your standards, or even a specific lesson, and it can draft:

• 3 exit ticket questions targeting different levels of understanding
• A 5-question quiz aligned to your objective
• One open-ended prompt plus a simple rubric

Imagine you paste in:

"Today’s objective: Students will be able to identify the main idea and at least two supporting details in a nonfiction paragraph at a 6th grade reading level."

You ask an AI tool like SchoolGPT to create:

• Two multiple-choice questions that check basic comprehension
• One short answer that requires identifying the main idea
• One question asking students to explain why a detail is or is not supportive

You are not starting from scratch. You are starting from something.

You can then edit. Tweak wording to match your style. Swap in a topic that will grab your specific group of kids. Remove a question that is technically correct but not quite what you want to emphasize.

AI is not deciding your objective or your standard. It is accelerating the part that used to take you 20 to 40 minutes per lesson.

[!TIP] Treat AI as a first draft assistant, not a test generator. The magic is in your edits.

Using AI to draft clear rubrics and student-friendly feedback

Rubrics are deceptively hard to write.

Too vague and kids do not know what they are aiming for. Too detailed and you are buried in tiny distinctions you cannot consistently score.

AI can help you:

• Turn a standard into a 3 or 4 level rubric
• Rewrite rubric language in student-friendly terms
• Create example comments for common performance levels

For example, you might paste your existing rubric descriptor:

"Demonstrates partial understanding of the concept, with some errors in reasoning and incomplete explanations."

You ask AI to rewrite it at a 5th grade reading level. You get:

"You show that you kind of get the idea, but some of your thinking is mixed up. Your answers are not fully explained."

Now your rubric is something you can share with students and families, especially for IEP meetings or progress updates.

Same with feedback. You can paste a student response, tell AI what the standard is, and ask for:

• One sentence of encouragement
• One clear next step
• One question to push their thinking

You still review it. You decide if it fits the student. You hit send or write your own version. But you are editing, not inventing from scratch.

Keeping teacher judgment at the center

Here is the line you cannot cross.

AI can analyze text and see patterns in answers. It cannot see the student who lost a family member last month. It cannot notice that the quiet kid in the back is suddenly taking risks they never took before.

There are things AI should not do:

• Diagnose learning disabilities
• Decide grades
• Override your judgment about a student’s capabilities
• Replace your communication with families

What it can do is make your judgment more visible.

You can use AI to:

• Draft three versions of feedback and then pick the one that fits
• Generate sample responses that help you calibrate your scoring
• Spot common misconceptions across a set of responses, which you then confirm with your own reading

The rule of thumb: AI can propose. You dispose.

If a tool tries to skip you in the loop, or hides its reasoning, that is a red flag.

How AI can lighten the load around IEPs and diverse learners

Designing checks for understanding that match IEP goals

Special education documentation is both crucial and time-consuming.

IEPs often have specific academic and behavior goals. "Student will solve two-step word problems with 80 percent accuracy given visual supports." Or "Student will write a 3-sentence paragraph with a topic sentence and details with 3 or fewer prompts."

Creating targeted formative checks for these goals takes time you rarely have.

AI can help you:

• Turn an IEP goal into 3 to 5 quick progress-monitoring items
• Adjust those items to be more visual, more scaffolded, or more concise
• Suggest ways to collect data in regular class activities rather than separate tasks

For example, you might ask SchoolGPT:

"Create 4 math word problems aligned to this IEP goal. Include visual supports I can describe or add to slides. Keep the language at a 3rd grade level."

You then skim, pick the 2 that match your student’s interests and current level, and you are ready to go.

Adapting questions, reading levels, and supports in minutes

You know how to scaffold. You just do not have time to do it for every student, every day.

AI can quickly:

• Rewrite a reading passage at a lower Lexile while preserving content
• Simplify question wording without changing the skill
• Add sentence starters or word banks
• Turn open responses into multiple choice for certain students

This is especially powerful when you teach a mixed group where some have IEPs, some are English learners, and some are ready for enrichment.

You can keep the same core task but generate multiple access points:

• Original version, for most students
• Scaffolded version, with supports, for specific students
• Challenge extension, for students ready to go deeper

Instead of creating three separate assignments from scratch, you adapt one base version with help from AI.

[!NOTE] This is not about labeling students. It is about quietly adjusting access so everyone is actually working on the intended skill.

Documenting progress without drowning in paperwork

Progress monitoring should not feel like a second job layered on top of teaching.

AI can help you:

• Turn your anecdotal notes into clearer documentation
• Draft short, objective summaries of student progress over a period
• Organize data from quick checks into simple language for IEP updates

Example workflow:

1. After class, you type a quick note: "Jordan solved 3 of 4 single-step problems independently. Needed verbal prompts for the last one. Used number line successfully."
2. You ask SchoolGPT: "Turn this into a 2 sentence progress note aligned to his math IEP goal, using neutral, objective language."
3. You paste that note into your documentation system.

You still control the story. You still choose what goes in. AI is just helping you write it in a clear, consistent way, instead of at 9 p.m. when your brain is fried.

Start small: simple ways to try AI in your next unit

A 20-minute workflow to pilot in your classroom this week

You do not need a schoolwide initiative to test this. You can run a simple 20-minute experiment.

Pick one lesson in an upcoming unit. Then:

1. Define the target. Write a single, clear objective. Example: "Students will be able to solve and explain one-step equations using addition and subtraction."

2. Ask AI to draft checks. In SchoolGPT or another tool, paste the objective and say: "Create 4 formative assessment questions. Mix 2 multiple choice, 1 short answer, 1 'explain your thinking' question. Aim at 7th grade."

3. Customize. Spend 5 minutes editing. Swap out numbers. Change names. Adjust wording. Cut anything that feels off.

4. Add supports for 2 specific students. Take the same questions and ask AI: "Adapt these for a student reading at a 4th grade level. Keep the same math." Or: "Add sentence starters for the open-ended question."

5. Plan feedback phrases. Ask AI: "Give me 4 short feedback comments I can use if a student mistakes subtraction for addition in these problems." Print or keep them in a doc to speed up your commenting.

6. Teach, then reflect. After the lesson, ask yourself: Did this save me prep time? Did the questions do what I needed? Would I tweak the prompts I gave AI?

You are not overhauling your practice. You are testing whether AI can meaningfully reduce friction in one part of your week.

Questions to ask as you evaluate AI tools for your school

If your school is shopping for tools, or thinking about using something like SchoolGPT more broadly, keep the questions grounded in real classroom life.

A quick comparison lens:

Question to ask	Why it matters
Can I control and edit everything it generates?	You need final say, always.
Can it align to my standards and curriculum, not generic content?	Random questions are useless. Alignment is key.
How does it handle student data and privacy?	Especially critical for IEP-related work.
Can it adapt for different reading levels and supports?	Mixed-need classes are the norm, not the exception.
Does it actually save me time in a normal week?	Shiny dashboards do not matter if the workflow is clunky.

The right tool feels like an assistant. The wrong one feels like a second job.

Looking ahead: helping students use AI for self-assessment

The most interesting future use of AI for formative assessment is not what it does for teachers. It is what it can help students do.

Imagine students:

• Pasting their rough draft into an AI tool that is set up with your rubric, then asking, "What is one way I could make my evidence stronger?"
• Asking AI to generate one more practice problem at their current difficulty level, then checking their own understanding.
• Using AI to rehearse oral answers or explanations, then refining their thinking before they share with the class.

This is not about letting AI write for them. It is about teaching them to use feedback tools to reflect, revise, and take more ownership of their learning.

Your role shifts slightly. From sole feedback provider to feedback coach. You help them learn which AI feedback to ignore, which to take seriously, and how to make the final call.

That is a powerful life skill, not just a classroom trick.

If you are curious, pick one upcoming lesson and give this a try.

Use AI to draft a quick check, adapt it for one student with an IEP, and pre-write a few feedback phrases. Keep what works. Toss what does not. Adjust your prompts next time.

The point is not to automate your teaching. It is to reclaim enough time and mental space that you can do the parts of the job that only you can do.