AI Prompts for Education

Design a 3-week unit plan using backward design for [subject + grade level]:

Learning goals:
- What should students know, understand, and be able to do by the end?
- Which standards does this address?

Assessment evidence:
- Performance task: what will students create or demonstrate?
- Other evidence: quizzes, exit tickets, observations

Learning plan (week by week):
- Week 1: hook and foundational knowledge
- Week 2: skill development and guided practice
- Week 3: independent application and assessment

Include differentiation strategies for advanced, grade-level, and struggling learners.
Specify materials, technology tools, and prerequisite knowledge needed.

Design a project-based learning (PBL) unit for [grade level + subject] around the driving question: "[your question here]"

Project structure:
- Entry event to launch the project and create need-to-know questions
- Sustained inquiry: 4-5 research and learning activities
- Voice and choice options for how students demonstrate learning
- Critique and revision cycles before final presentation

Deliverables:
- Individual component: [describe]
- Team component: [describe]
- Final public presentation format

Assessment: rubric covering content knowledge, collaboration, communication, and critical thinking
Timeline: [X weeks], with milestone checkpoints
Connection to real-world stakeholders or community partner

Create a complete Socratic seminar lesson plan for [text or topic] at [grade level]:

Pre-seminar (1 class period):
- Close reading activity and annotation guide
- Background knowledge builder
- Preparation questions at literal, interpretive, and evaluative levels

Seminar structure:
- Opening question (10 min)
- Core questions to deepen discussion (25 min)
- Closing reflection (10 min)
- Inner/outer circle or fishbowl structure as needed

Post-seminar (next class):
- Written reflection prompt connecting discussion to broader themes
- Individual accountability task to assess engagement and comprehension

Discussion norms, assessment rubric for participation, and sentence starters for English learners.

Design an integrated curriculum unit connecting [subject 1] and [subject 2] for [grade level]:

Unifying theme: [describe the overarching concept that bridges both subjects]

Content objectives from each discipline:
- [Subject 1]: [2-3 specific learning targets]
- [Subject 2]: [2-3 specific learning targets]

Integration strategies:
- Shared vocabulary and concepts across both subjects
- Activities where both skill sets are genuinely needed
- Assessment that requires students to draw on both disciplines

Schedule suggestion: how to coordinate teachers or block scheduling
Student artifact: a final product that is authentically integrated, not just parallel
Reflection: how you will assess whether integration added value vs. teaching separately

Create a standards-based rubric for assessing [assignment type] in [subject + grade level]:

Standards addressed: [list 2-3 specific standards]

Rubric dimensions (choose 4-5):
- Content knowledge and accuracy
- Critical thinking and analysis
- Communication (written/oral/visual)
- Evidence use and citation
- Revision and improvement process

For each dimension, write descriptors at 4 levels:
- Exceeds standard: what mastery + extension looks like
- Meets standard: what proficiency looks like
- Approaching standard: what partial understanding looks like
- Below standard: what needs significant support

Include: co-construction notes (how to involve students in rubric design)
Student-friendly version for self-assessment and peer review

Design a 4-week formative assessment sequence for [unit/topic] at [grade level]:

Daily checks (5 minutes):
- 3 exit ticket templates testing different levels of understanding
- 2 warm-up question sets that surface prior knowledge and misconceptions

Weekly formative tasks:
- Quick skill check with immediate self-scoring
- Peer teaching or explanation task
- Application problem with annotated thinking

Data use protocol:
- How to sort and analyze results in under 20 minutes
- Grouping strategy for targeted small-group instruction
- Criteria for deciding when to reteach vs. move forward

Include: common misconceptions to watch for in [topic] and diagnostic questions that reveal them

Create a performance-based assessment task for [subject + grade level]:

Task overview:
- Authentic scenario or real-world context that frames the task
- Role the student plays and audience they are addressing
- Product, performance, or presentation expected

Task requirements:
- Must-have elements and optional enrichment
- Resources students may (and may not) use
- Timeline and milestone checkpoints

Evaluation criteria:
- Content: [specific knowledge and skills assessed]
- Process: how students document their thinking and decision-making
- Communication: how they present findings

Accommodations and modifications for diverse learners
Anchor papers or sample work descriptions at each performance level

Design a feedback framework for student writing (or [subject-specific task]) that builds revision skills:

Feedback structure (use for any draft):
1. Glow: one specific strength with evidence from the work
2. Grow: one prioritized area for improvement with concrete suggestion
3. Question: one inquiry that pushes thinking further

Feedback stems for teachers:
- "I notice that you..." (observation, not judgment)
- "One thing that would strengthen this is..."
- "What would happen if you..."

Student revision protocol:
- How students respond to feedback in writing
- Revision log tracking changes made
- Self-assessment before submitting final draft

Peer feedback training sequence:
- Modeled examples of helpful vs. unhelpful feedback
- Sentence starters for constructive criticism
- How to receive feedback productively

Create a tiered lesson on [topic] for a mixed-ability [grade level] class:

All students (core): [what every student will learn and do]

Tier 1 — support level:
- Simplified reading or visual scaffold
- Step-by-step task breakdown
- Concrete manipulatives or graphic organizer
- Partner or small-group structure

Tier 2 — grade level:
- Standard task with scaffolded support available if needed
- Collaborative activity with structured roles
- Guided notes or partially completed organizer

Tier 3 — extension:
- Open-ended inquiry question
- Application to a novel context or problem
- Research component or peer teaching opportunity

Formative check-in: how you will monitor each group and know when to intervene
Flexible grouping strategy: criteria for how groups will be formed (not by fixed ability)

Apply Universal Design for Learning (UDL) principles to redesign this lesson: [describe current lesson]

UDL framework — provide multiple means of:

Representation (the WHAT of learning):
- Present the same content through text, audio, visual, and hands-on formats
- Build vocabulary and background knowledge proactively
- Highlight patterns, big ideas, and connections explicitly

Action & expression (the HOW of learning):
- Offer choice in how students respond: written, verbal, visual, kinesthetic
- Provide assistive technology options
- Allow varied pacing with check-in points

Engagement (the WHY of learning):
- Connect to student interests and real-world relevance
- Offer choice in challenge level and topic angle
- Build self-monitoring and metacognitive skills

Specific accommodations for: [list any student groups you're designing for]
Technology tools that support access across all three UDL pillars

Design scaffolding for English language learners (ELLs) at [proficiency level: Beginning/Intermediate/Advanced] in a [subject + grade level] class:

Language objectives (alongside content objectives):
- Vocabulary: [5-8 key terms with visual supports]
- Language function: [describe, explain, argue, compare — specific to the task]
- Language structure: [sentence frames or grammar patterns to practice]

Scaffolding strategies by task:
- Reading: pre-teach vocabulary, bilingual glossary, annotated text, audio support
- Writing: sentence frames, paragraph frames, native language brainstorming
- Discussion: think-pair-share, structured academic conversation stems, visual prompts

Assessment adaptations:
- Extended time, visual supports, native language allowed for brainstorming
- How to assess content knowledge separate from language proficiency

Resources: recommended digital tools for vocabulary building and language support

Design a differentiated enrichment track for advanced learners in a [subject + grade level] unit on [topic]:

Extension activities (after demonstrating mastery):
- Depth: explore the topic at greater complexity, nuance, or abstraction
- Breadth: connect to related fields, historical context, or interdisciplinary applications
- Acceleration: move into next grade-level content with appropriate support

Independent research project option:
- Self-selected question within the topic area
- Research process scaffold (question → sources → analysis → product)
- Presentation format options

Higher-order thinking tasks aligned to Bloom's Taxonomy levels 4-6:
- Analyze: [specific task]
- Evaluate: [specific task]
- Create: [specific task]

Compacting guide: how to pre-assess and determine what advanced learners can skip
Mentorship connections: how to link to community experts or online communities

Design a self-paced asynchronous learning module for [topic] at [grade level or course]:

Module structure (estimated [X] hours to complete):

1. Hook (5-10 min): video, image, or question that creates curiosity
2. Core content delivery:
   - Pre-recorded mini-lecture (max 10 minutes)
   - Interactive reading with embedded questions
   - Worked examples with narrated explanations

3. Practice and application:
   - Low-stakes knowledge check with immediate feedback
   - Application activity: [describe]
   - Reflection prompt before moving forward

4. Discussion or collaboration:
   - Asynchronous discussion prompt (post + respond to 2 peers)
   - Collaborative document or shared artifact

5. Self-assessment: checklist of module objectives the student rates themselves on

Accessibility: captions, transcripts, screen-reader compatible
Instructor touchpoints: how you will monitor progress and reach out to struggling students

Design a 60-minute synchronous online lesson on [topic] for [grade level] that maximizes engagement:

First 5 minutes — connection ritual:
- Warm-up question in chat or poll
- Brief social check-in before academic content

Minutes 5-20 — direct instruction (chunked):
- Mini-lecture segment (max 10 minutes before a break)
- Embedded check for understanding (poll, chat response, quick sketch)
- Think-pair-share in breakout rooms (5 minutes)

Minutes 20-45 — collaborative practice:
- Breakout room activity with clear task and timer
- Shared document, Jamboard, or Padlet for group output
- Gallery walk of group work via screen share

Minutes 45-55 — synthesis and closure:
- Whole class debrief: what patterns did you see across groups?
- Exit ticket via chat, poll, or brief form

Final 5 minutes — preview and energy close:
- What's coming next and why it matters
- Optional: shoutout or celebration of great thinking observed

Tech backup plan: what happens if a student loses connection

Design a hybrid learning structure for [course] where some students are in person and others are remote simultaneously:

Classroom setup:
- Camera placement so remote students can see the board and discussion
- Audio solution so remote students can hear peer discussion clearly
- Participation bridge: how remote students contribute during in-person activities

Lesson design principles for hybrid:
- Lead with text and visuals, not just voice
- Use shared digital tools that work identically for both groups (not separate workflows)
- Assign an "in-room ambassador" for remote students each class

Activity adaptations:
- Discussion: simultaneous chat + verbal, with facilitation for both
- Group work: intentionally mixed in-person + remote groups
- Labs or hands-on: virtual equivalent available in real time

Assessment: same tasks for both groups, accessible formats for both
Known pitfalls to avoid: [list the 3 most common hybrid mistakes and how to prevent them]

Design a community-building strategy for an online class of [N] students at [level]:

Weeks 1-2 — foundation:
- Introductory activity: student introduction video or "about me" page
- Team formation: criteria for creating diverse groups of 4-5
- Community norms: collaborative process for students to set norms together

Ongoing structures:
- Weekly check-in ritual (Monday: 1 word/emoji; Friday: shoutout to a classmate)
- Discussion forums with real questions worth debating, not summary prompts
- Peer feedback partnerships that rotate monthly

Student-to-student connection:
- Study buddy system for students to use between sessions
- Optional social hours or interest-based channels
- Peer teaching or "I know this" helping structure

Instructor presence:
- Personalized feedback that references individual student contributions
- Office hours format that feels low-stakes and accessible
- How to identify isolated students early and reach out proactively

Design a 2-week AI literacy unit for [grade level]:

Week 1 — Understanding AI:
- Day 1: What is AI and how does it learn? (bias and training data)
- Day 2: AI in our daily lives — mapping AI tools we already use
- Day 3: How does a language model work? (non-technical explanation with demonstration)
- Day 4: AI limitations — hallucinations, bias, outdated information
- Day 5: Ethical implications — who benefits, who is harmed, who decides

Week 2 — Using AI critically:
- Day 1: Prompt engineering basics and how specificity changes output
- Day 2: Fact-checking AI — students verify 5 AI claims across 3 sources
- Day 3: AI for learning vs. AI for bypassing learning — case studies
- Day 4: Class AI use policy creation (student-led)
- Day 5: Reflection and portfolio piece on AI in their field of interest

Assessment: AI audit of a real tool they use, with written evaluation of limitations and risks

Design a writing workshop that teaches students to use AI as a thinking partner rather than a replacement for writing:

Phase 1 — Generating ideas (AI as brainstorm partner):
- Students prompt AI for 10 different angles on their topic
- Students evaluate, critique, and select the angle that resonates with them
- Reflection: what did AI miss? What surprised you?

Phase 2 — Drafting (student writes, AI gives targeted feedback):
- Student writes first draft independently (no AI)
- Student prompts AI to identify logical gaps in their argument
- Student revises — must document what they accepted and rejected from AI feedback

Phase 3 — Revision (AI as specific tool, not editor):
- Use AI only to check clarity of a specific paragraph
- Not: "make this better." Instead: "what is unclear in this paragraph?"
- Final draft must be demonstrably different from AI's version

Assessment rubric includes: originality of argument, quality of revision choices, reflection on AI use
Academic integrity: all AI prompts and outputs submitted alongside final draft

Create a practical, student-centered AI use policy for [course + grade level]:

Policy philosophy:
- Our goal is [describe learning objectives that AI might affect]
- We believe AI is [your stance: a tool, a collaboration partner, a potential shortcut to avoid]

Tier system for assignments:
- AI-free: assessments where your unassisted thinking is what we are measuring
- AI-supported: AI allowed as a tool; you must document how you used it
- AI-collaborative: AI is explicitly part of the learning task

Student responsibilities:
- Disclosure: how and when to declare AI use
- Attribution: how to credit AI assistance in submitted work
- Verification: fact-checking any AI-generated content before submission

Consequences for policy violation:
- First instance: learning conversation and redo opportunity
- Repeated instances: [describe escalation]

Policy revision process: how students can propose changes based on new tools and learning
Review date: policy will be revisited [X] and updated collaboratively

Design a research project that deliberately develops AI-critical research skills for [grade level + subject]:

Project: research [topic or student-selected question in domain]

Stage 1 — Traditional research first:
- Students find 3 credible sources without AI (library, databases)
- Read, annotate, and summarize key arguments
- Form an initial thesis based only on human-authored sources

Stage 2 — AI-augmented research:
- Use AI to identify counterarguments they may have missed
- Ask AI to suggest additional search terms and source types
- Critically evaluate AI's suggestions: are these credible? Are these new?

Stage 3 — Synthesis and AI audit:
- Write the final paper or create the final product
- Submit an AI audit: list every AI tool used, prompt entered, and output evaluated
- Reflect: did AI improve your research? Where was it wrong or misleading?

Assessment equally weights:
- Quality of research and argument (50%)
- AI use audit and critical reflection (25%)
- Final product communication (25%)

Design a monthly professional learning community (PLC) structure for [department or grade-level team]:

Session structure (90 minutes):

Opening (10 min):
- Review norms and focus on protocols
- Quick personal check-in (what's energising you? what's challenging you?)

Data review (25 min):
- Present student work or assessment data from the past month
- Use a structured protocol: what do we notice? what do we wonder?
- Identify 1-2 patterns that require instructional response

Collaborative planning (35 min):
- Design one instructional response to the identified pattern
- Assign: who will pilot the strategy, when, with what class
- Peer observation scheduling for the next month

Reflection and next steps (20 min):
- What did we decide? Who is responsible?
- Resource sharing: each person shares one tool or strategy
- Preview of next meeting's focus

Between sessions: observation and documentation protocol
Annual arc: how the PLC focus shifts across the year to cover all priority areas

Design a 6-week instructional coaching cycle for a teacher working on [specific area: student engagement / formative assessment / questioning techniques]:

Week 1 — Establish baseline:
- Pre-conference: goals, current practice, evidence of impact
- Baseline classroom observation with specific look-fors
- Post-observation conversation using non-evaluative language

Weeks 2-4 — Practice and support:
- Teacher implements agreed strategy in two lessons
- Coach provides resources, models, or co-plans as needed
- Mid-point check-in: what's working, what needs adjustment

Week 5 — Peer observation:
- Teacher observes a colleague using the target strategy
- Debrief: what will you borrow, adapt, or leave behind?

Week 6 — Evidence and reflection:
- Final observation with student work or data as evidence
- Post-conference: growth documented, next learning goal identified
- Summary written together: what changed in student experience?

Coaching conversation protocols: specific questions for each stage
Documentation: observation notes format, teacher goal tracking sheet

Design a first-year teacher onboarding program for [school type + subject/grade context]:

Pre-arrival (2 weeks before school starts):
- Welcome packet: school culture, key contacts, non-negotiables
- Classroom setup guidance and materials checklist
- Introduction to mentor teacher and first meeting agenda

Month 1 — Foundations:
- Week 1: school systems, policies, and student support resources
- Week 2: curriculum familiarisation and first unit planning session
- Week 3: classroom management philosophy and system design
- Week 4: first observation with mentor and structured debrief

Months 2-4 — Growth:
- Biweekly check-ins with mentor (not evaluative)
- Monthly new teacher cohort meeting to share challenges and strategies
- One supported observation in a colleague's classroom each month
- Help accessing department resources and curriculum materials

Support structures:
- Emergency contacts: who to call about what
- Common first-year challenges and how the school supports each
- Self-care and boundary-setting resources for new teachers

Year-end: portfolio reflection and goal-setting for year two

Design a professional development workshop series on AI for educators at [school/institution]:

Workshop 1 — Foundations (3 hours):
- What AI tools are your colleagues already using (survey first)
- Live demonstration of 3-4 tools most relevant to your context
- Hands-on prompt writing practice with real lesson planning tasks
- Discussion: opportunities, concerns, and ethical considerations

Workshop 2 — Classroom applications (3 hours):
- Lesson planning with AI: compare before and after
- Assessment design: using AI to generate question banks and rubrics
- Differentiation: AI-generated tiered texts and modified tasks
- Academic integrity: how to set clear AI policies with students

Workshop 3 — Critical use and policy (2 hours):
- When AI output is wrong: fact-checking and verification practice
- Drafting a school-level AI use framework together
- Student-facing policy workshop: how to involve students in the conversation
- Ongoing learning community: tools, channels, and peer support structure

Between sessions: try one AI application in your classroom and report back
Resources: curated list of educator-focused AI tools, updated termly