Module 7 AI Teacher Productivity Lab
A working lab, not a lecture. Teachers bring a chapter they teach next month and spend the three hours producing things they actually need: a lesson plan, competency questions, a worksheet at three levels, an explanation at three ability levels, remediation material, a formative quiz and a parent progress summary. They use several tools — any chat assistant, a worksheet generator, PrepGraph’s review-first question bank — and apply the same checklist to all of them. The programme’s only generic prompting segment is here, framed as "asking well and verifying", and it is kept short: the skill that matters is not the prompt but the check that follows it. Parent summaries are teacher-written; AI only drafts.
By the end, teachers can…
- 1 Write a request to an AI assistant that names the class, the chapter, the learning outcome, the level, the format and the constraints — and improve it once after reading the output.
- 2 Produce a lesson plan for one NCERT chapter with AI and mark what was kept, changed and removed, with a reason for each.
- 3 Produce a worksheet at three ability levels on the same competency and check every item against the textbook and an answer key.
- 4 Draft competency questions with a chat assistant and with PrepGraph’s question bank, and compare both sets on one checklist: outcome-aligned, one clear answer, distractors that catch a named misconception.
- 5 Write a parent progress summary from a student record, using AI only to draft, and verify every fact in it against the record before it goes out.
- 6 Attach a verification note to any AI-made artefact: tool used, what was asked, what was checked against what, what was changed.
Session plan — 3 hours
| Time | Activity | Format |
|---|---|---|
| 0:00 10 min | Opening: what ate your week? Pairs list the preparation tasks that took the most time last week — worksheets, question papers, notes for absentees, parent messages. Each teacher picks the five they will make today for a chapter they teach next month (Class 9 Science Motion, Class 8 Maths Linear Equations, Class 10 Science Light, Class 7 Social Science, Class 6 English — or their own). | Discussion |
| 0:10 35 min | Asking well and verifying The programme’s only generic prompting segment. Ten minutes of input: a good request reads like a brief — who (class, section, number of students), what (chapter, outcome), level, format, constraints — and every output goes through the verify-before-use loop from Module 1. Then teachers take one vague request ("make a worksheet on motion"), rewrite it as a brief, run both, and compare the two outputs side by side. They record the three checks they would run before using either. | Hands-on |
| 0:45 35 min | Station 1: lesson plan and multi-level explanation With any chat assistant: a two-period lesson plan for the chosen chapter for a named section of 40; then the same core concept explained three ways — for a student who is lost, a typical student, a student who is ahead. Teachers mark the plan keep / change / remove, and check each explanation against the NCERT text for a wrong simplification. | Hands-on |
| 1:20 40 min | Station 2: competency questions and a three-level worksheet Six competency questions drafted with a chat assistant, then six AI-drafted in PrepGraph’s question bank (nothing reaches students until the teacher approves); both sets scored on the checklist — outcome-aligned, one defensible answer, distractors that catch a misconception — and the weaker items fixed. Then a worksheet generator (or the chat assistant) produces a worksheet at three levels on one competency; teachers check that the levels differ in demand, not just in length. | Hands-on |
| 2:00 25 min | Station 3: remediation material and a formative quiz A one-page remediation sheet for one misconception the teacher meets every year (distance vs displacement; moving a term across the equals sign; real vs virtual image) and a five-item formative quiz with an answer key. Partners swap and try to break each other’s quiz: an ambiguous stem, a second correct option, a wrong key. | Hands-on |
| 2:25 20 min | Station 4: parent progress summary From an anonymised sample student record (an assignment result and two weeks of practice), teachers write a six-line note to a parent before a PTM. AI may draft; the teacher verifies every fact against the record, removes anything the record does not support, and checks the tone. A Hindi version is optional. The note is the teacher’s; the AI never speaks to the parent. | Hands-on |
| 2:45 15 min | Portfolio start and gallery walk Each teacher puts one artefact and its verification note on the table; the group walks the room applying the checklist and leaves one sticky note per artefact: "what I would check before using this". Teachers leave with the portfolio template started. | Group work |
| Total 3 h · timings are a default; facilitators adapt to the group. | ||
Key ideas
Ask like a brief, not a wish
A request that names the class, chapter, outcome, level, format and constraints gets something you can use. "Make a worksheet on motion" gets something generic. The skill is ordinary professional clarity — the same brief you would give a new colleague.
Verification is the work
AI turns a forty-minute first draft into a four-minute one. The professional time now goes to checking: against the NCERT text, the answer key, the level of your actual students, and — for anything about a named child — the record. An artefact without a verification note is not finished.
Many tools, one checklist
A chat assistant writes prose fast. A worksheet generator formats. PrepGraph’s question bank drafts items the teacher reviews before they reach a student. The tool changes; the checklist does not: outcome-aligned, one clear answer, distractors that mean something, right level, checked against the textbook.
Parents hear you, not the machine
A parent note is the teacher’s voice and the teacher’s responsibility. AI may draft a sentence; the teacher owns every fact and every word, and would be comfortable being asked "how do you know?" about each line.
Worked example
One Tuesday afternoon, four tools, five artefacts
A Class 9 Science teacher has Motion next week with 9-B (40 students) and an hour after school. She starts with a brief: "Class 9, section B, 40 students, NCERT Science, Motion, two 40-minute periods, outcome: distinguish distance from displacement and read a distance–time graph; most students are comfortable with tables, weak with graphs; no lab equipment." The chat assistant returns a plan she mostly keeps; she removes a "race-track simulation" that needs equipment she does not have, and adds the textbook’s own worked example.
She asks for distance vs displacement explained three ways. The version for a struggling student says displacement is "the straight-line distance" — she changes it to "the straight line from start to finish, with direction", because the sign matters next week.
Six questions from the chat assistant: two have a second defensible answer. Six AI-drafted in PrepGraph’s question bank sit in review until she acts on them; she approves four, rewrites two distractors so they catch the "distance always equals displacement" error, and rejects none. A worksheet generator gives her three levels on graph reading; level three was just longer, so she rewrites it to ask for a graph from a description.
Last, a parent note for one student before Friday’s PTM. The AI draft says "excellent progress". The record says 5 of 10 on the last assignment and four days of practice out of fourteen. She writes what the record shows, one thing the child did well, and one thing to try at home.
Fifty-five minutes. Five artefacts, each with a one-line verification note. None of them will embarrass her on Monday — because she checked.
Assignment — counts towards certification
Productivity portfolio: five artefacts, five verification notes
Over the next two weeks, make five artefacts you actually need for your own classes — choose from: a lesson plan, a competency question set, a three-level worksheet, a multi-level explanation or remediation sheet, a formative quiz with key, a parent progress summary. Use at least two different AI tools across the portfolio, with PrepGraph’s question bank for at least one artefact. Every artefact carries a verification note: tool used, what you asked, what you checked and against what, what you changed, and whether it was used with students.
Deliverable: A portfolio (PDF or shared folder) of five artefacts plus five verification notes of up to 120 words each, and a half-page "what I will keep doing". No student names.
| Criterion | Meets the standard when… |
|---|---|
| Five real artefacts | Each names the class, section and chapter it is for and is used, or ready to use, within the month — not an exercise made for the portfolio. |
| Verification shown | Every note names the source checked (NCERT text, answer key, the student record) and at least one correction that was made as a result. |
| Differentiation is real | At least one artefact is at three levels on the same competency, and the levels differ in what students must do, not only in length or number of items. |
| The parent summary is the teacher’s | Every statement is traceable to a record; there is no invented praise; a parent could act on it; the teacher, not the tool, is the author. |
Where this lands in the PrepGraph workflow
Each certification task corresponds to a behaviour in the teacher portal — so the programme produces a working habit, not a slide deck. The pedagogy comes first; the surface implements it.
| Certification task | Pedagogical move | PrepGraph surface |
|---|---|---|
| Draft competency questions and approve only the good ones | Review-first item authoring against a checklist | Question bank (review-first)Author or AI-draft competency questions; nothing reaches students until a teacher approves it. |
| Turn an approved set into a five-item formative quiz for one section | Short competency check with per-question results | Assignments & resultsSet a short diagnostic or homework from the question bank; see who attempted, how each question went, and give feedback. |
| Share the remediation sheet so a student’s tutor can answer from it | Teacher-curated sources for revision | Shared libraryShare your notes and documents with students; the AI tutor can answer from the documents you shared. |
| Write a parent summary from one student’s record | Student-level reading of results, teacher-written communication | Student profilesOpen one student and see their practice, weak concepts and recent work in one place. |
Materials
- •One laptop per teacher with any chat assistant and a worksheet generator (the school’s choice — free tools are fine), plus PrepGraph teacher-portal logins with a demo class
- •"Asking well" brief card (who · what · level · format · constraints) and the verification checklist
- •NCERT textbooks or PDFs for the chapters teachers bring
- •An anonymised sample student record (assignment result + two weeks of practice) for the parent-summary station
- •Portfolio template and verification-note template
- •Station timing cards and sticky notes for the gallery walk
Facilitator notes
- •This is the only place in the 25 hours where generic prompting appears. Keep "asking well and verifying" under 45 minutes, concrete, and tied to the teachers’ own chapter. Never drift into "top ten prompts every teacher should know".
- •Use several tools on purpose, and treat PrepGraph as one station among others. If asked "why not do everything in PrepGraph?", answer plainly: the question bank is review-first and feeds assignments with per-question results; a chat assistant is faster for prose; a worksheet generator formats. Different tools, one checklist.
- •Verification notes are written at the station, before moving on — not reconstructed at the end.
- •The parent-summary station uses an anonymised record only. No real student’s name on any shared screen. And the note is teacher-written: AI drafts, the teacher decides every line.
- •Pair a confident tool user with a hesitant one at each station; the hesitant teacher drives the keyboard.
Bring the programme to your school
Tell us your board, grades and teacher count. We’ll reply within two working days with a cohort plan and the CPD record templates.