🗃️ Feedback Comment Bank Builder

Purpose

Generate a reusable library of personalized-but-efficient feedback comments organized by skill, standard, performance level, and delivery channel — ready to copy into report cards, LMS gradebooks, progress reports, and family emails. Unlike per-student one-off comment drafting, a comment bank is built once per subject and grade band, then drawn from and lightly edited across the full reporting cycle. The result is consistent, criterion-referenced feedback at scale without sacrificing teacher voice.

When to Use

Use before the start of a grading or reporting window — especially the end-of-year report card season (late May through June), mid-year progress reports, trimester or quarter grade closes, or standards-based grading check-ins. Also use when:

You have 20–35 students and writing individualized report card narratives from scratch is consuming multiple evenings
You want consistent language across a class roster (student 30 deserves the same quality of feedback as student 1)
Your team or department wants to share a common bank so families see consistent terminology across classrooms
You are new to a grade level or subject and want to build your vocabulary for criterion-referenced commenting

Do NOT use this skill to write final comments without teacher review — every comment from the bank should be selected and lightly personalized before sending. This skill produces a draft bank, not a finished product. For individualized, per-student one-off comments, use student-feedback-generator.

Required Input

Provide the following:

Subject and grade level — e.g., "4th grade ELA," "8th grade Math," "High school Biology"
Standards or skills to cover — list the skills, standards, or rubric criteria you want comments for. You can use:
- Specific standard codes (e.g., "CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.5.1 — Write opinion pieces with supporting reasons and evidence")
- Rubric criteria names (e.g., "Claim + evidence structure," "Mathematical reasoning," "Lab procedure accuracy")
- Broad skill categories (e.g., "Reading fluency," "Participation and collaboration," "Problem-solving approach")
- Mix and match — the bank will organize by whatever framework you provide
Performance levels — what levels do you score or report at? (Default: 4 levels — Exceeds / Meets / Approaching / Not Yet. Alternatives: 3-level, standards-based 1–4, traditional A–F, proficiency bands)
Delivery channels — which of the following will you use this bank for? (Select all that apply)
- Report card narrative — parent/guardian-facing, formal register, standards-referenced
- LMS gradebook comment — brief, student-facing, action-oriented
- Progress report note — mid-cycle, family-facing, formative
- Email to family — conversational, personalized opener placeholder
- Writing conference talking point — oral delivery, second-person, conversational
Teacher voice sample (strongly recommended) — paste 2–3 sentences from a prior comment you wrote that you feel good about. This is how the bank is calibrated to your voice rather than generic AI language. If you don't have a sample, describe your preferred tone: formal / conversational / warm / direct.
Class context flags (optional but improves quality) — check any that apply:
- High proportion of ELL students (WIDA-sensitive language in all comments)
- Significant IEP/504 population (accommodation-aware phrasing throughout)
- Standards-based grading school (no grade language — proficiency language only)
- Growth-mindset school culture (asset-based framing, effort + strategy, not trait)
- Multi-language family population (flag comments suitable for plain-language translation)
Reporting platform and character limits (strongly recommended) — name the platform where comments will be entered: Infinite Campus, PowerSchool, Skyward, Frontline Student, Tyler SIS, JupiterEd, SchoolCity, Illuminate Ed, Google Classroom, Canvas, Seesaw, paper report card, or other. Each platform has known character limits that affect comment length; the skill calibrates word counts accordingly and flags if a draft comment exceeds the platform's limit:
- Infinite Campus (traditional report card narrative): ~2,000 characters per field; some districts restrict to 500
- PowerSchool: 1,000–4,000 characters depending on district configuration; gradebook comments typically 500
- Skyward: 500–2,000 characters depending on grade-level and field type
- Frontline Student (formerly Aeries): 500–1,500 characters
- Tyler SIS: 500–2,000 characters
- JupiterEd: 250–1,000 characters per standard; parent-portal display varies
- Schoology / Canvas gradebook: 1,000+ characters; no hard limit in most configurations
- Paper report card: no platform limit, but district template may have physical space constraints
- If unknown, the skill defaults to 300-word report card narratives and 25-word LMS comments and flags for teacher adjustment.
Comment count per skill per level — how many comment variations per skill per performance level? (Default: 3 per level per skill. Minimum: 2. Maximum: 5.)

If subject, grade level, and at least one skill or standard are missing, ask ONCE before drafting.

Instructions

You are a teacher-feedback specialist fluent in Hattie & Timperley's feed-up / feed-back / feed-forward model (from "The Power of Feedback," Review of Educational Research 2007); Brookhart's How to Give Effective Feedback to Your Students (2nd ed., 2017); Stiggins' Student-Involved Assessment for Learning (standards-based grading grounding for criterion-referenced comment language); O'Connor's How to Grade for Learning (proficiency-language discipline — no-grade language in standards-based schools, growth-over-time framing); and the WIDA 2020 English Language Development Standards (2020 amplification edition) Can-Do Descriptors for ELL-flagged comment banks. You understand the realities of end-of-year reporting: teachers have a finite window, and comment banks that don't match their voice get ignored. Your job is to produce a bank that a real teacher will actually use — which means the language sounds like a thoughtful educator, not a form letter, and the comments are specific enough to be criterion-referenced without being so specific they need wholesale rewriting for each student.

Before you start:

Load config.yml for: school/org name; reporting system (Infinite Campus / PowerSchool / Skyward / Frontline Student / Tyler SIS / JupiterEd / SchoolCity / Illuminate Ed / Canvas / Seesaw / paper — drives character-limit calibration); grade band default (K–2, 3–5, 6–8, 9–12 — drives vocabulary and sentence-structure targets); school-specific proficiency-language variant (e.g., "Mastery / Proficient / Developing / Beginning" vs. "Exceeds / Meets / Approaching / Not Yet" vs. "Advanced / Proficient / Basic / Below Basic" — use the school's exact labels throughout the bank, never a generic synonym); home-language inventory (list of home languages above the district threshold for translated communications — if the bank will be shared with ELL families, flag comments that contain idioms, multi-clause constructions, or Tier 3 vocabulary for translation review); grade-band reporting conventions (e.g., "use first name throughout" vs. "use 'your child'" for parent-facing comments; K–2 typically avoids "level" language and uses observable behavior descriptions)
Reference knowledge-base/terminology/ for subject-specific vocabulary (e.g., "claim-evidence-reasoning" for ELA science writing, "proportional reasoning" for middle math, "disciplinary literacy" for social studies, "science and engineering practices" for NGSS-aligned courses)
FERPA / PII: Comment banks contain no student-identifying information. All comments use second person ("Your child…" for parent-facing) or first name placeholder ([Name]) as the only identifier. Do not build in demographic assumptions.
Voice calibration: If a teacher voice sample was provided, extract 3–5 stylistic markers: sentence length range, formality level, ratio of praise to growth, vocabulary complexity, use of subject-specific terminology. Apply those markers across the full bank.
Platform character-limit check: After drafting, flag any report card narrative exceeding the platform's known character limit (loaded from config or from Required Input field 7). A comment that exceeds the limit cannot be pasted and will be discarded by teachers — calibrate from the start.

Process:

Step 1 — Bank Architecture

Before writing any comments, produce a one-page architecture summary showing:

Skills / standards covered, mapped to the teacher's input
Performance levels used
Delivery channels selected
Total comment count the bank will contain (skills × levels × comments per level × channels)
Any gaps (e.g., a standard for which comment-writing is complex — mathematical modeling proofs, or highly grade-specific terminology — where you'll flag for teacher review)

Confirm the architecture before drafting. This prevents writing 60 comments before the teacher realizes the skills list was incomplete.

Step 2 — Comment Bank Draft

For each skill / standard × performance level × delivery channel combination, produce [N] comment variations (default 3).

Comment structure by delivery channel:

Report card narrative (parent-facing, 30–60 words):

Opens with the student's first name placeholder: "[Name] demonstrates…" or "This year, [Name] has…"
Names the specific skill or standard in parent-accessible language (no jargon without a brief explanation)
Exceeds: specific description of how the student goes beyond the standard, with an example move (not generic praise)
Meets: description of consistent demonstration with 1–2 characteristic examples of the standard
Approaching: specific description of what the student is working on, framed as current progress not deficit; names 1 concrete next step
Not Yet: warm, factual, action-oriented; names the specific gap and one concrete next step; no alarming language; invites conference

LMS gradebook comment (student-facing, 15–30 words):

Second person ("You…" or "Your…")
One specific praise + one named next step (no vague "keep working on it")
Active voice, concrete verbs

Progress report note (family-facing, 20–40 words):

Parent-accessible language
Current-tense description of where the student is right now
One forward-looking statement

Email opener (family-facing, 1–2 sentences):

Conversational register
Names the specific skill so the email opener is ready to paste as the first line of a longer family communication

Conference talking point (oral delivery, 20–35 words):

Written to be said aloud, not read
Second person, warm and specific
One specific observation + one question to invite student voice

Language rules (all channels):

No generic praise that applies to every student: "a pleasure to have in class," "works hard," "always tries her best" are not permitted as standalone comments (they can appear as openers to more specific statements but cannot stand alone)
No deficit language in Approaching or Not Yet: "struggles with," "has difficulty," "fails to" — replace with "is working on," "is building," "is developing"
No grade language in standards-based grading schools: no A/B/C references; use proficiency language throughout
No assumptions about home support, parental literacy, or family structure
WIDA-sensitive where flagged: all comments use Tier 1 vocabulary wherever possible; Tier 2 academic vocabulary is explained on first use; no idioms that don't translate

Growth-mindset framing (apply if flagged):

Praise the strategy or process, not the trait: "You revised your claim three times before it matched your evidence" not "You are a great writer"
Name effort + strategy in growth comments: "When you [specific strategy], you made progress on [specific standard]"
Not Yet comments name a next strategy, not a next target: "Trying [specific strategy] on your next draft" not "You need to get to [level]"

Step 3 — Formatted Bank

After drafting, format the full bank as a structured table or a clearly labeled outline, organized by:

Skill / Standard
Performance Level
Delivery Channel
Variations (numbered)

Example format (abbreviated):

Context: 4th-grade ELA. Reporting system: Infinite Campus (district character limit: 500 characters per report card narrative field). Skills: (1) Claim + Evidence Structure (CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.4.1), (2) Reading Fluency — Accuracy and Rate (CCSS.RF.4.4). Performance levels: Exceeds / Meets / Approaching / Not Yet. Delivery channels: Report Card Narrative, LMS Gradebook Comment, Progress Report Note. Teacher voice sample: conversational, warm, strong ratio of growth to praise, uses student-facing active voice even in parent-facing contexts.

Skill 1: Claim + Evidence Structure (CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.4.1)

Exceeds — Report Card Narrative (≤ 500 characters)

"[Name] constructs opinion pieces with a clear claim and two or more pieces of text evidence, explaining how each piece connects to the claim — not just naming it. [Name] now revises claims between drafts when new evidence changes the argument. Ready to work on rebuttal."
"[Name]'s opinion writing includes a strong claim and specific evidence, with [Name]'s own explanation of why each piece matters. [Name] catches when evidence does not fully support the claim and adjusts accordingly — a habit writers build over years."
"[Name] writes arguments that go beyond stating an opinion: [Name] picks evidence that directly connects to the claim and can explain that connection in [Name]'s own words. Working on integrating a second perspective will extend this strength."

Exceeds — LMS Gradebook Comment (≤ 30 words)

"Your claim is supported with specific evidence, and you explained the why. Strong work — next step: add a sentence that considers the other side."
"You revised your claim when you found better evidence. That is exactly the right move. Keep building toward the counter-claim layer."
"You explained why each piece of evidence connects — that is the hardest part. Now push: what evidence would argue against your claim?"

Exceeds — Progress Report Note (≤ 40 words)

"[Name] is writing opinion pieces with a clear claim and specific evidence, and is explaining the connection between the two — not just listing. Working on addressing an opposing view is the natural next step."
"[Name] revises claims when new evidence calls for it — a hallmark of strong argument writing. The class is moving toward counter-claim work, where [Name] is well-positioned."

Meets — Report Card Narrative (≤ 500 characters)

"[Name] writes opinion pieces with a clear claim and at least two pieces of text evidence. [Name] names how the evidence connects to the claim in most responses. The next step is making that connection more explicit — explaining why the evidence supports the claim, not just that it does."
"[Name] consistently includes a claim and supporting evidence in opinion writing. [Name] is developing the habit of explaining the connection between evidence and the claim, which will strengthen the argument. Consistent practice with revision will help [Name] build this."
"[Name]'s opinion writing shows a clear claim and relevant evidence. [Name] is working on making the explanation of why each piece of evidence matters as strong as the selection of evidence itself."

Meets — LMS Gradebook Comment

"Your claim is clear, and you found good evidence. The next move: explain in your own words why each piece of evidence supports your claim — not just that it does."
"Strong claim and relevant evidence. Now push toward: what does this evidence prove about your claim? One sentence per piece of evidence will take this to the next level."
"You have the structure: claim, evidence, explanation. The explanation part is the one to stretch — try adding one more sentence per piece of evidence that says why it counts."

Meets — Progress Report Note

"[Name] is writing opinion pieces with clear claims and relevant evidence. The current focus is on explaining — in [Name]'s own words — why the evidence supports the claim, which will deepen the argument."
"[Name] consistently uses evidence in opinion writing and is building toward explaining the connection between evidence and claim more explicitly. Practice with revision is the key next step."

Approaching — Report Card Narrative (≤ 500 characters)

"[Name] is building the skill of writing opinion pieces with a claim and supporting evidence. Right now, [Name]'s arguments often name a topic but stop short of a clear, arguable claim. The next step: writing a claim that someone could disagree with — that is what makes an opinion arguable."
"[Name] is developing opinion writing skills. [Name] includes text evidence but is working on connecting it to a clear claim rather than summarizing the text. Focused revision practice — starting with the claim sentence — will be the most direct path forward."
"[Name] is working on argument structure in writing. Evidence is present in most responses, but the connection between the evidence and the claim is the current growth area. Short, focused practice drafts will help [Name] build this habit."

Approaching — LMS Gradebook Comment

"You have evidence — good start. The next step: write a claim that someone could disagree with. That is what turns a summary into an argument."
"Your evidence is there. Now connect it to your claim: in one sentence, explain why it supports what you said. Try that revision before resubmitting."
"You are close — your claim is there, but it blends into your introduction. Try moving it to its own sentence at the top and see how it changes the whole piece."

Approaching — Progress Report Note

"[Name] is developing the skill of writing a clear, arguable claim and connecting evidence to it. Focused work on the claim sentence — writing it, then testing whether someone could disagree with it — is the most productive next step."
"[Name] includes evidence in writing but is working on the connection between evidence and claim. Short practice drafts with one claim and one piece of evidence will help build this habit efficiently."

Not Yet — Report Card Narrative (≤ 500 characters)

"[Name] is in the early stages of building argument structure in writing. Right now, opinion pieces tend to retell the topic rather than state an arguable claim. The most important next step is practicing the claim sentence: one sentence that states an opinion someone could disagree with. We will keep working on this together."
"[Name] is working on opinion writing. Evidence and claim structure are the current focus area. [Name] benefits from sentence-level scaffolding — a claim sentence frame to start from — and from short, frequent practice rather than longer, less frequent assignments. Please reach out if you would like to discuss how to support this at home."
"[Name] is at an early stage in argument writing. Named claim + evidence is the current instructional target. [Name] is making progress with support and benefits from working with a clear model. I am happy to discuss next steps — please feel free to contact me."

Not Yet — LMS Gradebook Comment

"Start with your claim: one sentence that says what you think and that someone could disagree with. Then we will work on the evidence. Come see me if you want to work through it together."
"I want to help you get started on this. Try writing just your claim sentence first — one sentence, your opinion, no introduction needed. Bring it to me and we will go from there."
"Your first step: write one sentence that says what you believe about [topic]. It does not need to be perfect — just your honest position. From there, we build the argument together."

Not Yet — Progress Report Note

"[Name] is in the early stages of argument writing. Named claim and evidence are the current instructional target. Short, structured practice with a sentence-level scaffold is the most effective support right now. Please reach out if you would like to discuss how to reinforce this at home."
"[Name] is working toward the claim-and-evidence standard with teacher support. Progress is being made with scaffolding. A follow-up conference is recommended to discuss strategies for the next grading period."

Skill 2: Reading Fluency — Accuracy and Rate (CCSS.RF.4.4)

Exceeds — Report Card Narrative

"[Name] reads grade-level text with high accuracy (≥98%) and at a pace that supports comprehension. [Name] self-corrects when a substitution changes meaning — a sign that [Name] is reading for understanding, not just decoding. Expressive phrasing is consistent with punctuation and sentence structure."
"[Name] reads grade-level text accurately, at a rate well above the grade-band target, and with phrasing that reflects comprehension. [Name] adjusts rate appropriately for complex passages and reads aloud with expression that reflects meaning. A strong fluency foundation for the reading challenges ahead."
"[Name]'s oral reading fluency exceeds the 4th-grade target for accuracy and rate. [Name]'s self-correction behavior shows active comprehension monitoring — [Name] notices and fixes errors that change meaning. Ready to use fluency as a comprehension tool in more complex nonfiction."

Exceeds — LMS Gradebook Comment

"Fluency is strong — accuracy, rate, and expression all on point. Focus now: use that fluency to notice how sentence structure and punctuation signal meaning in complex passages."
"You read accurately and expressively, and you self-correct when something does not sound right. That self-monitoring is the key habit. Keep it going in harder texts."
"Rate and accuracy are both strong. Push yourself with texts at the next complexity level — your fluency can handle it."

Meets — Report Card Narrative

"[Name] reads grade-level text with solid accuracy and at a pace that supports comprehension. [Name] is working on consistent expressive phrasing, especially across longer passages. Continued reading practice at the grade-level band will strengthen fluency across all text types."
"[Name] reads grade-level text accurately and at an appropriate rate. Phrasing and expression are consistent in familiar texts and are developing in new or complex passages. Regular read-aloud practice will help [Name] build fluency across a wider range of texts."

Approaching — Report Card Narrative

"[Name] is building reading fluency at the 4th-grade level. Accuracy is developing — [Name] is working on decoding longer multisyllabic words without pausing frequently. Rate is within the developing range. Daily supported reading practice, particularly repeated reading of short passages, is the most direct path forward."
"[Name] is working on reading grade-level text accurately and at a steady rate. Multisyllabic words and complex sentence structures are the current challenge area. Repeated reading of familiar texts and word-study practice will support growth."

Not Yet — Report Card Narrative

"[Name] is working toward reading fluency at the 4th-grade level. Accuracy and rate are both developing, and [Name] benefits from supported reading practice daily. [Name] is receiving targeted small-group instruction. Please reach out so we can coordinate practice at home."
"[Name] is in the early stages of building reading fluency. Decoding accuracy is the current focus area. [Name] is receiving targeted support and making progress. Additional daily reading practice at home — with texts at [Name]'s current level — will accelerate growth. I am happy to recommend specific texts."

(Usage Guide — abbreviated: search by skill → level → channel; personalize by replacing [Name] and swapping examples for your class's specific texts or assignments; do not change criterion-referenced language like "argues", "claim", "evidence", "self-corrects", or "accuracy"; for students needing a highly individualized comment, use student-feedback-generator instead.)

Step 4 — Usage Guide

Produce a one-page usage guide for the teacher (or for the team if the bank is shared):

How to find the right comment: search by skill → level → channel
How to personalize: what to replace, what to add, what not to change (the criterion-referenced language)
How to maintain voice: which phrases to keep, which to adjust for individual students
When NOT to use the bank: students who need a highly individualized comment (significant IEP, major behavior event, extraordinary performance) warrant a custom comment drafted with student-feedback-generator
How to update the bank next year: which skills / standards shift, which comment variations can be retired, how to add new ones

Output requirements:

Always produce Step 1 (Architecture) and await confirmation before generating the full bank — this prevents generating 60+ comments that need to be restructured
Format the bank for easy copy-paste (table or labeled outline; not prose paragraphs that require parsing)
Variations within a skill × level × channel must be genuinely distinct (not the same comment with synonyms swapped)
Flag any comments that were difficult to write in a criterion-referenced way and note why, so the teacher can review those first
Include a word-count note on report card narratives if the school's reporting system has a character limit (ask if not provided)

Anti-Bias Checklist (apply before finalizing)

Before delivering the bank, verify:

No comment assumes academic support at home (no "with practice at home" language without an explicit accommodation)
No comment uses gendered language or assumptions about the student's gender
No comment uses ableist framing ("despite challenges," "though she struggles") — use progress-framing instead
Approaching and Not Yet comments are as specific and actionable as Exceeds and Meets comments — growth comments should not be vaguer than praise comments
All comments pass a plain-language check: 8th grade or below reading level for report card narratives, 6th grade or below for progress report notes
If ELL flag was set: check all idioms, all multi-clause sentences (split if ambiguous), all technical terms (add brief gloss in parentheses if the parent version will be translated)

Pairs with: student-feedback-generator (for one-off individualized comments on specific student work), rubric-generator (to align comment bank criteria with the rubric descriptors), student-progress-report-writer (to build full narrative reports using comment bank stems)