Evidence, not opinion
Feedback that cites the actual moment in your lesson, not a vague memory from weeks ago.
“When you asked the class to defend their answer with evidence from the text, four students independently referenced the same paragraph — that’s the questioning technique the rubric is looking for, and it’s worth naming out loud in your next lesson too.”
Built for you, not done to you
Your evaluator stays the evaluator. Your union has a seat at the table before any of this reaches a teacher’s file.
“As the teachers’ union rep, I proudly recommend Swiftscore to every evaluator—it’s an absolute game-changer!”
A mechanism, not a promise
Here is what has to be true for “fairer evaluation” to mean anything.
A draft scored against your contract’s framework, not the mood of the room — your principal can still edit anything.
Request edits to what’s written. What lands on your file reflects a conversation, not a verdict handed down.
Unions see example feedback and take part in calibration before any of this reaches a teacher’s file.
Common questions
Am I being recorded?
Swiftscore scripts the lesson to help your evaluator write a better observation — nothing is stored as audio. The transcript belongs to your district, not to us, and your principal decides per building whether to use this at all.
What if the AI gets my score wrong?
Your evaluator stays the evaluator. Swiftscore drafts against the evidence it heard and cites the exact moment a score came from, so your principal can check any score in one click and change it.
Want to shape the future of teacher evaluation?
Join a focus group where teachers give feedback directly to Swiftscore, shaping how evaluators across the country use AI and how it protects teachers.