Teacher Admin Work with AI: Reports, Plans, Grant Applications

Here's a text I need stripped of personal data before I work
with it further. It's a school document.

Do two things:
1. Rewrite the text, replacing all personal data with tags:
   student names → [STUDENT A], [STUDENT B]…, parent names →
   [PARENT/GUARDIAN A], colleague names → [TEACHER 1], school,
   town, and institution names → [SCHOOL], [TOWN], [INSTITUTION],
   birth dates, addresses, and ID numbers → [REDACTED].
2. Separately list any wording that doesn't contain a name but
   still identifies a specific person anyway (a unique
   combination of circumstances, a rare diagnosis, a description
   of a family situation). Suggest more general wording for each.

Don't change or summarize anything else in the text. Don't add
information that isn't already there.

Text:
[paste text]

I teach [subject] in [7th] grade at [type of school]. Below
is the exact wording of the expected learning outcomes and
content from our school curriculum.

Hours per week: [2].
School year: [start date] to [end date].
Weeks I have to account for that fall through: [breaks,
project days, ski trip, testing days, professional development
days — with dates].

Build a pacing guide broken down by month. A table with
columns: month | topic | expected outcomes from the curriculum
(verbatim, shortened) | number of hours | note on how I'll
check understanding

Rules:
- work exclusively from the outcomes I pasted in; don't add
  content that isn't in the curriculum
- total hours can't exceed the real allotment after subtracting
  the weeks that fall through; leave 10 percent as a buffer
- put review hours at the end of each term
- where an outcome is too big for one month, split it and
  explain how you split it

Curriculum:
[paste outcomes and content]

Compare two lists and give me a coverage check.

A) Expected outcomes from the school curriculum for [subject],
grade [grade]:
[paste verbatim]

B) My finished pacing guide:
[paste the guide]

Return four lists:
1. Curriculum outcomes not covered anywhere in the guide.
2. Outcomes covered only in passing (mentioned but with no
   dedicated hours) — for each, note where in the guide they
   appear and how many hours they got.
3. Topics in the guide with no basis in any curriculum outcome.
4. Outcomes covered more than once — where, and whether it
   makes sense as review or is a duplication.

Don't fix anything — just show the findings with a reference
to the relevant row.

Here are my running notes for the [year] school year — a date
and one sentence for each event. I need input for the annual
report for [subject / department / homeroom].

Build a text that:
- is organized into sections: instruction and its changes,
  events and field trips, competitions and their results,
  partnerships with other organizations, teacher professional
  development, materials and equipment
- is written factually, in past tense, without evaluative
  superlatives
- includes a date and a brief result for each item
- doesn't add anything that isn't in the notes

Where a note isn't enough (missing result, number of
participants, date), write [FILL IN: what] instead of guessing.
List every spot needing a fill-in at the end.

Notes:
[paste file]

Make two shortened versions from this input.

1. FOR SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION — max 15 sentences: what happened
   in my subject this year, what the results were, what I need
   for next year (materials, hours, staffing support), and what
   didn't go well. No generic filler — every sentence should
   carry information.

2. FOR THE DISTRICT — max 8 sentences, in language understandable
   to someone who doesn't work in a school: what the department
   does in this area, what it achieved, and what that means for
   students.

Rules for both versions:
- use only facts from the input, don't add or generalize
  anything
- no evaluation like "outstanding" unless backed by a specific,
  documented result
- where the input has a [FILL IN] tag, keep it in the shortened
  version too

Input:
[paste]

I'm writing a recommendation letter for a student. Use the
tag [STUDENT A]; I'll add the name myself to the final
document.

Purpose of the letter: [college admissions / scholarship /
internship / study abroad]. Recipient: [institution]. Length:
[half a page].

My notes and evidence:
[concrete results, projects, competitions, behavior in group
work, documentable examples — each with when it happened]

Write a recommendation that:
- draws exclusively on my notes and doesn't add qualities I
  didn't mention
- backs every strength with a concrete example, not just an
  adjective
- is written in the first person, as a teacher who has taught
  this student for [3] years
- avoids superlatives I couldn't back up
- ends with one sentence on specifically how this student
  would be an asset to the recipient

Where I'm missing evidence for something, write [FILL IN: what]
instead of a generic phrase.

Here are my running notes on [STUDENT A] for [term], subject
[subject]:
[paste notes — what they've mastered, where they've improved,
where they struggle, specific situations with dates]

Write a draft report card comment for parents:
- length [8-12] sentences
- structure: what the student can do (with an example), how
  they've progressed this term, where they struggle (factually,
  without labels), what specifically I recommend for practice,
  and how the family can help
- language understandable to someone with no background in
  education
- describe behavior and performance, not the child's character
  ("made errors in his last three assignments in...," not
  "he's careless")
- don't state any diagnosis, even if the notes imply one

Where the notes don't support a claim, write [EVIDENCE MISSING]
instead of a generic sentence.

Here's the text of a call for proposals (or its substantive
parts) for a grant program our school wants to apply to.

Break it down into a working list:
1. Who is eligible and what conditions must be met — check
   against the text whether we qualify (we are [type of school,
   district, size]).
2. What activities are eligible for funding, and what's
   explicitly excluded.
3. Every field and attachment we need to fill in or provide —
   a numbered list, one sentence per item on what's being asked.
4. Required indicators and how they're measured.
5. Deadlines, including anything that has to happen before
   submission.
6. Budget rules: what counts as an eligible expense, what the
   limits are, and whether matching funds are required.

Work exclusively from the pasted text. Where the text doesn't
answer something or is ambiguous, write [NOT FOUND IN THE CALL]
and add a question I should ask the funder — don't guess.

Call for proposals:
[paste text]

I'm writing an application for the [name of program]. The
"activity description" field needs to be [1800] characters.

The activity we want to run (my notes):
[what specifically, for whom, how many kids, how often, who
will lead it, where it will happen, what we need for it, how
long it runs]

The program goal this activity addresses:
[verbatim wording from the call]

Write a description that:
- opens with what will actually happen, not with why the topic
  matters
- includes counts, frequency, and timeframe from my notes
- explicitly shows the link to the cited program goal
- describes how we'll know the activity succeeded
- fits within the character limit

Don't add any numbers I didn't give you. Where you need a number
I haven't provided, write [FILL IN NUMBER: what].

Here's my grant application budget (line items, quantities, and
amounts are mine, from real quotes) and the eligibility rules
from the call.

Budget:
[paste table: line item | quantity | unit cost | total |
expense category]

Rules from the call:
[paste verbatim]

Check it and return findings:
1. Line items that, per the pasted rules, aren't an eligible
   expense, or where it's unclear from the rules.
2. Expense categories where the limit stated in the call is
   exceeded.
3. Costs that logically belong to the described activities but
   are missing from the budget (transportation, insurance,
   materials, instructor fees) — as a question only, not a
   line item you add.
4. Line items a reviewer is likely to want justified.

Don't recalculate totals and don't fill in amounts — I'll do the
arithmetic myself in the spreadsheet. Just return findings with
a reference to the row.

Attached are photos of the shelves in the [subject] supply
closet and photos of my handwritten inventory list.

Build an inventory table from them with columns:
item | quantity | location (shelf / cabinet, per the photo) |
condition (new / usable / damaged / illegible) | inventory
number, if visible on a tag

Rules:
- anything you can't reliably read from a photo, mark as
  [ILLEGIBLE] and note which photo and item it's from — don't
  guess
- only give a quantity where you can actually count it from the
  image; otherwise write [COUNT MANUALLY]
- transcribe handwriting verbatim; don't "correct" names to
  what seems to make sense to you

At the end, list items that are in my handwritten list but that
you don't see on the shelf photos.

Attached are [4] versions of the same type of document that
I've written over the past few years: [document type].

Turn them into a single template:
1. Find the common structure — which parts repeat across all
   versions, and in what order.
2. Leave text that's identical every time unchanged.
3. Replace text that varies with a bracketed placeholder that
   describes what goes there: [event date], [number of
   students], [chaperone's name].
4. Flag parts that appear in only some versions as optional,
   and note when they're used.
5. At the end, add a checklist: what needs to be filled in,
   what needs to be attached, and who has to approve it before
   it goes out.

Separately note what's inconsistent across the versions and
suggest which variant to adopt as the standard.

Versions:
[paste documents]