Notes on alignment audits

← Back to Field Notes

Standards alignment is less about coverage and more about depth. A few lessons from running audits with a model as a second reader.

An alignment audit asks one honest question: does what we teach, what we assess, and what we promised in the standards actually line up? Most teams already suspect the answer.

The three columns

Lay out standards, instruction, and assessment side by side. Gaps show up immediately: standards nobody teaches, lessons nobody assesses, and tests that measure something else entirely.

Physical mapping still beats spreadsheets for the first pass. People argue better around a table.

Standards coverage in one sample unit (illustrative)

Where a model earns its keep

Paste a unit's assessments and its standards, and ask a model to map each item to a standard with a one line justification. It will be wrong sometimes. That is useful: every disagreement is a conversation your team needed to have.

Shelf prompt: Alignment check

01Here are our standards: [PASTE].
02Here are our assessment items: [PASTE].
03Map each item to the closest standard.
04Flag any standard with no item, and any item with no standard.

Unmapped standards across three audit cycles (illustrative)

The audit is not the deliverable. The conversation it forces is.

Try it with your team

One hour audit

Pick one unit, not a whole course
Map assessments before lessons
Let the model draft, let the team decide
Leave with three changes, not thirty

The three columns

Where a model earns its keep

Try it with your team

New tools and field notes, in your inbox.