What You'll Get From Foundations Course

As a student, you'll get a few great benefits from being here:

• Access exclusive content. We've designed the Foundations Course (Limited Time Access) to help support those aspiring salespeople who cannot join during our normal week-long roleplays.

• Start your sales journey. Get started on your own time without having to wait for our next cohort.

How to Get the Most Out of Foundations Course

We’re here to get results and we know you are too. Here’s the best way for each of us to get there:

Be focused. You only have access to this course for a few weeks. Be sure to prioritize this as we are looking to work with those that are ready to move into their sales careers.

Communicate. Have questions? Feedback? Comments? Please share with us so we can continue to develop this program.

Be positive.  This can be a lot of information to learn quickly. Please take your time and apply this knowledge as soon as possible. 

You are Part of Something Bigger

By joining the Foundations Course, you’re also a member of Fuel Sales Academy, our overarching community. You’ll be able to keep up with our Foundations Course activity both here, but also in your main Fuel Sales Academy Activity Feed (think about it as our own Facebook newsfeed with Course and other activity all in one place).

Let’s get started.

Intro

You must complete the video in full before continuing. 

Mindset

You must complete the video in full before continuing. 

Buyer's Process

You must complete the video in full before continuing. 

The Sales Process

You must complete the video in full before continuing. 

Ideal Client Profile

You must complete the video in full before continuing. 

Outreach Process

You must complete the video in full before continuing. 

Messaging

You must complete the video in full before continuing. 

The First 45 Seconds

You must complete the video in full before continuing. 

The Discovery Framework

You must complete the video in full before continuing. 

Process Conversation Resources - Teacher Evaluation & Instructional Coaching

The goal of this document is to become your industry study guide for teacher evaluation and instructional coaching. It begins by outlining the current state of the market, why the process matters, who is involved, and why it can be difficult to achieve the intended outcome. Take time to absorb this context so you can enter discovery conversations grounded in the prospect's reality.

Below the current state, the guide focuses on four primary issues with teacher evaluation and instructional coaching. Each issue follows the same path you would typically use in a discovery conversation. As you move from facts to details to impact, put yourself in the prospect's shoes. The goal is to understand the process well enough to empathize with the time pressure, frustration, and lost coaching opportunity it creates.

Current State of Teacher Evaluation & Instructional Coaching

Teacher evaluation is intended to improve instruction. In practice, it often becomes one of the clearest examples of a process designed for growth that gets buried in compliance work. School leaders are expected to observe classrooms, collect evidence, align notes to a state or district framework, determine ratings, write feedback, meet with teachers, document goals, and submit the final record - all while managing the daily demands of a school.

Many stakeholders depend on the process. District leaders set expectations, select frameworks, monitor completion, and look for consistency across schools. Principals and other evaluators carry out observations, make judgments, write reports, and lead coaching conversations. Teachers need feedback that feels fair, specific, timely, and useful. Human resources and labor partners need a process that is credible, documented, and aligned to policy. Students ultimately benefit when the process helps teachers strengthen their practice.

Here is what you will learn when you are talking with a school leader about their current process.

The work begins before an evaluator enters the classroom. Leaders may review lesson plans, teacher goals, prior observations, student context, and the evaluation rubric. During the lesson, they capture evidence through handwritten notes, forms, laptops, or other tools. Afterward, they organize those notes, connect evidence to framework indicators, draft narrative feedback, identify growth areas, assign ratings when required, and prepare for a post-observation conversation.

The paperwork can take longer than the coaching itself. When leaders are responsible for many teachers, every additional step compounds. Notes may live in one place, lesson artifacts in another, and the official evaluation in a separate system of record. The evaluator must reconstruct what happened, choose representative evidence, use the district's language, and create a defensible write-up.

That delay matters because the most valuable part of the evaluation is not the form, score, or final document. It is the conversation that helps a teacher reflect while the lesson is still fresh, see what is working, identify a meaningful next step, and connect that step to future practice. When the write-up consumes the available time, coaching can become shorter, less frequent, or more generic.

Quality can also vary from evaluator to evaluator. One leader may capture detailed, low-inference evidence and connect it clearly to the rubric. Another may rely on memory, general impressions, or language that is too positive or too broad to be actionable. Even experienced leaders can struggle to balance accuracy, candor, trust, and consistency while working under time pressure.

District leaders face a different challenge: visibility. Completion reports can show whether forms were submitted, but not necessarily whether meaningful coaching occurred, whether growth goals were followed up, or whether teacher practice changed over time. A district can be fully compliant and still have an evaluation process that feels disconnected from professional learning.

The broader shift is clear. Districts do not simply need another place to store evaluations. They need a practical way to reduce the administrative burden, strengthen evidence-based feedback, and help leaders make coaching conversations more timely, specific, and connected to instructional growth.

Issue 1 - Evaluation Work Crowds Out Instructional Coaching

Issue Statement

What we've been hearing is that school leaders are frustrated because the teacher-evaluation process requires so much manual documentation that they spend more time producing the write-up than helping teachers improve.

FACTS

What do we know at a high level?

The prospect has already told us they experience this issue. Now our job is to understand why.

Examples of facts you might uncover:

• Evaluators observe classrooms and collect evidence throughout the year.
• Observation evidence must be aligned to a state or district framework.
• Leaders write narrative feedback, document ratings, and prepare for post-observation meetings.
• The official evaluation often lives in a system designed primarily for recordkeeping and compliance.
• Principals balance evaluation work with instructional leadership, operations, staffing, students, and families.

DETAILS

Help the prospect slow down and walk through exactly what happens from the moment an observation is planned until feedback is delivered and the evaluation is finalized.

Dig into:

• What happens before the evaluator enters the classroom?
• How is evidence captured during the observation?
• Where do notes, lesson plans, prior goals, and artifacts live?
• How does the evaluator connect evidence to the framework or rubric?
• How long does it take to turn raw notes into a complete write-up?
• What other responsibilities interrupt or delay the work?
• How soon after the observation does the teacher receive feedback?
• How does the evaluator prepare for the coaching conversation?
• How are goals documented, revisited, and measured in later observations?
• How do district leaders know the experience is consistent across evaluators and schools?

The goal is not merely to learn how the form is completed. The goal is to uncover everything required before a useful coaching conversation can happen.

IMPACT

What does that experience create?

Process Cause

• Evaluators spend significant time organizing notes, mapping evidence to a rubric, and drafting narrative feedback.
• Information is spread across observation notes, documents, goals, frameworks, and systems of record.
• High evaluator caseloads turn each manual step into a recurring administrative burden.
• Time pressure makes feedback quality and follow-through vary across leaders and schools.

Process Effect

• Teachers wait longer for feedback and lose the chance to reflect while the lesson is still fresh.
• Post-observation meetings become shorter, more general, or more focused on ratings than growth.
• Feedback can feel inconsistent, overly positive, or too vague to change classroom practice.
• Principals have less time for classroom presence, relationship building, and instructional leadership.
• Districts can meet compliance requirements without knowing whether coaching is improving teaching.
• Teachers may experience evaluation as something done to them instead of support designed to help them grow.

Issue 2 - Feedback Varies and Is Not Actionable

Issue Statement

What we've been hearing is that district leaders are concerned because observation feedback can vary widely by evaluator and is often too general, too positive, or not specific enough to help teachers change their practice.

FACTS

What do we know at a high level?

The prospect has already told us they experience this issue. Now our job is to understand why.

Examples of facts you might uncover:

• Multiple evaluators use the same district or state instructional framework.
• Evaluators make judgments based on classroom evidence, professional expertise, and rubric language.
• Written feedback must identify strengths, growth areas, and supporting evidence.
• Leaders often complete evaluations under significant time pressure.
• Teachers compare the clarity, usefulness, and fairness of feedback across evaluators.

DETAILS

Help the prospect slow down and walk through how raw classroom evidence becomes written feedback and a final evaluation.

Dig into:

• What does the evaluator consider strong, objective evidence?
• How are observation and interpretation separated in the notes?
• How does the evaluator select the most important evidence?
• How is that evidence connected to specific framework indicators?
• How does the evaluator decide which strength and growth area to emphasize?
• What makes feedback specific enough for a teacher to act on?
• How do leaders handle difficult or candid feedback?
• How are evaluators calibrated across schools?
• Who reviews the quality and consistency of completed evaluations?
• How do teachers respond when feedback feels vague, overly positive, or inconsistent?

Help the prospect move beyond whether feedback was submitted. Explore whether the teacher can clearly understand the evidence, the expectation, and the next change to make.

IMPACT

What does that experience create?

Process Cause

• Evaluators interpret the same rubric language differently.
• Time pressure encourages leaders to rely on memory, general impressions, or reusable language.
• Evidence, ratings, and narrative feedback are not always connected in a clear chain.
• Limited calibration makes quality depend on the individual evaluator.

Process Effect

• Teachers leave evaluations unsure about what to continue or change.
• Feedback feels less fair when expectations differ across evaluators or schools.
• Trust erodes when ratings and narrative feedback do not match the teacher's experience.
• Growth goals become generic instead of connected to observable classroom practice.
• District leaders cannot confidently use evaluation information to guide professional learning.
• Instructional improvement depends more on evaluator skill and available time than on a consistent process.

Issue 3 - Coaching Conversations Do Not Lead to Sustained Growth

Issue Statement

What we've been hearing is that instructional leaders are discouraged because even when useful post-observation conversations happen, growth goals and next steps are not consistently revisited, making each evaluation feel like an isolated event.

FACTS

What do we know at a high level?

The prospect has already told us they experience this issue. Now our job is to understand why.

Examples of facts you might uncover:

• Evaluators hold post-observation meetings and discuss strengths and growth areas.
• Teachers may leave the conversation with one or more goals or next steps.
• Formal and informal observations occur at different points throughout the year.
• Professional learning, coaching, and evaluation may be managed through separate processes.
• Principals are responsible for following up while balancing many other leadership priorities.

DETAILS

Help the prospect walk through what happens from the post-observation conversation to the next classroom visit.

Dig into:

• How does the evaluator prepare for the coaching conversation?
• What role does the teacher play in interpreting the evidence?
• How is a growth goal selected and made specific?
• Where are goals, commitments, and next steps documented?
• Who owns each follow-up action?
• What support or professional learning is connected to the goal?
• When and how is the goal revisited?
• What evidence shows whether practice is improving?
• What happens when progress stalls or the same concern appears again?
• How does the teacher see growth across multiple observations?

The goal is to understand the space between evaluation events. That is where a useful conversation either becomes sustained growth or disappears into the next urgent priority.

IMPACT

What does that experience create?

Process Cause

• Goals and next steps are stored in forms, meeting notes, or systems that are not part of daily coaching.
• Follow-up depends on the evaluator remembering and manually reconstructing prior conversations.
• Professional learning is not always connected to observation evidence or teacher goals.
• Each new observation can restart the process instead of building on prior work.

Process Effect

• Teachers receive feedback without a clear, supported path for improvement.
• The same growth areas appear repeatedly without visible progress.
• Teachers and leaders struggle to recognize or celebrate improvement over time.
• Coaching feels episodic instead of continuous and developmental.
• Evaluation, professional learning, and district priorities remain disconnected.
• Students wait longer to benefit from changes in instructional practice.

Issue 4 (District Leadership Only) - Districts Lack Visibility and Calibration Across Schools

Issue Statement

What we've been hearing is that district leaders are frustrated because they can see whether evaluations were completed, but they cannot easily see whether meaningful coaching is happening, whether expectations are consistent, or whether teacher practice is improving across schools.

FACTS

What do we know at a high level?

The prospect has already told us they experience this issue. Now our job is to understand why.

Examples of facts you might uncover:

• Districts have multiple schools, evaluators, teacher groups, and instructional priorities.
• Evaluation systems typically report completion status, ratings, and required documentation.
• District leaders are responsible for fairness and consistency across schools.
• Leaders want to know whether coaching activity is connected to teacher and district goals.
• Any district-wide view must protect teacher data and respect appropriate access controls.

DETAILS

Help the prospect slow down and walk through how district leaders monitor the quality and impact of evaluation and coaching today.

Dig into:

• What can leaders see beyond whether an evaluation was submitted?
• How do they know post-observation conversations are happening?
• How do they compare coaching frequency and follow-through across schools?
• How do they identify common teacher strengths and growth areas?
• How do they know evaluators are interpreting the framework consistently?
• How are district priorities reflected in observation and coaching?
• How is progress toward teacher goals measured over time?
• How do leaders identify evaluators or schools that need support?
• What reports must be assembled manually?
• Who can access teacher-level and district-level information?

The goal is not to create more oversight. It is to understand what leaders need in order to support evaluators, protect fairness, and connect coaching activity to instructional priorities.

IMPACT

What does that experience create?

Process Cause

• Systems of record emphasize completion and ratings more than coaching quality and follow-through.
• Evidence, goals, and coaching activity are difficult to aggregate across schools.
• Calibration depends on periodic meetings, manual reviews, or small samples of completed evaluations.
• District priorities are not consistently visible in day-to-day observation and feedback.

Process Effect

• District leaders discover gaps after the evaluation cycle rather than while support can still be provided.
• Teacher experience and feedback quality vary by school and evaluator.
• Leaders cannot easily tell whether coaching effort is producing measurable improvement.
• Professional learning decisions rely on anecdotes or incomplete information.
• Strong evaluators and effective coaching practices are harder to identify and spread.
• Evaluation remains a compliance process instead of a district-wide engine for teacher and student growth.

• • • • SwiftScore Messaging Framework

        Current State

        Teacher evaluation has become one of the clearest examples of a process that was designed to improve instruction, but often ends up buried in compliance work. School leaders are expected to observe classrooms, collect evidence, align notes to a rubric, write feedback, hold post-observation conversations, document next steps, and still manage everything else happening in the building.

        For many principals, the write-up takes longer than the coaching itself. That matters because the most important part of the process is not the form, the score, or the final document. It is the conversation that helps a teacher reflect, improve, and move practice forward while the lesson is still fresh.

        The challenge is that many evaluation systems were built as systems of record. They help districts store forms and complete requirements, but they do not always help leaders have better coaching conversations, more often. As a result, feedback can become delayed, inconsistent, too positive, or too general to drive real growth.

        District leaders also need to understand whether coaching is actually happening across schools. They want to know if principals are setting growth goals with teachers, following up on those goals, and seeing progress over time. Without that visibility, evaluation can remain a compliance cycle instead of a driver of teacher practice and student growth.

        The broader shift is clear: districts do not just need another place to store evaluations. They need a practical way to help leaders complete the paperwork faster, improve the quality of feedback, and make coaching conversations more frequent, more specific, and more connected to instructional growth.

        Who is SwiftScore?

        SwiftScore is an AI-native teacher-evaluation and instructional-coaching platform. Principals capture classroom evidence through privacy-first transcription, notes, or uploaded artifacts, and SwiftScore drafts rubric-aligned feedback in about 20 seconds. The leader always reviews, edits, and owns the final evaluation.

        Why Does SwiftScore Exist? What Problems Does It Solve?

        Principals look to SwiftScore when they are…

        • Frustrated that teacher evaluation has become compliance paperwork that takes time away from real instructional coaching.
        • Concerned that principals are spending more time writing evaluations than having timely, useful conversations with teachers.
        • Struggling with feedback that can be inconsistent, overly positive, or not actionable enough to move teacher practice.
        • Pressed to align observation evidence to state or district rubrics without adding hours of manual work for school leaders.
        • Lacking visibility into whether coaching conversations are happening regularly and whether teachers are making progress toward growth goals.
        • Worried that generic AI tools are not accurate, purpose-built, or trustworthy enough for teacher evaluation and instructional feedback.

        What Does SwiftScore Offer? How Does It Solve These Problems?

        SwiftScore helps school leaders move from observation to coaching faster by turning transcripts, notes, and uploaded documents into rubric-aligned Evidence, a Growth Path, and Conversation Starters in about 20 seconds, while keeping the leader in control of the final evaluation.

        Why is SwiftScore the Best Solution?

        1. It gives principals more time to coach instead of complete paperwork.

        SwiftScore automates the most time-consuming parts of the evaluation process by transforming classroom evidence into rubric-aligned draft feedback in approximately 20 seconds. This allows school leaders to spend more time supporting teacher growth rather than writing evaluations.

        2. It produces consistent, evidence-based feedback.

        The platform combines classroom transcripts, observation notes, lesson plans, district priorities, and instructional frameworks to generate structured feedback aligned to the district's evaluation rubric.

        3. It supports the entire coaching conversation, not just the evaluation.

        Beyond generating written feedback, SwiftScore helps leaders prepare for post-observation meetings with Conversation Starters, summarizes coaching discussions, captures growth goals, and tracks progress across future observations.

        4. It provides leaders with meaningful visibility.

        District and school leaders can monitor coaching activity, teacher growth, and progress toward instructional goals across observations, helping determine whether coaching efforts are producing measurable improvement over time.

        5. It works alongside existing evaluation systems.

        SwiftScore is designed to complement, not replace, a district's existing teacher evaluation platform. Schools can continue using their current system of record while adding AI-powered coaching support that improves efficiency and instructional quality.

        6. It is purpose-built for instructional coaching.

        Unlike general AI tools that simply generate text, SwiftScore is specifically designed around educator evaluation workflows, instructional rubrics, and coaching best practices, producing feedback that reflects how school leaders actually evaluate instruction.

        7. It delivers AI districts can trust.

        SwiftScore uses a purpose-built AI pipeline that achieved 93.5% alignment with expert-coded classroom evaluations in benchmarking, substantially outperforming general-purpose AI models. Leaders remain in complete control by reviewing, editing, and approving every evaluation before it is finalized.

       

SwiftScore Personas

This is where you will find all the details on the personas for SwiftScore. Refer to these to help support your discovery conversation.

District Leadership

Common Job Titles:

• Superintendent
• Assistant Superintendent
• Chief Academic Officer

"I need confidence that teacher evaluation is improving instruction across every school, not just generating completed paperwork."

Their Why: They are responsible for the overall quality of teaching and learning across the district. They want confidence that principals are consistently coaching teachers, instructional expectations are being reinforced, and the evaluation process is contributing to stronger classroom instruction district-wide.

The Insight: District leaders often know whether evaluations have been completed, but have much less visibility into whether meaningful coaching conversations are happening, whether teachers are acting on feedback, or whether instructional practice is improving over time.

SwiftScore Hook: SwiftScore is built around the idea that teacher evaluation should lead to better coaching, not just completed paperwork. It gives district leaders a better picture of whether coaching conversations are happening consistently across schools and whether they're leading to teacher growth.

Key Proof Points:

• District-Wide Visibility: Gives leaders insight into coaching activity, teacher growth, and progress across schools.
• Consistent Coaching Process: Helps create a more consistent evaluation and coaching experience while working alongside the district's existing evaluation system.

Discovery Questions:

• "How do you currently know whether your evaluation process is actually improving instruction across your schools?"
• "Beyond completed evaluations, what do you look for to determine whether principals are effectively coaching teachers?"

School Leadership

Common Job Titles:

• Principal
• Assistant Principal

"I want to spend more time coaching teachers and less time writing evaluations."

Their Why: School leaders are responsible for observing instruction, evaluating teacher performance, and helping teachers improve. Every hour spent organizing evidence and completing documentation is time they cannot spend supporting instruction.

The Insight: Many principals find that writing the evaluation takes longer than the coaching conversation itself. By the time everything is documented, the opportunity for timely, meaningful feedback has often passed.

SwiftScore Hook: SwiftScore takes much of the administrative work that happens after a classroom observation and organizes it into a rubric-aligned draft, so principals can spend more time preparing for the coaching conversation instead of writing the evaluation.

Key Proof Points:

• Administrative Time Savings: Drafts rubric-aligned evidence and feedback in approximately 20 seconds.
• Coaching Support: Generates Conversation Starters and Growth Paths that help principals prepare for more productive post-observation conversations.

Discovery Questions:

• "Walk me through what happens after you leave a classroom observation."
• "Where do you spend the most time between observing a lesson and meeting with the teacher?"
• "How often are you able to have the coaching conversation while the lesson is still fresh?"

Curriculum & Instruction Leadership

Common Job Titles:

• Director of Curriculum & Instruction
• Director of Teaching & Learning

"I need every teacher to receive high-quality instructional coaching that's aligned with our district's instructional priorities."

Their Why: They are responsible for ensuring instructional quality is consistent across the district. They want teacher evaluation to reinforce district priorities and help principals coach toward stronger classroom instruction.

The Insight: Curriculum leaders often see wide variation in how principals gather evidence, apply instructional rubrics, and deliver feedback. That inconsistency makes it difficult to ensure every teacher receives equally meaningful coaching.

SwiftScore Hook: SwiftScore gives principals a more consistent way to organize evidence, align feedback to the district's instructional framework, and prepare for coaching conversations. The goal isn't to standardize every evaluation, but to make the coaching process stronger and more consistent.

Key Proof Points:

• Instructional Consistency: Helps create more consistent, evidence-based feedback across evaluators.
• District Alignment: Supports district instructional priorities through rubric-aligned evaluations.

Discovery Questions:

• "How consistent is the evaluation experience from one school to another?"
• "How do you know principals are coaching toward your district's instructional priorities?"
• "What challenges do principals face when applying your instructional framework consistently?"

Human Resources & Talent Leadership

Common Job Titles:

• Director of Human Resources
• Chief Human Resources Officer
• Director of Talent

"I need a teacher evaluation process that's consistent, well documented, and supports professional growth."

Their Why: They oversee district evaluation processes and want them to be fair, consistent, and supportive of teacher development while reducing unnecessary administrative burden.

The Insight: HR leaders often see inconsistencies in documentation and evaluation quality across schools. They want principals spending less time wrestling with paperwork and more time developing teachers, while ensuring evaluations remain well-supported and defensible.

SwiftScore Hook: SwiftScore works alongside a district's existing evaluation system. It helps principals prepare stronger evaluations with better documentation while keeping the evaluator in complete control of the final feedback.

Key Proof Points:

• Consistent Documentation: Organizes evidence into structured, rubric-aligned evaluations.
• Works Alongside Existing Systems: Enhances the district's evaluation process without replacing its current system of record.

Discovery Questions:

• "How consistent are teacher evaluations across your schools today?"
• "Where do you see the biggest administrative challenges in your evaluation process?"
• "How do you support principals in producing consistent evaluations?"

Professional Learning Leadership

Common Job Titles:

• Director of Professional Development
• Instructional Coach

"I want every coaching conversation to lead to meaningful instructional growth, not end when the evaluation is submitted."

Their Why: They focus on helping educators continuously improve through coaching, reflection, and professional learning. They want evaluation to be the beginning of a teacher's growth, not the end of the process.

The Insight: Coaching conversations often happen once, but growth goals are difficult to revisit consistently. Without continuity, valuable opportunities to reinforce instructional improvement are easily lost.

SwiftScore Hook: SwiftScore supports more than the written evaluation. It helps leaders prepare for coaching conversations, capture what was discussed, establish growth goals, and revisit those goals during future observations.

Key Proof Points:

• Continuous Coaching: Connects coaching conversations across multiple observations.
• Growth Tracking: Documents growth goals and helps leaders monitor progress over time.

Discovery Questions:

• "How are coaching goals documented after an observation today?"
• "How do principals follow up on previous coaching conversations?"
• "What helps you know coaching is actually changing instructional practice?"

Example Scripting (homework)

Example Scripting

While each SDR will be reviewing this script below, they will be directed to make the script their own to ensure they sound more genuine in the process of the conversation and be able to adjust the story, test, and discovery to fit the persona or situation.

Opening the Call

Ask for the specific contact or enter the conversation seeking to speak with someone who is involved with the process or purpose of the product.

I'm [SDR Name] with SwiftScore. Does that name sound familiar?

<NO> That's ok …

<YES> That's great …

Do you mind if I take 30 seconds to tell you why I am calling and you can tell me if it makes sense to continue the call?

Story - Setting the Hook

Thanks!

I have been speaking with [reference title, department or role; e.g. curriculum leaders, education leaders, etc.] about the challenges they face [describe the focus]

They have shared that they are … [List 2 or 3 statements from below]

• Frustrated that teacher evaluation has become compliance paperwork that takes time away from real instructional coaching.
• Concerned that principals are spending more time writing evaluations than having timely, useful conversations with teachers.
• Struggling with feedback that can be inconsistent, overly positive, or not actionable enough to move teacher practice.
• Pressed to align observation evidence to state or district rubrics without adding hours of manual work for school leaders.
• Lacking visibility into whether coaching conversations are happening regularly and whether teachers are making progress toward growth goals.
• Worried that generic AI tools are not accurate, purpose-built, or trustworthy enough for teacher evaluation and instructional feedback.

Test Question - Engagement

Are you experiencing any of these issues as well?

Pause here and listen to the response. Offer empathy and/or positive feedback

Discovery - Establishing Need

Let's learn more about the process and impacts related to issues highlighted above. You might already have some intel from the educational institution sites to reference. These questions provide a prompt for exploration, but you should have a conversation using follow-up and clarifying questions, empathy, and curiosity. It is crucial to listen for pain framing from the prospect (we are trying, it's challenging, sometimes we struggle to, we wish, unfortunately). When you hear those comments from the prospect, you should dive in with open-ended questions.

Example:

Prospect: "It's a challenge to get everything we need back to the teacher in a timely manner."

SDR: Can you help me understand how that challenge is impacting the evaluation experience for your team?

Prospect: "Unfortunately, there is just not enough time in the day to do it all"

SDR: What do you mean when you say there is not enough time, how are evaluations creating such a time challenge?

SDR Aims to Learn/Understand:

The process used today for evaluations.

Common workflow:

Prepare → Observe → Analyze → Discuss → Document → Support → Followup

We should explore:

• Administrative workload
• Evaluator capability
• Feedback quality
• Calibration
• Teacher trust
• Coaching continuity
• District oversight

Example Discovery Questions

Current process

• Could you walk me through what happens from the moment an observation is scheduled until the teacher receives feedback?
• Where do you hear about the most challenging parts of the process? We often hear gathering evidence, interpreting the rubric, writing the evaluation, or developing the coaching steps.

Volume Based

• Can you help me understand how many teachers each evaluator supports, and how long the complete process takes per teacher?

Impact based

• How do you ensure that two evaluators would score the same classroom evidence similarly?
• How do teachers currently perceive the evaluation process?
• After feedback is delivered, how do you track whether the teacher tried the recommended strategy and improved?

Growing Pain

Where delays occur between the classroom observation, the completed evaluation, and the coaching conversation, as well as how those delays affect the relevance and usefulness of the feedback.

• SwiftScore connection: SwiftScore shortens the time between observation and feedback, helping leaders prepare for post-observation conversations while the lesson is still fresh and the feedback is more likely to be meaningful.

How difficult it is for evaluators to connect classroom evidence to state or district rubrics, instructional frameworks, and districtwide priorities without adding substantial manual work.

• SwiftScore connection: SwiftScore is purpose-built to analyze classroom evidence through the district's selected rubric and instructional framework, reducing the manual work required to organize and align evidence.

Whether the current evaluation process produces meaningful coaching conversations or primarily results in completed forms, scores, and compliance documentation.

• SwiftScore connection: SwiftScore supports the conversation beyond the evaluation form by providing Conversation Starters, suggested Growth Paths, and tools that help leaders move from documentation into reflective instructional coaching.

What visibility district leaders currently have into the frequency and quality of coaching conversations, principal follow-through, teacher progress, and patterns across schools.

• SwiftScore connection: SwiftScore provides district and school leaders with visibility into coaching activity, teacher growth, instructional goals, and progress across observations and schools.

How district leaders currently determine whether teacher evaluation is improving instructional practice and student learning rather than simply confirming that required evaluations were completed.

• SwiftScore connection: SwiftScore helps leaders look beyond completion data by tracking coaching conversations, growth goals, and progress over time, creating a clearer view of whether evaluation is contributing to instructional improvement.

Whether school leaders are already using general-purpose AI tools to support evaluation work, what information they are entering, and how the district is managing concerns related to accuracy, privacy, rubric alignment, and oversight.

• SwiftScore connection: Unlike general-purpose AI, SwiftScore is designed specifically for teacher evaluation and instructional coaching, with privacy-first evidence capture, rubric-aligned workflows, and evaluator review built into the process.

What level of confidence district leaders have in AI-generated instructional feedback and what safeguards, evidence, or human-review expectations would be necessary for broader adoption.

• SwiftScore connection: SwiftScore's purpose-built AI pipeline achieved 93.5% alignment with expert-coded evaluations in benchmarking, compared with approximately 63% for general AI models. The school leader still reviews, edits, and owns every final evaluation.

Close - Setting the Meeting

Summarize what you've heard and listen to the response. Next, you'll make the recommendation on the next step.

So, what I am hearing is that your district/school/department is struggling with/concerned about/frustrated by [summarize what they told you]

Pause here and listen to the response. Offer empathy and/or positive feedback

I am confident SwiftScore can help. The reason I say that is because…

[List 2 or 3 statements from below]

1. It gives principals more time to coach instead of complete paperwork.

SwiftScore automates the most time-consuming parts of the evaluation process by transforming classroom evidence into rubric-aligned draft feedback in approximately 20 seconds. This allows school leaders to spend more time supporting teacher growth rather than writing evaluations.

2. It produces consistent, evidence-based feedback.

The platform combines classroom transcripts, observation notes, lesson plans, district priorities, and instructional frameworks to generate structured feedback aligned to the district's evaluation rubric.

3. It supports the entire coaching conversation, not just the evaluation.

Beyond generating written feedback, SwiftScore helps leaders prepare for post-observation meetings with Conversation Starters, summarizes coaching discussions, captures growth goals, and tracks progress across future observations.

4. It provides leaders with meaningful visibility.

District and school leaders can monitor coaching activity, teacher growth, and progress toward instructional goals across observations, helping determine whether coaching efforts are producing measurable improvement over time.

5. It works alongside existing evaluation systems.

SwiftScore is designed to complement, not replace, a district's existing teacher evaluation platform. Schools can continue using their current system of record while adding AI-powered coaching support that improves efficiency and instructional quality.

6. It is purpose-built for instructional coaching.

Unlike general AI tools that simply generate text, SwiftScore is specifically designed around educator evaluation workflows, instructional rubrics, and coaching best practices, producing feedback that reflects how school leaders actually evaluate instruction.

7. It delivers AI districts can trust.

SwiftScore uses a purpose-built AI pipeline that achieved 93.5% alignment with expert-coded classroom evaluations in benchmarking, substantially outperforming general-purpose AI models. Leaders remain in complete control by reviewing, editing, and approving every evaluation before it is finalized.

So, I recommend we show you exactly how you can accomplish this by setting up a time with one of our experts.

[SwiftScore representative name] can walk you through this and answer any of your questions.

Use the meeting availability to pitch specific dates and time.

They have a time open this coming <DAY> at <TIME 1> or <TIME 2>. Do either of those times work better for you?

Additional Resources

SwiftScore Reference Resources

• Site: https://swiftscore.org
• Blog: https://swiftscore.org/blog
• District Stories (Case Studies):
• Overview Deck: https://portal.swiftscore.org/prototypes/swiftscore-overview-rev10
• Demo:
• Demo with HR director: https://fathom.video/share/NCx_xr3h8hb5ExFk-B-ep6sRggLUXutA
• Demo with a Principal: https://fathom.video/share/JdRBzU8PfzXDDH3sCV8wRMBAppesgc1W

Client Testimonial Examples

• "As the teachers' union rep, I proudly recommend SwiftScore to every evaluator. It moves us beyond compliance toward conversations that genuinely support teacher growth." — Mei Pena, Instructional Coach, Philadelphia Public Schools
• "SwiftScore provides peace of mind and enables my staff to better coach teachers." — Sue Thompson, Principal, George Washington HS
• "I'm a five out of five in instructional ability but a three out of five in practice." — Jordan Floyd, Principal AMY Northwest MS

Key Success Evidence/Metrics

• World Bank study: SwiftScore's AI feedback was benchmarked against expert 'master-coded' classroom evaluations.
• Base models (e.g. ChatGPT) scored ~63% alignment VS SwiftScore's custom pipeline reached 93.5%.

Glossary Of Terms

Artifact

What it means: A piece of evidence used during a teacher evaluation that helps provide context for instruction. Examples include lesson plans, student work, assessments, instructional materials, or teacher reflections.

Calibration

What it means: The process of helping multiple evaluators score and provide feedback consistently using the same instructional standards or evaluation rubric. The goal is for teachers to receive similar evaluations regardless of who observes them.

Classroom Observation

What it means: When a principal or instructional leader visits a classroom to collect evidence about teaching practices and student learning.

Coaching Conversation

What it means: The discussion that happens after a classroom observation where the evaluator and teacher reflect on the lesson, discuss strengths, and identify opportunities for growth. This is one of the central ideas behind SwiftScore.

Compliance

What it means: Meeting district or state requirements for completing teacher evaluations, observations, documentation, and reporting. Many districts struggle to balance compliance requirements with meaningful instructional coaching.

Evaluation Framework

What it means: The district's chosen model for evaluating teaching. It defines what effective instruction looks like and provides the standards principals use during observations.

Evidence

What it means: Objective information collected during a classroom observation that supports feedback or evaluation decisions. Evidence might come from observation notes, classroom transcripts, lesson plans, student work, or other instructional artifacts.

Feedback

What it means: Specific, evidence-based observations shared with a teacher after an observation to reinforce strengths and identify opportunities for improvement.

Framework Alignment

What it means: Organizing classroom evidence so it connects directly to the indicators within a district's evaluation framework or rubric.

Goal Tracking

What it means: Following a teacher's instructional goals across multiple observations instead of treating each evaluation as a separate event. SwiftScore is designed to connect coaching conversations over time rather than making every observation start from scratch.

Instructional Coaching

What it means: The ongoing process of helping teachers improve through classroom observations, reflection, feedback, goal setting, and follow-up conversations.

Instructional Framework

What it means: A district's shared definition of effective teaching. Principals use it to guide observations, coaching conversations, and teacher evaluations.

Observation Evidence

What it means: Everything collected during or immediately after a classroom observation that helps explain what happened during the lesson.

Observation Notes

What it means: Written notes an evaluator records during a classroom visit. These often become the foundation for the teacher evaluation.

Post-Observation Conference

What it means: The meeting between the evaluator and teacher after the classroom observation where evidence is discussed, feedback is shared, and next steps are established.

Professional Growth

What it means: The continuous improvement of a teacher's instructional practice through coaching, reflection, and ongoing feedback.

Rubric

What it means: The scoring guide used during teacher evaluations. Rubrics break effective teaching into specific categories and performance levels so evaluators can assess instruction consistently.

Standards-Aligned Feedback

What it means: Feedback that is directly connected to the indicators within the district's instructional framework or evaluation rubric rather than general comments or opinions.

System of Record

What it means: The district's official platform for storing completed teacher evaluations and documentation. SwiftScore works alongside these systems rather than replacing them.

Teacher Evaluation

What it means: The formal process of observing classroom instruction, collecting evidence, providing feedback, documenting performance, and supporting teacher growth.

Walkthrough

What it means: A short, informal classroom observation that allows school leaders to gather evidence and provide timely instructional feedback without conducting a full formal evaluation.

Please email us at Foundations@gofuelsales.com to let us know you are ready to start your roleplays. We will have access to Hyperbound sent to you within 24 hours. 

Once you have completed your roleplays please email us at Foundations@gofuelsales.com and include the URL for your call you would like reviewed. 

Once reviewed, you will have a response within a few days, as soon as a coach from the Fuel Sales Team can review your submission. 

Accessing Hyperbound

Finding the Bot

Making the Call and Feedback

Once you have completed your roleplays please email us at Foundations@gofuelsales.com and include the URL for your call you would like reviewed. 
 
As soon as a coach from the Fuel Sales Team can review your submission, you will get a response within a few days.