AI Team Builder for Teachers

How it works

From your class size to a team plan with full supporting materials in four steps.

Enter class size, group size, and task title

Mr. Santos teaches 10th-grade biology with a class of 28 students. He wants heterogeneous teams of 4 for a three-week ecosystem research project, mixed by academic performance levels, with no two students who had conflicts last semester in the same team. He enters class size (28), group size (4), and a task title (ecosystem research), and keeps his constraints (three must-separate pairs) on his own list.

He forms balanced teams from his own class list

The plan reminds him to use numbers from his class list, so that names stay on his own list, to mix skills, and to check that no one is left out; the tool does not place students. Mr. Santos knows why each team was formed, because the reasoning behind the balance is his own. He can adjust individual placements on his own list at any time.

Generate role cards for each team

For a team of four, the AI generates role cards, which can include a Facilitator (leads discussions, keeps the group on task, ensures everyone contributes), a Recorder (documents ideas, takes meeting notes, maintains the project log), and a Reporter (presents the team's work). With Improve with AI on, you can ask for specific responsibilities and the key question the role holder should be asking at each stage of the project.

Use the team charter template and peer evaluation rubric

The team charter template has teams document their working agreements in the first class session: their goal, decision-making process, and what they do if someone misses work. The peer evaluation rubric gives students a structured way to assess each other's contributions at the end of the project (measuring whether they did their part, listened, and helped others) which makes individual accountability visible in a group project.

The manual grouping problem

Building heterogeneous teams manually requires the teacher to hold information about every student simultaneously: academic skill levels, language needs, social dynamics, prior conflicts, and role-specific strengths. For a class of 30, this is a combinatorial problem with thousands of possible configurations, and teachers can spend a long time on grouping and still end up with teams they are not confident about.

You form the teams from your own list, and the AI Team Builder gives the supporting materials that make the groups work (role cards, charters, and evaluation rubrics) as part of the same plan.

What the AI team builder includes

Role cards, team charters, and peer evaluation rubrics, all generated together.

Grouping criteria you choose

You choose the grouping approach on your own list: heterogeneous (mixed by skill, performance, or prior knowledge), random (for low-stakes activities where team composition does not matter much), interest-based (students grouped by topic preference for choice-driven projects), or cooperative learning roles (teams balanced so each role is filled by a student with the right skill set for that role).

Constraints you keep on your own list

Teachers apply their own constraints when forming teams, on their own list, not in the form: must-separate pairs (students who had conflicts or are close friends who will not stay on task together), language support needs (students who benefit from being in a team with a bilingual peer), IEP or 504 considerations that affect team composition, and any others.

Role cards for cooperative learning roles

The tool generates role cards for cooperative learning roles such as Leader, Researcher, Maker, and Presenter. Each role card says what the role does, and with Improve with AI on you can ask for the key questions the role holder should ask at each project stage and the signs that the role is being performed well. Rotating roles across projects ensures all students practice all skills over time.

Team charter template

The team charter is completed by the team in the first class session and establishes working agreements before the project begins, not after the first conflict. The template prompts teams to document: their goal, how decisions will be made when the team disagrees, and what the team will do if a member is not meeting their obligations. You can add how often they will meet outside of class, how they will communicate (platform, expected response time), and what constitutes a fair contribution from each member.

Peer evaluation rubric

The peer evaluation rubric gives students a structured, criteria-based way to assess each other's contributions at project completion. The rubric evaluates three dimensions: whether each teammate did their part, listened, and helped others. With Improve with AI on, you can ask for performance levels with specific, behavioral descriptors. Teachers use peer evaluation scores alongside teacher assessment to generate individual grades for group projects.

Supports any group size and project type

The tool makes a plan for any group size and for any project type you type in the task title: research and presentation, laboratory experiments, engineering design challenges, debate and discussion panels, creative and arts projects, and service learning initiatives. With a task title, the AI can adapt the role cards to the project type, such as a Safety Officer role for a lab experiment team, or a Researcher and a Rebuttal Specialist for a debate team. The team structure fits the task.

Who uses the AI team builder

Teachers running project-based learning units can use the tool at the start of every major project alongside the intentional, balanced teams they form, not the same random groups students always end up in, but deliberately composed teams suited to the specific project type and learning goals.

Teachers who struggle with group work dynamics use the team charter to establish working norms proactively, addressing the communication and accountability issues that typically derail group projects before they emerge, not after.

Teachers who need to give individual grades for group projects use the peer evaluation rubric to collect accountability data that makes it possible to differentiate individual student performance within a group project grade.

Science and STEM teachers running collaborative lab experiments use the role cards to assign specific laboratory roles, and can add a Safety Officer role, ensuring that every team member has a defined responsibility during the lab and that safety procedures are someone's explicit job.