AI reading tutor
AI reading tutor that separates decoding from comprehension
A wrong comprehension answer can be decoding, vocabulary or inference. The mark looks identical in all three cases. Coeducate says which one failed.
01 Three different failures, one cross
Reading data is usually one number too coarse
A reading level tells you where to shelve a book. It does not tell you why a student who decodes fluently cannot answer a question about what the author is suggesting, or why a student with strong inference stalls on a paragraph full of unfamiliar vocabulary.
Those are different problems with different fixes and different timelines. Merging them into "comprehension: developing" is how a year of intervention gets spent on the wrong thing.
Decoding
The words did not come off the page reliably enough for meaning to survive.
Vocabulary
The words were read but two of them were not known, and both were load bearing.
Literal retrieval
The detail is in the text and was not found, usually because the search strategy is linear.
Inference
The detail was found but the step from stated to implied was not taken.
Author stance
The passage was understood as information and not as an argument with a position.
Session evidence card, grade 6-8 reading
Fixed exampleDiagnosis
Summarizes the text instead of inferring from it
The student restates three facts in order and then attaches an evaluation the passage never makes. The omitted inspection fee, which is the author's actual signal, is not used at all.
Next tutoring move / hint only
The report left one cost out. Which one, and why would an author mention that a cost was left out?
Skill mastery read
Retrieving explicit detail
SecureCorrectly lists the vote, the request and the cost ratio.
Inferring author stance
Not yetAttaches it was a good decision, which the passage does not say.
Using omitted information as evidence
Not yetDoes not mention the excluded annual inspection fee at all.
Citing textual evidence
DevelopingParaphrases the passage but never anchors a claim to a line.
Teacher note
Retrieves detail reliably but treats inference questions as summary questions, so any what is the author suggesting item will fail until stance is taught explicitly.
Reteach in 5 minutes
What was left out on purpose
- Read the paragraph and list every cost named.
- Ask which cost is missing and who benefits from that.
- Rewrite the answer starting with The author is hinting that.
Note the shape of the record: strong retrieval, absent inference. A single comprehension score would have averaged those two into a middling number and pointed intervention at the wrong skill.
02 Fiction and nonfiction
The same engine, two different skill vocabularies
Literary text
- Character motive read from action rather than stated feeling
- Narrative perspective and its reliability
- Function of an image or a repeated detail
- Tone and its effect on the reader
- Theme distinguished from plot summary
Informational text
- Claim separated from evidence
- Author stance and what has been left out
- Text structure used as a comprehension aid
- Cross-referencing two sources that disagree
- Numbers in prose read accurately
Both run over the passages you already teach. There is no reading library to adopt, which is what makes this usable alongside a curriculum you did not choose. See how adaptation works over your own material.
03 For intervention teams
Documentation that writes itself
A tiered support decision needs evidence over time, per skill, with something concrete underneath the claim. Producing that usually means an extra assessment window and a spreadsheet somebody maintains by hand.
Here it accumulates from the reading the student was doing anyway. Session eight is read against session one, per skill, with the student's own sentences as the evidence line. More on student progress tracking.
Inferring author stance, one student, eight sessions
Each point on that series links back to the session it came from and the sentence the student wrote, so the growth claim can be checked rather than trusted.
04 For the person who signs off
Two things a curriculum director asks first
Evidence you can present
Per-skill mastery per student, exportable, with the student's own reasoning attached. It survives a board slide and an MTSS meeting because the wording came from the student, not from a summary.
A privacy posture built for minors
Student work is not used to train models. No advertising, no data resale, deletable on request. Designed around FERPA and COPPA obligations, and our security page states plainly which formal attestations we do and do not hold.
Rollout, procurement and the full sign-off checklist are on the pricing page, alongside the cost-per-student estimator.
05 Pricing
Priced per program, not per seat
Annual billing is about 17% lower. There is no free tier, and the privacy posture is identical on every plan.
Classroom
$89/mo
One teacher, up to 60 students, CSV mastery export.
School
$349/mo
Up to 10 educators and 600 students, roles, SSO, scheduled reports.
District
$1,290/mo
Up to 75 educators and 5,000 students, standards mapping, SIS export, PO billing.
More AI tools for teachers
Paste a comprehension answer and see the split
The demo separates retrieval from inference on any reading answer you give it. Nothing you type is stored.
Student work is never used to train models. No card required to try the demo.