Finalize evaluation results

evaluation/case_001.md

@@ -74,23 +74,19 @@
 
 ## Week 1
 
-- Monitor attendance and academic performance closely. Ensure regular communication with parents about any concerning trends or behaviors.
-- Schedule a brief meeting with Olivia to discuss her engagement score and behavior issues. Provide constructive feedback and set clear expectations moving forward.
+- Monitor Olivia's engagement score and attendance. Provide positive reinforcement for consistent participation.
 
 ## Week 2
 
-- Continue monitoring homework completion rates. Encourage students to complete assignments independently but offer help when needed.
-- Review class discussions and ensure they align with the curriculum objectives. Address any discrepancies between student understanding and lesson content promptly.
+- Review homework completion rates. Offer extra credit opportunities for students who consistently complete their assignments.
 
 ## Week 3
 
-- Implement targeted support sessions focusing on areas where Olivia shows weakness in academics or behavior management. Assign specific tasks to practice these skills.
-- Arrange a parent-teacher conference to discuss ongoing challenges and develop a personalized plan for improvement.
+- Conduct a brief meeting with Olivia's parents to discuss her academic progress and any areas where she may need additional support.
 
 ## Week 4
 
-- Conduct another review of Olivia's engagement score and behavior records. Adjust interventions based on new insights gained during the previous weeks.
-- Organize a small group activity focused on teamwork and collaboration to enhance social-emotional learning and improve engagement.
+- Schedule a one-on-one session with Olivia to discuss her goals and set specific, measurable objectives for improvement.
 
 ## Sources Used
 

evaluation/case_002.md

@@ -74,23 +74,19 @@
 
 ## Week 1
 
-- Monitor Ava's engagement score and behavior closely. If any significant changes occur, implement targeted support immediately.
-- Schedule a brief meeting with Ava's parents to discuss their expectations and provide them with an overview of Ava's current academic and behavioral status.
+- Monitor Ava's engagement score and attendance regularly throughout the week. Ensure she completes her homework without any issues. Encourage positive interactions during class time.
 
 ## Week 2
 
-- Continue monitoring Ava's engagement score and behavior. If there are no significant changes, review the homework policy and ensure it aligns with Ava's needs.
-- Arrange for a short-term tutoring session if Ava shows signs of struggling with specific subjects or concepts.
+- Continue monitoring engagement score and attendance. Check for any behavioral changes or signs of academic decline. Engage in brief discussions about her learning experiences to maintain motivation.
 
 ## Week 3
 
-- Conduct a more detailed assessment of Ava's learning pace and identify areas where she may need extra support. Implement a structured intervention plan focusing on these identified gaps.
-- Set up regular check-ins with Ava's peers to foster a supportive learning community within her class.
+- Review the completed homework assignments. Provide feedback and suggestions for improvement. Schedule a short meeting with Ava to discuss her progress and set goals for the next week.
 
 ## Week 4
 
-- Evaluate the effectiveness of the implemented interventions during this period. Adjust the approach based on Ava's response and adjust the frequency of meetings with parents accordingly.
-- Encourage Ava to participate in after-school clubs or extracurricular activities that can enhance her social skills and interests outside of academics.
+- Evaluate the effectiveness of the implemented strategies. Adjust the approach based on Ava's response. Consider incorporating more structured activities if necessary to address any identified gaps in her learning.
 
 ## Sources Used
 

evaluation/case_003.md

@@ -90,23 +90,19 @@
 
 ## Week 1
 
-- Schedule regular check-ins with Noah's parents via phone calls or emails to discuss his academic progress and any challenges he may be facing at home.
-- Assign a peer mentor to help Noah stay engaged during after-school opportunities, such as tutoring sessions or study groups.
+- Monitor Noah's attendance and academic performance closely. Ensure he completes his homework regularly. Encourage him to engage more actively in class discussions and group projects.
 
 ## Week 2
 
-- Organize an open house event where parents can meet their child's teacher and other students to build positive relationships and increase engagement.
-- Encourage Noah to participate in extracurricular activities outside of school hours to provide him with more structured time away from homework.
+- Schedule a brief meeting with Noah's parents to discuss their expectations and any challenges they face regarding his education. Provide them with resources and strategies to help improve his engagement and behavior.
 
 ## Week 3
 
-- Implement a reward system for Noah based on his attendance and participation in after-school opportunities. This could include stickers, small prizes, or extra recess time.
-- Arrange for a professional development session for Noah's parents to learn about effective parenting techniques and how they can support their child's learning at home.
+- Arrange for an extra session during lunchtime where Noah can work one-on-one with a tutor who specializes in helping students build confidence and focus. This will also provide him with additional practice time.
 
 ## Week 4
 
-- Conduct a parent-teacher conference to review Noah's progress and set new goals for improvement. Provide resources and support materials to help parents better understand Noah's needs.
-- Invite Noah to share his experiences and successes with peers during class discussions to boost his confidence and encourage social interaction.
+- Organize a small group activity focused on teamwork and problem-solving skills. This could be done through a game or project-based learning activity. Encourage Noah to participate actively and share his ideas.
 
 ## Sources Used
 

evaluation/case_004.md

@@ -92,23 +92,19 @@
 
 ## Week 1
 
-- Monitor William Anderson's attendance and academic performance closely. If his grades or behavior show any signs of decline, implement targeted support immediately.
-- Schedule a brief meeting with William's parents to discuss their child's engagement score and homework habits. Encourage them to set up after-school opportunities at home if they haven't done so yet.
+- Monitor William Anderson's attendance and academic performance closely. Ensure he completes his homework regularly. Encourage him to engage more actively in class discussions and group projects.
 
 ## Week 2
 
-- Continue monitoring William's attendance and academic performance. If there are no significant changes, provide him with basic core strategy resources such as study guides and practice tests.
-- Contact William's family again to check on their involvement in after-school opportunities. Offer to help them set up more structured activities if needed.
+- Continue monitoring attendance, academic performance, and homework completion. Engage William in more structured learning activities such as study groups or one-on-one sessions with the teacher. Encourage participation in extracurricular clubs or sports to improve engagement.
 
 ## Week 3
 
-- Review William's recent test results and assignments. If he shows improvement but still struggles academically, consider offering additional tutoring sessions outside of regular class hours.
-- Arrange a parent-teacher conference to discuss William's progress and any challenges he may be facing. This will also give you an opportunity to reinforce positive behaviors at home.
+- Review William's recent test results and assignments. Provide constructive feedback and set clear goals for improvement. Consider offering extra credit opportunities or alternative assessment methods to motivate him. Schedule regular check-ins with parents to discuss progress and challenges.
 
 ## Week 4
 
-- Evaluate William's engagement score and homework completion rate over the past four weeks. If he continues to perform well, maintain current interventions and focus on reinforcing good behavior through consistent praise and recognition.
-- Discuss potential future after-school opportunities with William's parents. Explore options such as extracurricular clubs or community service projects that can enhance his learning experience beyond the classroom.
+- Evaluate William's behavior during class and at home. Address any issues promptly through consistent communication and consequences. Encourage positive behaviors and provide incentives for good behavior. Arrange for a brief meeting with William's parents to discuss strategies for continued success.
 
 ## Sources Used
 

evaluation/evaluation_dataset.json

@@ -69,7 +69,7 @@
         "reference_url": ""
       }
     ],
-    "generated_ai_action_plan": "# Action Plan\n\n## Week 1\n\n- Monitor attendance and academic performance closely. Ensure regular communication with parents about any concerning trends or behaviors.\n- Schedule a brief meeting with Olivia to discuss her engagement score and behavior issues. Provide constructive feedback and set clear expectations moving forward.\n\n## Week 2\n\n- Continue monitoring homework completion rates. Encourage students to complete assignments independently but offer help when needed.\n- Review class discussions and ensure they align with the curriculum objectives. Address any discrepancies between student understanding and lesson content promptly.\n\n## Week 3\n\n- Implement targeted support sessions focusing on areas where Olivia shows weakness in academics or behavior management. Assign specific tasks to practice these skills.\n- Arrange a parent-teacher conference to discuss ongoing challenges and develop a personalized plan for improvement.\n\n## Week 4\n\n- Conduct another review of Olivia's engagement score and behavior records. Adjust interventions based on new insights gained during the previous weeks.\n- Organize a small group activity focused on teamwork and collaboration to enhance social-emotional learning and improve engagement.\n\n## Sources Used\n\n- Continue Monitoring"
+    "generated_ai_action_plan": "# Action Plan\n\n## Week 1\n\n- Monitor Olivia's engagement score and attendance. Provide positive reinforcement for consistent participation.\n\n## Week 2\n\n- Review homework completion rates. Offer extra credit opportunities for students who consistently complete their assignments.\n\n## Week 3\n\n- Conduct a brief meeting with Olivia's parents to discuss her academic progress and any areas where she may need additional support.\n\n## Week 4\n\n- Schedule a one-on-one session with Olivia to discuss her goals and set specific, measurable objectives for improvement.\n\n## Sources Used\n\n- Continue Monitoring"
   },
   {
     "case_id": "case_002",
@@ -141,7 +141,7 @@
         "reference_url": ""
       }
     ],
-    "generated_ai_action_plan": "# Action Plan\n\n## Week 1\n\n- Monitor Ava's engagement score and behavior closely. If any significant changes occur, implement targeted support immediately.\n- Schedule a brief meeting with Ava's parents to discuss their expectations and provide them with an overview of Ava's current academic and behavioral status.\n\n## Week 2\n\n- Continue monitoring Ava's engagement score and behavior. If there are no significant changes, review the homework policy and ensure it aligns with Ava's needs.\n- Arrange for a short-term tutoring session if Ava shows signs of struggling with specific subjects or concepts.\n\n## Week 3\n\n- Conduct a more detailed assessment of Ava's learning pace and identify areas where she may need extra support. Implement a structured intervention plan focusing on these identified gaps.\n- Set up regular check-ins with Ava's peers to foster a supportive learning community within her class.\n\n## Week 4\n\n- Evaluate the effectiveness of the implemented interventions during this period. Adjust the approach based on Ava's response and adjust the frequency of meetings with parents accordingly.\n- Encourage Ava to participate in after-school clubs or extracurricular activities that can enhance her social skills and interests outside of academics.\n\n## Sources Used\n\n- Continue Monitoring"
+    "generated_ai_action_plan": "# Action Plan\n\n## Week 1\n\n- Monitor Ava's engagement score and attendance regularly throughout the week. Ensure she completes her homework without any issues. Encourage positive interactions during class time.\n\n## Week 2\n\n- Continue monitoring engagement score and attendance. Check for any behavioral changes or signs of academic decline. Engage in brief discussions about her learning experiences to maintain motivation.\n\n## Week 3\n\n- Review the completed homework assignments. Provide feedback and suggestions for improvement. Schedule a short meeting with Ava to discuss her progress and set goals for the next week.\n\n## Week 4\n\n- Evaluate the effectiveness of the implemented strategies. Adjust the approach based on Ava's response. Consider incorporating more structured activities if necessary to address any identified gaps in her learning.\n\n## Sources Used\n\n- Continue Monitoring"
   },
   {
     "case_id": "case_003",
@@ -235,7 +235,7 @@
         "reference_url": "https://dropoutprevention.org/effective-strategies/family-engagement/"
       }
     ],
-    "generated_ai_action_plan": "# Action Plan\n\n## Week 1\n\n- Schedule regular check-ins with Noah's parents via phone calls or emails to discuss his academic progress and any challenges he may be facing at home.\n- Assign a peer mentor to help Noah stay engaged during after-school opportunities, such as tutoring sessions or study groups.\n\n## Week 2\n\n- Organize an open house event where parents can meet their child's teacher and other students to build positive relationships and increase engagement.\n- Encourage Noah to participate in extracurricular activities outside of school hours to provide him with more structured time away from homework.\n\n## Week 3\n\n- Implement a reward system for Noah based on his attendance and participation in after-school opportunities. This could include stickers, small prizes, or extra recess time.\n- Arrange for a professional development session for Noah's parents to learn about effective parenting techniques and how they can support their child's learning at home.\n\n## Week 4\n\n- Conduct a parent-teacher conference to review Noah's progress and set new goals for improvement. Provide resources and support materials to help parents better understand Noah's needs.\n- Invite Noah to share his experiences and successes with peers during class discussions to boost his confidence and encourage social interaction.\n\n## Sources Used\n\n- After-School Opportunities\n- Family Engagement"
+    "generated_ai_action_plan": "# Action Plan\n\n## Week 1\n\n- Monitor Noah's attendance and academic performance closely. Ensure he completes his homework regularly. Encourage him to engage more actively in class discussions and group projects.\n\n## Week 2\n\n- Schedule a brief meeting with Noah's parents to discuss their expectations and any challenges they face regarding his education. Provide them with resources and strategies to help improve his engagement and behavior.\n\n## Week 3\n\n- Arrange for an extra session during lunchtime where Noah can work one-on-one with a tutor who specializes in helping students build confidence and focus. This will also provide him with additional practice time.\n\n## Week 4\n\n- Organize a small group activity focused on teamwork and problem-solving skills. This could be done through a game or project-based learning activity. Encourage Noah to participate actively and share his ideas.\n\n## Sources Used\n\n- After-School Opportunities\n- Family Engagement"
   },
   {
     "case_id": "case_004",
@@ -331,7 +331,7 @@
         "reference_url": "https://dropoutprevention.org/effective-strategies/family-engagement/"
       }
     ],
-    "generated_ai_action_plan": "# Action Plan\n\n## Week 1\n\n- Monitor William Anderson's attendance and academic performance closely. If his grades or behavior show any signs of decline, implement targeted support immediately.\n- Schedule a brief meeting with William's parents to discuss their child's engagement score and homework habits. Encourage them to set up after-school opportunities at home if they haven't done so yet.\n\n## Week 2\n\n- Continue monitoring William's attendance and academic performance. If there are no significant changes, provide him with basic core strategy resources such as study guides and practice tests.\n- Contact William's family again to check on their involvement in after-school opportunities. Offer to help them set up more structured activities if needed.\n\n## Week 3\n\n- Review William's recent test results and assignments. If he shows improvement but still struggles academically, consider offering additional tutoring sessions outside of regular class hours.\n- Arrange a parent-teacher conference to discuss William's progress and any challenges he may be facing. This will also give you an opportunity to reinforce positive behaviors at home.\n\n## Week 4\n\n- Evaluate William's engagement score and homework completion rate over the past four weeks. If he continues to perform well, maintain current interventions and focus on reinforcing good behavior through consistent praise and recognition.\n- Discuss potential future after-school opportunities with William's parents. Explore options such as extracurricular clubs or community service projects that can enhance his learning experience beyond the classroom.\n\n## Sources Used\n\n- After-School Opportunities\n- Family Engagement"
+    "generated_ai_action_plan": "# Action Plan\n\n## Week 1\n\n- Monitor William Anderson's attendance and academic performance closely. Ensure he completes his homework regularly. Encourage him to engage more actively in class discussions and group projects.\n\n## Week 2\n\n- Continue monitoring attendance, academic performance, and homework completion. Engage William in more structured learning activities such as study groups or one-on-one sessions with the teacher. Encourage participation in extracurricular clubs or sports to improve engagement.\n\n## Week 3\n\n- Review William's recent test results and assignments. Provide constructive feedback and set clear goals for improvement. Consider offering extra credit opportunities or alternative assessment methods to motivate him. Schedule regular check-ins with parents to discuss progress and challenges.\n\n## Week 4\n\n- Evaluate William's behavior during class and at home. Address any issues promptly through consistent communication and consequences. Encourage positive behaviors and provide incentives for good behavior. Arrange for a brief meeting with William's parents to discuss strategies for continued success.\n\n## Sources Used\n\n- After-School Opportunities\n- Family Engagement"
   },
   {
     "case_id": "case_005",

evaluation/gpt_judge_results.json

@@ -7,62 +7,67 @@
     {
       "case_id": "case_001",
       "student_name": "Olivia Moore",
+      "risk_group": "Low",
       "scores": {
-        "relevance": 2,
-        "correctness": 1,
-        "root_cause_alignment": 1,
-        "evidence_alignment": 2,
-        "actionability": 3,
+        "relevance": 3,
+        "correctness": 2,
+        "root_cause_alignment": 2,
+        "evidence_alignment": 3,
+        "actionability": 4,
         "clarity": 4,
-        "overall_quality": 2
+        "overall_quality": 3
       },
-      "justification": "The student is low risk with stable performance and no elevated risk factors, but the plan introduces behavior issues, academic weakness, parent conferences, and targeted support that are not supported by the profile. It is readable and includes actionable steps, but the intervention intensity is not proportionate to the evidence."
+      "justification": "The revised plan is lighter and correctly limits sources to Continue Monitoring. However, it still implies academic improvement needs, parent discussion, and measurable improvement objectives for a low-risk student with stable performance and strong participation."
     },
     {
       "case_id": "case_002",
       "student_name": "Ava Martinez",
+      "risk_group": "Low",
       "scores": {
-        "relevance": 2,
-        "correctness": 1,
-        "root_cause_alignment": 1,
-        "evidence_alignment": 2,
-        "actionability": 3,
+        "relevance": 3,
+        "correctness": 2,
+        "root_cause_alignment": 2,
+        "evidence_alignment": 3,
+        "actionability": 4,
         "clarity": 4,
-        "overall_quality": 2
+        "overall_quality": 3
       },
-      "justification": "The plan is overly intensive for a low-risk student with strong participation and no incidents. It invents potential tutoring needs, behavioral monitoring, peer check-ins, and after-school activities beyond the Continue Monitoring evidence. The language is clear, but the content does not accurately reflect the case."
+      "justification": "The revised plan is more proportional than the original and uses only Continue Monitoring. It still over-monitors behavior, academic decline, gaps in learning, and intervention effectiveness despite Ava's low-risk profile and positive teacher notes."
     },
     {
       "case_id": "case_003",
       "student_name": "Noah Taylor",
+      "risk_group": "Moderate",
       "scores": {
-        "relevance": 2,
+        "relevance": 3,
         "correctness": 2,
-        "root_cause_alignment": 1,
+        "root_cause_alignment": 2,
         "evidence_alignment": 3,
-        "actionability": 3,
+        "actionability": 4,
         "clarity": 4,
-        "overall_quality": 2
+        "overall_quality": 3
       },
-      "justification": "Noah has only moderate academic risk and stable trends, but the plan emphasizes family challenges, engagement issues, rewards, and parent training that are not present in the student evidence. It uses the retrieved sources, but the implementation roadmap is not well aligned to the actual risk profile."
+      "justification": "The revised plan is clearer and more actionable, but it still expands beyond Noah's evidence by emphasizing behavior and engagement issues when the primary identified risk is moderate academic risk with stable trends. It also introduces tutoring even though that was not one of the retrieved sources."
     },
     {
       "case_id": "case_004",
       "student_name": "William Anderson",
+      "risk_group": "Moderate",
       "scores": {
         "relevance": 3,
         "correctness": 2,
         "root_cause_alignment": 2,
         "evidence_alignment": 3,
-        "actionability": 3,
+        "actionability": 4,
         "clarity": 4,
         "overall_quality": 3
       },
-      "justification": "The plan is moderately relevant because William has moderate attendance, academic, and homework risk. However, the root causes are stable and the plan references decline, engagement score issues, and family after-school setup in ways that are not fully supported. Actions are understandable but somewhat generic."
+      "justification": "The revised plan is practical and uses the retrieved sources, but it still over-prescribes support for a moderate-risk student with stable root-cause trends. It adds engagement, extracurricular, parent check-in, and behavior-at-home actions that are only weakly supported by the case evidence."
     },
     {
       "case_id": "case_005",
       "student_name": "John Smith",
+      "risk_group": "High",
       "scores": {
         "relevance": 4,
         "correctness": 4,
@@ -77,6 +82,7 @@
     {
       "case_id": "case_006",
       "student_name": "Emma Brown",
+      "risk_group": "High",
       "scores": {
         "relevance": 4,
         "correctness": 4,
@@ -91,6 +97,7 @@
     {
       "case_id": "case_007",
       "student_name": "Sarah Johnson",
+      "risk_group": "Critical",
       "scores": {
         "relevance": 4,
         "correctness": 4,
@@ -105,6 +112,7 @@
     {
       "case_id": "case_008",
       "student_name": "Lily Green",
+      "risk_group": "Critical",
       "scores": {
         "relevance": 4,
         "correctness": 4,
@@ -118,13 +126,51 @@
     }
   ],
   "averages": {
-    "relevance": 3.13,
-    "correctness": 2.75,
-    "root_cause_alignment": 2.5,
-    "evidence_alignment": 3.13,
-    "actionability": 3.5,
+    "relevance": 3.5,
+    "correctness": 3.0,
+    "root_cause_alignment": 2.88,
+    "evidence_alignment": 3.38,
+    "actionability": 4.0,
     "clarity": 4.0,
-    "overall_quality": 3.13
+    "overall_quality": 3.5
+  },
+  "risk_group_averages": {
+    "Low": {
+      "relevance": 3.0,
+      "correctness": 2.0,
+      "root_cause_alignment": 2.0,
+      "evidence_alignment": 3.0,
+      "actionability": 4.0,
+      "clarity": 4.0,
+      "overall_quality": 3.0
+    },
+    "Moderate": {
+      "relevance": 3.0,
+      "correctness": 2.0,
+      "root_cause_alignment": 2.0,
+      "evidence_alignment": 3.0,
+      "actionability": 4.0,
+      "clarity": 4.0,
+      "overall_quality": 3.0
+    },
+    "High": {
+      "relevance": 4.0,
+      "correctness": 4.0,
+      "root_cause_alignment": 4.0,
+      "evidence_alignment": 4.0,
+      "actionability": 4.0,
+      "clarity": 4.0,
+      "overall_quality": 4.0
+    },
+    "Critical": {
+      "relevance": 4.0,
+      "correctness": 4.0,
+      "root_cause_alignment": 3.5,
+      "evidence_alignment": 3.5,
+      "actionability": 4.0,
+      "clarity": 4.0,
+      "overall_quality": 4.0
+    }
   },
-  "summary": "The generated plans are clearest and most useful for high- and critical-risk students. The weakest performance is on low-risk and stable-trend cases, where the plans often invent concerns or recommend support intensity that exceeds the evidence. Overall clarity is strong, but correctness and root-cause alignment are reduced by unsupported assumptions."
+  "summary": "The revised prompt improves Low and Moderate action plans from the first pass by reducing action density and limiting source accumulation. Overall quality rises to 3.50 across all 8 cases. The remaining weakness is that Low and Moderate plans still infer mild concerns from stable student profiles, so correctness and root-cause alignment remain lower than High and Critical cases."
 }

evaluation/gpt_judge_summary.md

@@ -4,44 +4,53 @@
 
 | Criterion | Average Score |
 |---|---:|
-| Relevance | 3.13 |
-| Correctness | 2.75 |
-| Root Cause Alignment | 2.50 |
-| Evidence Alignment | 3.13 |
-| Actionability | 3.50 |
+| Relevance | 3.50 |
+| Correctness | 3.00 |
+| Root Cause Alignment | 2.88 |
+| Evidence Alignment | 3.38 |
+| Actionability | 4.00 |
 | Clarity | 4.00 |
-| Overall Quality | 3.13 |
+| Overall Quality | 3.50 |
+
+## Risk Group Averages
+
+| Risk Group | Relevance | Correctness | Root Cause Alignment | Evidence Alignment | Actionability | Clarity | Overall Quality |
+|---|---:|---:|---:|---:|---:|---:|---:|
+| Low | 3.00 | 2.00 | 2.00 | 3.00 | 4.00 | 4.00 | 3.00 |
+| Moderate | 3.00 | 2.00 | 2.00 | 3.00 | 4.00 | 4.00 | 3.00 |
+| High | 4.00 | 4.00 | 4.00 | 4.00 | 4.00 | 4.00 | 4.00 |
+| Critical | 4.00 | 4.00 | 3.50 | 3.50 | 4.00 | 4.00 | 4.00 |
 
 ## Per-Case Scores
 
-| Case | Student | Relevance | Correctness | Root Cause Alignment | Evidence Alignment | Actionability | Clarity | Overall Quality |
-|---|---|---:|---:|---:|---:|---:|---:|---:|
-| case_001 | Olivia Moore | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 2 |
-| case_002 | Ava Martinez | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 2 |
-| case_003 | Noah Taylor | 2 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 2 |
-| case_004 | William Anderson | 3 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 3 |
-| case_005 | John Smith | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
-| case_006 | Emma Brown | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
-| case_007 | Sarah Johnson | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
-| case_008 | Lily Green | 4 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
+| Case | Student | Risk Group | Relevance | Correctness | Root Cause Alignment | Evidence Alignment | Actionability | Clarity | Overall Quality |
+|---|---|---|---:|---:|---:|---:|---:|---:|---:|
+| case_001 | Olivia Moore | Low | 3 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 3 |
+| case_002 | Ava Martinez | Low | 3 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 3 |
+| case_003 | Noah Taylor | Moderate | 3 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 3 |
+| case_004 | William Anderson | Moderate | 3 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 3 |
+| case_005 | John Smith | High | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
+| case_006 | Emma Brown | High | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
+| case_007 | Sarah Johnson | Critical | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
+| case_008 | Lily Green | Critical | 4 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
 
 ## Short Justifications
 
 ### case_001: Olivia Moore
 
-The student is low risk with stable performance and no elevated risk factors, but the plan introduces behavior issues, academic weakness, parent conferences, and targeted support that are not supported by the profile. It is readable and includes actionable steps, but the intervention intensity is not proportionate to the evidence.
+The revised plan is lighter and correctly limits sources to Continue Monitoring. However, it still implies academic improvement needs, parent discussion, and measurable improvement objectives for a low-risk student with stable performance and strong participation.
 
 ### case_002: Ava Martinez
 
-The plan is overly intensive for a low-risk student with strong participation and no incidents. It invents potential tutoring needs, behavioral monitoring, peer check-ins, and after-school activities beyond the Continue Monitoring evidence. The language is clear, but the content does not accurately reflect the case.
+The revised plan is more proportional than the original and uses only Continue Monitoring. It still over-monitors behavior, academic decline, gaps in learning, and intervention effectiveness despite Ava's low-risk profile and positive teacher notes.
 
 ### case_003: Noah Taylor
 
-Noah has only moderate academic risk and stable trends, but the plan emphasizes family challenges, engagement issues, rewards, and parent training that are not present in the student evidence. It uses the retrieved sources, but the implementation roadmap is not well aligned to the actual risk profile.
+The revised plan is clearer and more actionable, but it still expands beyond Noah's evidence by emphasizing behavior and engagement issues when the primary identified risk is moderate academic risk with stable trends. It also introduces tutoring even though that was not one of the retrieved sources.
 
 ### case_004: William Anderson
 
-The plan is moderately relevant because William has moderate attendance, academic, and homework risk. However, the root causes are stable and the plan references decline, engagement score issues, and family after-school setup in ways that are not fully supported. Actions are understandable but somewhat generic.
+The revised plan is practical and uses the retrieved sources, but it still over-prescribes support for a moderate-risk student with stable root-cause trends. It adds engagement, extracurricular, parent check-in, and behavior-at-home actions that are only weakly supported by the case evidence.
 
 ### case_005: John Smith
 
@@ -61,4 +70,4 @@ The plan addresses Lily's critical attendance, academic, homework, and behavior
 
 ## Overall Finding
 
-The generated plans are clearest and most useful for high- and critical-risk students. The weakest performance is on low-risk and stable-trend cases, where the plans often invent concerns or recommend support intensity that exceeds the evidence. Overall clarity is strong, but correctness and root-cause alignment are reduced by unsupported assumptions.
+The revised prompt improves Low and Moderate action plans from the first pass by reducing action density and limiting source accumulation. Overall quality rises to 3.50 across all 8 cases. The remaining weakness is that Low and Moderate plans still infer mild concerns from stable student profiles, so correctness and root-cause alignment remain lower than High and Critical cases.