---
name: writing-in-a-human-voice
description: Rewrite school writing that sounds machine-generated so it reads like the person who sent it, without changing what it says. Use when a note home, a report card comment, a newsletter, or a message to families reads stiff, generic, padded, or oddly formal, when a teacher says a draft sounds like AI wrote it, and before any letter to a parent goes out. Also use on a teacher's own draft that is not landing. Keeps every fact, invents nothing, and does not soften news that should stay plain.
license: MIT
---

# Writing in a human voice

A unit plan can read like a form and lose nothing. A letter home cannot. When a
parent opens a note about their child and it reads like a template, the message
underneath is that nobody spent five minutes on it, and that is what they
remember rather than the sentence about reading fluency.

This skill takes a draft that sounds machine-written and makes it sound like the
teacher sending it, without changing a single thing it says. It runs at the end
of `communicating-with-families` and `writing-assessments`, and it runs on its own
when a teacher brings a draft that is not landing.

## Where this came from

This is an adaptation of [`blader/humanizer`](https://github.com/blader/humanizer)
by Siqi Chen, used under the MIT licence. The taxonomy of patterns and the method
of working through them are his. The examples here, the patterns we dropped, and
everything specific to writing about children are ours.

That taxonomy is in turn derived from Wikipedia's ["Signs of AI
writing"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Signs_of_AI_writing),
maintained by WikiProject AI Cleanup and licensed CC BY-SA. What travels from
there is the classification — the names for the patterns and what counts as one —
rather than the prose describing them.

The *encyclopedic* source patterns are gone: name-dropping publications, follower
counts, citation formatting, the neutrality rules an encyclopedia needs. What is
not gone is the unsourced appeal to authority — a newsletter citing research
nobody can point to is pattern 13, and it is common. Cutting the rest left room
for real examples.

## The four rules

1. **Find the patterns.** Work the draft against the list below rather than
   rewriting on instinct. Instinct removes the wrong things.
2. **Keep every claim.** Shorten the dull parts, expand the useful ones, merge or
   split paragraphs freely. Every fact that went in comes out again.
3. **Invent nothing.** This one has teeth here that it does not have elsewhere.
4. **Sound like the teacher.** Not like a good writer. Like this one.

## Invent nothing

Upstream lets fiction off this rule. Here nothing is let off, because every
subject is a real child and every reader is that child's parent.

Do not add a fact, a name, a number, a date, a score, a quote, a source, an
anecdote, or a behaviour that did not come from the teacher — not as colour, not
as an example, not to make a flat sentence land. A rewrite that invents "he asked
three good questions during our discussion of the water cycle" has fabricated an
observation about a child, and the parent may well raise it at conferences.

When a sentence needs a detail you do not have, there are two honest moves:

- **Ask.** "You wrote that Priya has trouble with homework. How many times has
  she missed it this term?" One question buys the strongest sentence in the
  letter.
- **Write the smaller sentence.** A short true sentence beats a rich invented
  one, every time.

The rule runs backwards too: do not quietly drop a fact because it makes a
paragraph awkward.

## Specificity beats warmth

> Marcus is a joy to have in class.

Every parent has read that sentence — last year's report card, the one before, a
different child, a different teacher. It carries no information, and worse, it
reads as what you write when you have nothing to say.

> Marcus worked through the whole set of word problems without asking for help.

That tells a parent something real: their son did a hard thing on his own, and the
teacher noticed. It is also warmer than the first, which is the part people get
wrong. Warmth is not a register; it is evidence of attention.

So when you meet a warm generic sentence, neither delete it nor polish it — ask
what it is standing in for.

| Generic | What to ask the teacher |
| --- | --- |
| "A pleasure to have in class" | What did she do this week that you liked? |
| "Has made great progress" | Progress from what, to what, by when? |
| "Works well with others" | Who does he work with, and on what? |
| "Needs to apply himself" | Which task, and what does he do instead? |
| "A creative thinker" | What did she make or say that showed it? |

If an answer comes back, the sentence writes itself. If the teacher has not got
one, that is worth knowing too, and the honest move is a shorter comment rather
than a warmer one. Two cautions: specific is not clinical, since no parent wants a
data table; and one real observation carries a comment while four make it a log.

## Hard news stays plain

Plainness is kindness. A rewrite must never make a problem harder to find.

The failure looks like an improvement. The draft says a child is two years behind
in reading; the rewrite makes it flow, warms the opening, moves the hard sentence
into a paragraph about effort — and the parent finishes the letter thinking things
are fine. Nothing was deleted. The news was still lost.

- Keep the hard sentence early, short, and in the active voice.
- Do not soften a verb. "Is behind" does not become "is still developing."
- Do not bury it between two compliments. Parents learn to read the middle of the
  sandwich and distrust the bread.
- Removing hedges makes hard news land harder. That is correct: check the plainer
  version says only what the teacher said, then keep it.

A rewrite that makes a letter easier to read and its problem easier to miss is a
worse letter.

## Match the teacher, not a style guide

**A sample of the teacher's own writing outranks every rule below it.** Where one
is available, read it first: sentence length, how sentences open, punctuation
habits, the words she actually uses, how formal the sign-off is. Then match those.
Do not swap her casual words for careful ones, and do not strip a quirk — the
semicolons, the short opening line, the way she always names the child twice —
because a rule here says to. Those quirks are why it sounds like her.

With no sample, ask for one, or ask whether she uses first names with families,
how long her comments run, and how formally she signs off.

The school's own voice is recorded at `school/gpa-context.md#house-voice`. Follow
it where it is filled in; where it is blank, ask the teacher rather than deciding
for the school what it sounds like.

## The patterns

Each one: the words that give it away, the problem in a sentence, and a before and
after from school writing.

### 1. Inflated claims about growth and importance

**Watch for:** has demonstrated significant growth, marks a turning point, a
testament to, plays a crucial role in, reflects a broader, underscores the
importance of, has made tremendous strides, a pivotal year, lays the foundation
for, speaks volumes about

**The problem:** an ordinary observation dressed up as a milestone, which makes
every comment sound the same and none of them believable.

**Before:**
> Marcus has demonstrated significant growth in his mathematical reasoning this
> quarter, reflecting his commitment to perseverance and marking a pivotal moment
> in his development as a learner.

**After:**
> Marcus's math has come a long way this quarter. He now stays with problems that
> used to stop him.

The after is thinner because the before had no content to keep. If the teacher can
name the problem that used to stop him, that is the best sentence in the report;
ask her, and do not supply one. Even the after is a translation — "stays with
problems that used to stop him" is what "commitment to perseverance" most likely
meant — and it is safe only because the plain wording is narrower than the jargon
rather than wider. Where you cannot map jargon onto a behaviour the teacher would
own, cut it instead of guessing.

### 2. Shallow `-ing` phrases

**Watch for:** demonstrating, showcasing, fostering, highlighting, reflecting,
ensuring, contributing to, allowing her to, thereby building

**The problem:** an `-ing` clause tacked onto a plain fact to make it sound
analysed. It almost always restates what the first half said.

**Before:**
> Ava participates enthusiastically in group work, fostering a positive classroom
> environment and demonstrating strong collaborative skills.

**After:**
> Ava is enthusiastic in group work and gets on well with the other children.

### 3. Brochure language

**Watch for:** vibrant, rich, enriching, immersive, dynamic, journey, our
commitment to, fostering a love of learning, nurturing environment, exciting
opportunity, unforgettable, incredible

**The problem:** the newsletter starts selling the school to people who already
chose it and pay for it.

**Before:**
> Third grade is embarking on an exciting and immersive journey into the vibrant
> world of ancient Egypt. Through dynamic, hands-on exploration — including
> building model pyramids and writing their names in hieroglyphs — students will
> foster a lifelong love of history.

**After:**
> Third grade starts ancient Egypt on Monday. The children will build model
> pyramids and write their names in hieroglyphs.

Cutting the sales language lost nothing; it uncovered the two facts a parent
wanted, which had been buried mid-sentence.

### 4. Stock vocabulary

**Watch for:** delve, foster, cultivate, showcase, underscore, robust, holistic,
multifaceted, leverage, utilize, myriad, meaningful, impactful, key, crucial,
vital, landscape, tapestry, align with, engage with

**The problem:** these words are not wrong on their own. In a group they are the
clearest signal that nobody chose them.

**Before:**
> We utilize a holistic, multifaceted approach to foster meaningful engagement and
> cultivate a robust foundation in early literacy.

**After:**
> We teach early reading in several different ways each week.

Which is all the original said. Strip the vocabulary and you can see how little is
there. The gap is filled by asking the teacher which several ways, not by better
words.

### 5. Long verbs where "is", "has", or "can" would do

**Watch for:** demonstrates the ability to, exhibits, displays, possesses,
continues to show, is able to, engages in, has shown a tendency to

**The problem:** a plain verb swapped for a longer one. A report card full of them
reads like a court filing.

**Before:**
> Liam demonstrates the ability to decode multisyllabic words and exhibits a
> willingness to engage in independent reading.

**After:**
> Liam can decode long words, and he reads on his own.

### 6. Forced groups of three

**The problem:** ideas pushed into threes because three sounds complete. Check the
third item — it is usually the one nobody observed.

**Before:**
> Sofia is curious, capable, and kind. She approaches every task with focus,
> determination, and care.

**After:**
> Sofia is curious and kind, and she stays with a task.

If the third adjective came from the teacher, keep it. If it arrived to finish the
rhythm, it is an invented claim about a child.

### 7. Repeated openings and shifting names

**The problem:** two shapes of one fault. Sentences that all start the same way,
and a child renamed every time they are mentioned.

**Before (repeated openings):**
> Noah is a diligent student. Noah completes his work on time. Noah participates in
> class discussions. Noah has had a wonderful year.

**After:**
> Noah gets his work in on time and speaks up in discussions.

**Before (shifting names):**
> Emma has settled in well. This student works hard. Your daughter is well liked by
> her peers.

**After:**
> Emma has settled in well. She works hard and the other children like her.

Fix the repeated shape, not the repeated word: in a short comment, the child's
name repeated is often clearer than a pronoun.

**Then check across the whole set.** Twenty-two comments that each open "Ella has
had a wonderful year" is the version that does real damage, because two parents
compare notes at pickup and find their children got the same letter.

### 8. Passive voice that hides who did what

**Watch for:** it has been observed that, mistakes were made, the situation has
been addressed, it is hoped that, concerns have been raised

**The problem:** the passive drops the person out of the sentence. In a note home
that is worse than vague, because the parent cannot tell whether the teacher
acted, another child was involved, or something happened to their own.

**Before:**
> It has been noticed that homework has not been submitted consistently, and it is
> hoped that improvement will be seen.

**After:**
> Priya has missed several homework assignments this term.

The after stops there on purpose. "It is hoped that improvement will be seen" is a
hope, so its active form is a plain statement; adding "I would like to talk with
you" would offer a meeting the teacher never offered, and a parent can act on
that. De-passivising names the actor. It licenses no new speech act.

"Several" is the weak spot, and it is the specificity rule asking a question: if
the teacher knows the number, the sentence should carry it. What a passive hides
is nearly always a detail the teacher already has.

### 9. Hedging until the point disappears

**Watch for:** may at times, could potentially, appears to occasionally, somewhat,
a bit of difficulty, might perhaps benefit from, in some instances

**The problem:** each hedge is a small kindness. Stacked, they produce a letter the
parent cannot act on, and half of them will read it as good news.

**Before:**
> Isabelle may at times appear to experience some minor difficulty with sustained
> focus, and it could potentially be beneficial for her to perhaps receive some
> additional support in this area.

**After:**
> Isabelle loses focus during independent work. I think she needs more support in
> that part of the day.

Keep a hedge carrying real uncertainty the teacher expressed. Cut the ones that
only apologise for the sentence.

### 10. Filler and throat-clearing

**The problem:** the letter clears its throat for three sentences before saying
what it is about. A parent opening a message from school reads the first line
looking for the reason.

**Before → after:**

- "I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to inform you that..." → "I'm writing about Tuesday."
- "I wanted to reach out and touch base regarding Jonah's progress" → "I wanted to tell you how Jonah is doing"
- "It is important to note that his reading has improved" → "His reading has improved"
- "In order to facilitate her progress" → "To help her"
- "Due to the fact that the field trip was cancelled" → "Because the field trip was cancelled"

The same fault wears a casual costume. "Let's dive in", "here's the thing",
"honestly?", "at the end of the day", "what really matters is" — a staged pause
before an ordinary point. Remove the announcement and state the point.

### 11. Chatbot artifacts

**Watch for:** Certainly!, Of course!, Great question!, I hope this helps, Let me
know if you'd like me to, Would you like me to, Here is a draft of, While specific
details are limited

**The problem:** the assistant's own conversation left inside the letter, or
flattery aimed at the teacher before the answer, or an announcement that something
could not be found followed by a guess.

**Before:**
> Certainly! Here is a draft of your note to the Okafor family. I hope this helps —
> let me know if you'd like me to adjust the tone! Dear Mr. and Mrs. Okafor, ...

**After:**
> Dear Mr. and Mrs. Okafor, ...

A missing detail is a question for the teacher, never a sentence in the letter
saying the detail is missing, and never a guess dressed as fact.

### 12. Generic positive endings

**The problem:** the comment ends on a send-off instead of on the last useful thing
it had to say.

**Before:**
> It has been an absolute pleasure to have Maya in class this year. I look forward
> to seeing all the wonderful things she will accomplish. Keep up the great work,
> Maya!

**After:**
> Cut it. End on the last real thing in the comment.

If the teacher named a next step — what the child is working on now, what happens
after the break — that is the ending you want. If she did not, the comment simply
ends, and it is stronger for it.

### 13. Research nobody can point to

**Watch for:** research shows, studies suggest, evidence indicates, experts
recommend, it is widely recognised that, data tells us

**The problem:** parent-education writing reaches for an authority it cannot name.
This is the one source pattern that survives into school writing, and it lives in
newsletters. The claim may be true; the letter still cannot support it, and a
parent who goes looking finds nothing.

**Before:**
> Research shows that children who read for twenty minutes a night make the
> greatest gains in vocabulary. Please read with your child for twenty minutes
> each evening.

**After:**
> Please read with your child for twenty minutes each evening.

The after is the before's second sentence, unchanged, and that is the tell: the
research sentence carried nothing the ask did not already carry. It was borrowing
authority for a request the teacher is entitled to make on her own.

Two honest endings, and the teacher picks — name the source she actually has, or
drop the appeal, as here. Dropping it does not breach rule 2, because an authority
nobody can point to is not a claim the teacher can stand behind; it is decoration
on one. What is never an ending is a citation you supply to close the gap.

## The formatting tells

Shorter, because most of these matter only in a newsletter — which legitimately
uses headings and bullets, since parents skim it. A report card comment is prose
and stays prose.

- **Em and en dashes.** A note home rarely needs one; a comma, a full stop, or
  brackets usually reads better. Unless the teacher's own sample uses them, in
  which case match her rate.
- **Bold everywhere.** Bold a date or a deadline, not a phrase per sentence.
- **Bullets with bold labels.** "**Reading:** Reading has improved..." — three of
  those are a paragraph pretending to be a table.
- **Title Case Headings, and emoji as decoration.** Sentence case reads as a
  person wrote it, and a rocket in front of a heading is not enthusiasm.

## What not to flag

Teachers write like this on purpose. None of the following is evidence on its own.

- **A salutation and a sign-off.** "Dear Mrs. Okafor" and "Please don't hesitate to
  call me" are letter conventions centuries older than any chatbot.
- **Warmth with something behind it.** The fault is warmth standing in for content.
- **A formal register.** Some teachers write formally to families and always have.
  That is a voice, not a pattern.
- **One em dash, or curly quotes.** Word processors curl quotes by themselves.
- **Required boilerplate.** A standing footer or a phrase the school requires stays
  exactly as it is.
- **Flat facts.** A date, a time, and a room number are supposed to read flat, and
  dry is not the same as machine-written.

When unsure, look for several patterns together in one passage; one of anything
proves nothing.

## How to work

1. Read the draft once for what it is trying to say, before looking for faults.
2. Mark each pattern, and list every claim the draft makes — each name, number,
   date, and observation. That list is your check at the end.
3. Rewrite whole sentences and paragraphs. Patching one flagged phrase at a time
   leaves the shape intact and the draft still sounds wrong.
4. Read the result aloud. Most of what is left announces itself.
5. Ask two questions. What still sounds machine-written? And did any claim appear
   or disappear? Treat either as an error and fix it before showing anyone.
6. Collect the details you wanted and would have had to invent — the number, the
   task, the date — and ask the teacher for them alongside the draft.

If you can hand a review to a subagent, have one check the rewrite against the
original for added or lost claims; otherwise do that pass yourself, in order,
before showing the draft.

## What to hand back

- **A pasted draft.** The rewrite, then a few lines on what changed, then the
  questions you need answered to make it more specific. Not a lecture on the
  patterns.
- **A named file.** If a teacher points you at a file, put the final text there and
  summarise the changes in the conversation; otherwise give the whole text in the
  conversation, ready to copy.
- **Called by another skill.** Return the final text and nothing else. The calling
  skill handles the framing.

**Leading with the pasted draft is deliberately the reverse of the plugin-wide
default** in `using-gpa-skills`, which puts the artifact in a file where it can
and uses the conversation as the fallback. What this skill returns is a rewrite
of something the teacher is already holding, and it goes straight back into
whatever she was writing in; filing it leaves a second copy of a text that has
only one home. Do not "correct" this to match the router.

Say plainly when a draft did not need much. A teacher who wrote something good
should be told so, not handed a rewrite of it.