Would teachers use ranking to choose activities, not evaluate students?
I am testing a narrower classroom-adjacent direction for Rankiwiki: helping a teacher choose among class activities, books, or project themes without turning students into the ranked objects.
A possible flow is:
- The teacher names a small set of options.
- Students contribute short reasons, ideally without public names.
- The class ranks the options, then discusses the minority reasons before deciding.
The validation question is not whether voting is engaging. It is which teacher outcome is valuable enough to justify the workflow: broader participation, a faster group decision, or surfacing objections that would otherwise stay quiet.
Rankiwiki is a public community ranking platform today, not a classroom-ready product. It does not currently provide private classes, teacher controls, student-data safeguards, or classroom moderation. I would validate the decision workflow with adults and educators before building or testing anything involving students.
If you have interviewed teachers or built education software, which outcome would you test first—and what answer would make you stop?
