02

Applied AI · Quality · Human judgment

AI Training & Evaluation

Structured methods for evaluating educational and marketing AI output, diagnosing weaknesses, improving prompts, and training people to use AI responsibly.

Impossible stair-block with a red paper airplane flight path
01 · The problem

Why this work matters

Fluent AI output can still be inaccurate, incomplete, poorly targeted, or unsafe. Teams need practical standards that turn subjective reactions into repeatable quality decisions.

02 · My role

What I contributed

Designed evaluation prompts, weighted rubrics, scoring dimensions, revision logic, and human-in-the-loop review workflows informed by education and marketing expertise.

03 · The value

What it demonstrates

Connects AI capability with domain judgment so organizations can improve accuracy, audience fit, instructional value, brand alignment, usability, and risk awareness.

Selected examples

Case studies you can open

Each example adds a distinct workflow, domain, or evaluation method.

Selected deliverables

Work products

  1. 01Educational-content evaluation and improved response
  2. 02Marketing-campaign evaluation and revised campaign concept
  3. 03Prompt-engineering comparison across three iterations
  4. 04Weighted rubric covering quality, audience, ethics, and usability
  5. 05AI literacy and evaluator-training framework

Evidence

What supports the work

  • Prompt, baseline output, scoring rubric, diagnosis, and revision
  • Requirements translated into measurable evaluation dimensions
  • Original-versus-improved response comparison
  • Human approval and documented rationale retained throughout
Evidence status

Original portfolio demonstrations showing evaluation method and decision quality—not benchmark claims about model performance.

Methods & capabilities

Skills used in this work

LLM evaluationPrompt engineeringRubric designAI trainingHuman-in-the-loop review