Pacing Guide

The description states that Pacing Guide is a web application designed to help teachers keep classes aligned when they do not move through a course at the same pace. It allows:

• Building courses from ordered sequences of lessons.
• Creating different pacing tracks for the same course.
• Assigning courses and tracks to individual classes.
• Defining weekly schedules and rotations.
• Accounting for holidays, testing days, assemblies, and modified schedules.
• Adjusting class pacing independently.
• Using lesson notes, checkpoints, and planning tools.
• Viewing plans as a continuously updated teaching calendar.
• Sharing calendars with others and synchronizing them with external apps.

It also supports schools by enabling:

• Providing schedule defaults and calendar changes.
• Managing plan allocations for teachers.
• Offering subscription access without requiring each teacher to purchase individually.

The authors state that Pacing Guide began as a spreadsheet used by one teacher and evolved into a scalable web application during OpenAI Build Week 2026. They emphasize the shift from a personal tool to a platform supporting both individual teachers and schools.

They claim:

• The tool grew from a single-use spreadsheet to a full-stack product.
• It preserves practical workflows while handling complex scheduling logic.
• The system supports teacher autonomy while allowing school-level coordination.
• Authentication, authorization, billing, and internationalization were added during development.

The description indicates that Pacing Guide targets teachers and schools managing multiple classes with varying schedules.

Key segments mentioned:

• Individual teachers who want to manage their own pacing.
• Schools that provide schedule defaults and plan allocations.
• Administrators who need oversight over teacher access and shared calendars.

The description states that Pacing Guide supports:

• Individual subscriptions via Stripe test mode.
• School-managed plan allocations and seat limits.
• Direct access grants without subscription.

It also mentions:

• Trial workflows.
• Subscription management tools.
• Seat-based access control for schools.

The project was built using:

• Frontend: React + TypeScript
• Backend: Python + FastAPI
• Database: PostgreSQL
• DevOps: Docker, GitHub Actions, CI/CD pipelines
• Authentication: Google OAuth and local accounts with email verification and recovery
• Billing: Stripe test mode
• Localization: i18next for English/Spanish support
• Testing: Vitest, integration tests

Codex (GPT-5.6) was used extensively throughout development to:

• Propose data models.
• Implement changes across stacks.
• Write and run tests.
• Refine interfaces iteratively.

There is no evidence of actual traction, revenue, customers, or adoption beyond the development phase. The authors state that this is a prototype built during a hackathon, and they have not yet released it publicly.

They mention:

• A first public release plan.
• UI/UX review and end-to-end testing.
• Future features like course catalog recommendations and district-level admin accounts.

The description does not provide any information about competitors or market positioning beyond self-reports of functionality. There is no mention of existing tools in the educational planning space, nor how Pacing Guide compares to them.

• No traction or revenue: The project is described as a prototype built during a hackathon with no evidence of real-world usage.
• Unverified claims: All statements are self-reported and unverified; there’s no third-party validation.
• Limited team size: Only two members, which may limit scalability and long-term maintenance.
• Unclear monetization path: While subscription flows are implemented in test mode, no production billing or pricing strategy is described.
• AI dependency: Heavy reliance on Codex for development raises questions about reproducibility and control over the codebase.

1. What specific feedback did you receive from teachers during development?
2. How many actual teachers or schools have expressed interest in using Pacing Guide beyond the prototype stage?
3. Can you describe how you plan to transition from Stripe test mode to live billing?
4. What are your plans for onboarding and training users once launched?
5. Are there any known legal or compliance issues related to handling teacher data or school calendars?
6. How do you intend to differentiate Pacing Guide from existing educational tools?
7. What is the timeline for the first public release, and what metrics will define success?