Skip to content
Comparisons

Eighty tools, or one loop that follows through.

MagicSchool saves teachers time across a very wide range of tasks. Zelvi does fewer things, all from the course’s own material, and records whether a struggling student recovered.

Choose Zelvi if

  • You want the tutor and the teaching tools to work from your course’s published material, with citations.
  • You need a recorded result for each struggling student, not only a generated resource.
  • You teach gateway college, allied-health or workforce courses.
  • You want students on the same misconception grouped into one live session.

Choose MagicSchool if

  • You want the widest range of teacher tools: lesson plans, rubrics, presentations and more.
  • You are a K-12 district that wants one AI platform across every classroom.
  • You want teacher certification courses and a large educator community.
  • You need integrations across Google, Microsoft, Canvas, Schoology, Clever and ClassLink today.

Feature by feature

Zelvi compared with MagicSchool, feature by feature
FeatureZelviMagicSchool
Number of toolsA few: reading level, translation, feedback, practiceA very large catalogue for teachers and students
Grounded in your course materialEvery tool and answer works from the published material and cites itTools generate from the teacher’s prompt and inputs
Follow-through on a wrong answerRe-teach, retry, record, hand offNot the product it is trying to be
Educator community and trainingPilot onboarding with your teamLarge community and certification courses
Replies in the student’s language22 languages, with course terms kept in English beside themMultilingual tools

What MagicSchool does better

MagicSchool does far more than Zelvi does. Its range of teacher tools, its community and its K-12 integrations are well ahead of ours, and a teacher who wants help with many different planning tasks will get more from it.

What our side of this rests on

  • Answers cited back to your own material, with the instructor one tap away when the material does not cover itOn our go/no-go benchmark every answer retrieved the right passage, carried a valid citation and stayed inside the material, and every out-of-scope question routed the learner to the instructor rather than a guess — against 54.2% for handing the model the whole document.
  • Change reading level, translate, and draft feedback on student work, all from the course’s own materialFeedback cites the course pages it relies on, translation keeps the English term beside each subject term, and every pasted text is fenced from the instructions.
  • Students stuck on the same misconception are grouped, and the instructor brings them into one short live sessionGroups are built from the escalations Ava already opened, keyed on concept and misconception, and only students enrolled on the course can be invited.
  • When a student says something that may mean they are in danger, Ava stops tutoring, says she is an AI, gives crisis resources for their country, and alerts the institutionEighty-nine automated checks, covering crisis language in English, Spanish and Hindi, and coursework such as "why does Ophelia commit suicide" that must not raise an alert. The alert email never contains the student’s words.
  • Each institution’s data is isolated at the database level, not by application codeTen checks run as a real signed-in user, so the database’s own access rules are genuinely exercised rather than assumed.

Questions people actually ask

Does Zelvi write lesson plans?
No. Zelvi re-levels and translates readings, drafts feedback on student work, and builds practice, all from the course material. It does not try to be a general teacher toolkit.
Can teachers use both?
Yes. Planning help and a grounded recovery loop are different jobs.

Other comparisons