Skip to content
← Back to work

Curriculum-grounded authoring and learning diagnosis

Curriculum standards, concept dependencies, original items and explainable scoring organized as reliable education-model data.

1.6K+assessment tasks6difficulty tiers>93%rubric agreement
MERIDIAN / WORKSPACE
Curriculum-grounded authoring and learning diagnosis · workbench concept
Meridian workspace example

Task understanding before scale

An education model needed to distinguish concept mastery, reasoning errors and incomplete expression rather than mark only final-answer correctness. Subject teachers mapped curriculum standards to a knowledge graph, authored original items and supplied reference solutions, step-level rubrics and misconception patterns. A second teacher solved independently, while evaluation researchers used model pilots and item-response analysis to check discrimination, bias and scoring agreement.

01

Curriculum, concept dependencies and capability targets aligned

02

Reference, step rubric and misconception set delivered together

03

Teacher solve, model pilot and difficulty-bias calibration

02 / PROCUREMENT REVIEW STRUCTURE

One structure aligns the questions asked by model, data, procurement and security teams.

01 / Capability gap

Curriculum standards, concept dependencies, original items and explainable scoring organized as reliable education-model data.

02 / Evaluation object

Curriculum standards, knowledge graphs, original items, learner-style answers and step rubrics

03 / Task design

Teacher authoring, independent solve, misconception modeling, model pilots and item-response analysis

04 / Operating scale

Representative batch of 1,600+ tasks across six difficulty tiers and multiple subjects

05 / QA protocol

Curriculum alignment × original authoring × difficulty calibration; Teacher solve, model pilot and difficulty-bias calibration

06 / Evidence package

Curriculum, concept dependencies and capability targets aligned; Reference, step rubric and misconception set delivered together; Step-rubric agreement above 93%; low-discrimination and biased items reworked before release

07 / Disclosure

Client identity, original material and selected volumes are removed or banded. This brief explains delivery method and does not guarantee future results.

NEXT STEP

Review samples. Then define the task.

Carry this direction into your enquiry to confirm delivery, verification and sample scope.

Request samplesInspect deliverables

Build data around your next capability goal

Start with a task goal and a sample. Define the materials, specialists, verification methods and delivery scope together.