Weak chapters found before the finals
0Mean board score
0Earlier detection
Success stories
Six schools. Six numbers
Six schools. Six numbers
measured against themselves.
Every figure on these pages is measured against what that school or institute was already doing, in their own prior year — not against an industry average and not against a competitor. Where a number is illustrative, it says so.
Own prior year
Named term
No industry averages
Six stories
Six stories, six readers
Which of these
Which of these
is you?
The same platform reads completely differently depending on who is looking at it. Pick a role to see what it actually does for them — and which of the six stories below is theirs.
School
A school
One licence across every standard and division, one paper set once and sat by all of them, and a chapter map that makes a division comparison a fair question rather than an argument about who set the harder paper.
- One licence, every standard and division
- Set once, assigned to many divisions
- One rubric, so drift between markers stops
- Division-against-division on chapters, not totals
Institute
A coaching institute
One shared question bank behind every branch, batches that span cities, and the first branch comparison that means something because every branch sat the same mock.
- One bank, every branch, tagged and searchable
- Batches across branches and shifts
- Repeats excluded per batch, automatically
- Branch-against-branch on the same paper
What a coaching institute gets Forty branches, one question bank
Teacher
A teacher
The setting and the marking stop being yours; the reviewing stays. Eight minutes to a ready paper, twenty-eight to review forty scripts, and every AI score is a proposal you can overrule.
- Eight minutes to a ready paper
- Objective sections marked instantly
- Written answers traced to your rubric
- Every override logged with your name
What a teacher gets The department that got its Sundays back
Student
A student
A result that names two chapters instead of a position in the class, every deduction explained, and practice built from exactly the topics that cost marks.
- Two chapters ranked by marks lost
- Every mark explained, not just scored
- Practice from your own weak chapters
- No rank — it is never calculated
Parent
A parent
Every result the moment a teacher releases it, in plain language, with the two chapters that need work — and nothing that would let a fourteen-year-old call it spying.
- One notification per released paper
- Chapter map in plain language
- Strong chapters named, not only weak ones
- No login times, no activity feed
On your own
An individual learner
No school and no institute required. Pick a board and a standard, generate papers from any chapters, and get the one thing self-study cannot give you honestly — a ranking of your own weak spots.
- Any board, any standard
- Papers in the real exam pattern
- Your own chapter map over time
- Monthly, cancel and export anytime
What an individual learner gets One paper, three mediums, one standard
Every one of those six has its own page with the full picture, and every one of them has a story below measured against their own prior year.
The work
What changed,
What changed,
and how much of it.
Six of them, across schools, a coaching institute, a department and a parent body. Each one names what they were doing before, because a number without a baseline is a number without a claim.
Forty branches, one question bank
0On one bank
0Saved per mock cycle
The department that got its Sundays back
0Marking time
0Per paper, reviewed
A mock cycle that finally moved
0On retested chapters
0Practice sets completed
The parents who stopped waiting
0Sooner than the report card
0Practice sets completed
One paper, three mediums, one standard
0From one blueprint
0Questions set twice
How we report numbers
Four rules we hold
Four rules we hold
ourselves to.
Education software is not short of impressive percentages. These are the constraints that make the ones above worth reading.
Measured against their own prior yearNever against an industry average
Every figure compares a school to what that same school was doing the year before, with the same cohort structure where possible. Comparisons to a sector average are meaningless, because the average school is not the one deciding whether to buy this — and it lets you claim a large improvement by picking a low benchmark.
The term is namedSo you can judge the sample
Each story says which term the figures come from and how many students, divisions or branches were in it. A 14% improvement across twelve divisions and a 14% improvement across one are different claims, and you should be able to tell which one you are reading.
What did not improve is in the storyIncluding where it went backwards
Every rollout has something that got worse before it got better — usually the first paper, which takes a department longer than the one it replaced because the rubric has to be written down for the first time. Each story says what that was. A case study with no cost in it is marketing.
Illustrative figures are labelledEvery time, in the same words
Some diagrams elsewhere on this site show the shape of a result rather than one school’s actual numbers. Those carry the word illustrative next to them. Nothing on this page is illustrative — these six are measured.
If a figure above matters to your decision, ask us on the call and we will show you how it was calculated.
How we report
Questions about
Questions about
the numbers above.
Education software is not short of impressive percentages. These are the ones we get asked about ours.
Real, and several will take a call. Names are used with permission; where an institute preferred not to be named, we say so rather than inventing a plausible one. Ask on a demo and we will make the introduction where the school has agreed to it.
Against that institute’s own prior year, not against a benchmark and not against a control group we picked afterwards. Where a number covers only part of a rollout — one subject, one term, one set of divisions — the page says which part.
We publish what went wrong inside the ones that went well, which is the honest half of it. Every story here names something that got worse before it got better, or a subject where it was dropped. We have not yet written up an institute that abandoned it entirely, and that is a gap rather than a claim.
Because these are the ones with a full year of before-and-after data and permission to publish. We would rather six that can be checked than thirty that cannot.
Ready when you are
Bring us last term’s results.
Book a free 30-minute demo. We’ll build the chapter breakdown from a paper you already ran, so the first number you see is your own.