Syllabi
Teaching and learning, tailored to the learner in front of you.
Syllabi reads a curriculum the way a teacher does — as a graph of dependent ideas, not a list of topics. It models what a learner already holds, finds the gap that is actually blocking them, and rebuilds the path from there. Teachers get plans, materials and diagnostics; learners get a route that fits.
- Interface
- Web · LMS embed · API
- Unit of work
- Concept node
- Update signal
- Learner artefacts
- Human control
- Full plan override
- Built for
- Schools, universities, tutoring programmes, training teams
Not a screenshot.
Switch between three learner profiles. The prerequisite graph re-plans in place: the blocking concept is circled, the route redraws, and the generated plan on the right is rewritten to match.
fig. 1 — prerequisite graph, live re-plan
Year 9 · stalls on simultaneous equations
Blocking concept
Proportion
Failures on simultaneous equations trace back through graphing to an unstable proportion model — not to the topic being assessed.
Generated route — 4 steps
- 1Repair. Proportion as a multiplicative relation, using the ratio work already secure
- 2Rebuild. Linear equations re-derived from the repaired proportion idea
- 3Bridge. Graphing lines as the visual form of the same relation
- 4Reach. Simultaneous equations, introduced graphically before algebraically
Four steps, none of them hidden.
Each stage produces an artefact a human can read, contest and overrule. That constraint shapes the architecture more than any model choice does.
Ingest the syllabus
The existing curriculum document goes in as-is. Concepts and prerequisite edges come out, with every extracted edge attributed to the passage that produced it so a teacher can contest it.
Estimate where the learner is
Mastery is inferred from work the learner produces — attempts, errors, explanations — and expressed per concept rather than per topic, with an uncertainty attached to each estimate.
Find what is actually blocking
The system walks the graph backwards from the failure to the earliest weak prerequisite. That node, not the assessed topic, is where teaching resumes.
Write the route and the materials
A sequence of steps with explanations, worked examples and practice generated against that specific gap. The teacher edits or rejects any step before it reaches a learner.
What it actually does.
Curriculum as a graph
01Every syllabus is decomposed into concepts and prerequisite edges, so a weak node explains the failures downstream of it instead of hiding behind a topic label.
Learner state modelling
02A running estimate of mastery per concept, updated from work the learner actually produces — not from a one-off placement test.
Path rewriting
03When the estimate moves, the route moves. Sequencing, difficulty and modality re-plan continuously against the same learning objectives.
Materials that follow the plan
04Explanations, worked examples, practice sets and assessments generated against the specific gap, in the register the learner reads best.
Teacher in the loop
05Every generated plan is inspectable and editable. Teachers see why a route was chosen and can overrule any step of it.
Classroom-scale view
06Aggregate the same graph across a cohort to see which prerequisite is quietly costing the whole class its marks.
The interesting question was never 'can a model explain fractions'. It was 'does it know that fractions are why this student cannot do the algebra'.
- Syllabi does not assign grades or produce a mark that follows a learner.
- It does not run without a teacher able to see and override the plan.
- It does not infer anything about a learner from demographic attributes.
Limits are part of the specification. They are enforced in the system, not in the marketing.
Want Syllabi against your own data? Pilots start with a short scoping call and a sample of the real thing.