A useful curriculum graph
Cuegence can create and maintain a useful, school-approved curriculum and concept graph.
Pilot programme
Built with schools, not just for them.
Cuegence is developed alongside pilot schools. Together we evaluate the learning-intelligence loop in real academic workflows—and measure what makes it genuinely useful.
What the pilot proves
A pilot with a hypothesis, not a demo.
The pilot must prove the learning-intelligence loop—not merely that AI can generate teaching material. Together with pilot schools, we measure whether accumulated learner and class context produces better decisions than a generic curriculum-aware copilot.
Target: ≤5 minutes of Cuegence-specific administration per class each day
Normal evidence updates the model
Everyday school evidence can update an auditable longitudinal learner model at concept level.
Teachers find it accurate and correctable
Teachers consider the learner-model interpretation sufficiently accurate and useful—and can correct it.
Model-informed beats generic
A model-informed lesson plan or intervention is materially more relevant than one generated from curriculum alone.
Assessments create quality evidence
Question-paper generation and concept mapping can create high-quality evidence from normal tests.
Signals without excessive admin
Homework, assignments, and teacher feedback can add useful signals without excessive teacher administration.
Practice closes the loop
Personalized home practice can be generated from learner state, and subsequent evidence can close the loop.
Isolation without learner PII
The hosted architecture can maintain tenant isolation while the intelligence layer operates without direct learner PII.
Who should join
K–12 schools and school groups ready to evaluate learning intelligence in real academic workflows, with teachers in the loop.
Pilot programme
Help shape better teaching intelligence.
We are inviting K–12 schools and school groups to evaluate Cuegence in real academic workflows and help measure what makes learning intelligence genuinely useful.
- Use normal school evidence—without a separate student app
- Evaluate model-informed teaching against curriculum-only output
- Keep teachers in control of every academic decision
- Work directly with the Cuegence product team
Prefer email?
hello@cuegence.comTell us about your school
We’ll use this information only to respond about the Cuegence pilot.
FAQ
Questions schools ask first
A clear view of what Cuegence does—and what it deliberately does not do.
Still have a question? hello@cuegence.com
No. Cuegence is a learning-intelligence layer for K–12 schools. It works with evidence from normal academic activity and can connect to existing school systems. There is no direct student-facing Cuegence application in v1.
A generic tool can use a curriculum prompt. Cuegence also uses approved academic plans, confirmed coverage, concept-level evidence, prerequisite state, previous interventions, and teacher feedback. That accumulated context makes its suggestions specific to the learners being taught.
No. Teachers remain authoritative over classroom teaching, lesson plans, assessments, and interventions. They can inspect why an inference exists, review its evidence, and edit, replace, or correct Cuegence output.
Evidence can include question-wise marks, question-to-concept mappings, assignments, homework, teacher feedback, confirmed curriculum coverage, and approved integrations. Every signal keeps its source and context, and absence of evidence is not treated as poor understanding.
The learning-intelligence layer works with school-scoped pseudonymous learner identifiers. Direct personally identifiable information is excluded from model calls, and identity or contact data is kept separate wherever practical.
Parents can receive supportive daily or weekly practice and guidance through school-approved channels. Cuegence does not expose raw mastery scores, risk labels, class ranks, percentiles, or peer comparisons.
No. One school’s operational data never informs or benchmarks another school. Cuegence does not generate teacher-effectiveness scores, automated rankings, or personnel decisions.
The pilot is intended for K–12 schools and school groups that want to evaluate evidence-informed teaching preparation, concept-level learning intelligence, personalized practice, or clearer academic visibility in real workflows.