Assessment blueprints
Coverage, cognitive-level and difficulty distribution agreed and documented before any item is written.
EdTech · Service 02
Item banks, rubrics and calibrated assessments that measure what the course actually taught.
Overview
Items that measure what you meant to measure.
An item bank is only as good as its weakest reviewer. We run assessment development as an editorial process: a blueprint that fixes coverage and difficulty distribution before writing starts, SME authors working to a written style guide, and independent review for alignment, bias, accessibility and answer-key correctness.
We author across question types — multiple choice and multi-select, constructed response, technology-enhanced and performance tasks — and deliver into QTI, your assessment platform, or a structured export your engineers can ingest.
Coverage, cognitive-level and difficulty distribution agreed and documented before any item is written.
Multiple choice, multi-select, constructed response, technology-enhanced and performance items with full rationales.
Standards, difficulty, cognitive level and metadata applied consistently across the bank.
Analytic and holistic rubrics with anchor responses, written so two scorers agree.
Independent review for cultural and linguistic bias and for items that disadvantage assistive-technology users.
Style-guide enforcement, fact checking and copy-editing across instructional and assessment content.
Standards, coverage, item counts and difficulty targets, signed off in writing.
SME authors write to the style guide in tracked batches, with a calibration batch reviewed first.
Independent alignment, bias, accessibility and answer-key review; anything contested goes to a third reviewer.
QTI or platform delivery with metadata intact, plus a post-delivery correction window.
Short form, one business day to a reply