One student note, four people reading it

A student keeps missing the same idea. Limud writes that down once, with the evidence behind it, and four people read that one note, each in the way their own job needs.

A girl of about eleven writing an answer by hand in a ruled exercise book, a tablet propped upright on a stand beside her on the same table. — The tablet adapts the material. The child still does the work.

The student note

Equivalent fractions

Failing days: 6
Data points: 6
Confidence: 0.68
Written by: The model

An example note, with the fields Limud actually stores. Six failing days on the same concept is what turns a bad afternoon into a pattern, and the confidence rises with the evidence behind it rather than being asserted. If the model is unavailable the deterministic fallback writes the note instead, and this panel says which one did.

Student
Sylvester, grade 5
Misses the same idea six days running. Nothing about the week looks unusual, so nobody would have caught it by eye.
Teacher
Mrs. Osher
Opens the student file and finds the concept, the six days, and the number of data points behind the claim.
Family
David, at home
Gets the same finding in plain words, with one concrete thing to try this evening. No grade book to decode.
District
Superintendent Ofer
Sees the note counted across schools, so a score that moves can be tied to a named intervention.

One concept, written down once, read four ways.

What a student actually does here

Sylvester is eleven, reads slowly, and loses a page of a worksheet to one paragraph he cannot get past.

Learning DNA.: A short survey about hobbies, interests, and whether he learns best by ear, by eye or by doing. The profile sharpens every time he works, so it describes him in March better than it did in September.
The assignment everyone gets.: The graded artifact is identical for every classmate, because fairness in evaluation is not negotiable. The material behind it arrives rebuilt for his profile. Focus mode strips the screen back to one question when the load gets too high, and the tutor answers with a question drawn from something he already likes.
Feedback the same minute.: AI Grading returns the score, the rubric breakdown and the next step on submission rather than next class. Mastery by subject, predicted grades and a study heatmap build up in his own analytics over the term.

What a teacher stops doing by hand

Mrs. Osher has been building three versions of one worksheet by hand since the year she started.

Two uploads, not one.: The assignment goes up once and stays the same for everyone. The teaching material goes up separately and comes back rewritten per student: same facts, same dates, same final assignment, a different way in.
Quizzes and grading.: Curriculum-aligned quizzes generate from built-in topic banks for a quick knowledge check. AI Grading marks essays against her own rubric and hands her draft feedback to edit and approve, not a verdict to accept.
The class, not the average.: The intelligence dashboard aggregates in real time and flags which students the engagement trend says need a person rather than another worksheet.

What a family gets, at school or at home

David wants to know how his kid is doing without learning to read a grade book to find out.

The check-in.: One button returns a plain-English account of how the term is going: what is landing, what is not, and one concrete thing to try this evening. It also says whether the model or the fallback wrote it, and how confident it is.
Family teaching mode.: A parent who teaches at home, full time or on weekends, turns on the full teacher toolkit inside the same account: assignment authoring, AI Grading, materials upload and per-child analytics. One login, not a second product.

What a district sees across its schools

Superintendent Ofer has to defend a line item to a board that has been sold software before.

One command center.: Enrollment, teaching staff and annual cost on one screen, per school and across the district, so district health does not have to be assembled from four exports.
Provisioning without tickets.: Bulk user import from CSV, and one announcement that lands in the teacher, student and parent portals at once.
Compliance, stated plainly.: A panel names the standards Limud is built to meet: FERPA, COPPA and WCAG 2.2 AA. It reports that commitment rather than monitoring anything live, and Limud holds no third-party certification and does not claim one.

What all four are standing on

The model: Google Gemini 2.5 Flash writes the questions the tutor asks, the grading feedback and every rewritten assignment. When it is unavailable a deterministic fallback answers instead, and the note that reaches a parent says which of the two wrote it.
The method: SM-2 spaced repetition and adaptive difficulty targeting, both reading the same Learning DNA profile the assignments read. One profile, not one per feature.
The record: Role-scoped access with an audit trail on student-record reads, HTTPS everywhere, and AES-256-GCM encryption for the school-system credentials Limud stores. Accessibility is checked in CI on every build. FERPA and COPPA are the laws this is built to comply with, not certifications it holds.

Districts pay by seat and families pay by household, for the same product.

See what a plan costs