Customers
Designed with a QA directorate, not for one.
OneRubric was built alongside the quality-assurance directorate of a public university in Ghana, starting from the way its evaluation cycle actually ran. We are now opening it to the first cohort of institutions.
The starting point
The cycle most universities still run.
Evaluations were already collected every semester. The work started from what happened after collection.
| Today at most universities | With OneRubric |
|---|---|
| Thousands of survey forms collected, then filed away | Every response analysed automatically |
| Nobody reads the free-text comments; the richest feedback is wasted | Every comment is read and grouped into themes |
| Lecturers get a score, not a path to improve | Every lecturer gets a private, specific coaching note |
| The QA office spends about two weeks hand-writing the period report | The period report is generated; a board pack is one click |
| No record of what anyone did about a bad score | Every commitment is tracked and verified next term |
| Leadership sees evaluations once a year, if at all | Live dashboards for heads, deans and the executive |
What the partnership shaped
Decisions that came from a real QA directorate.
Seven roles, not three
Student, lecturer, head of department, dean, executive, QA office and IT operator each get their own scoped screens, because evaluation in a real university is a chain of responsibility rather than an admin task.
Six areas of teaching
The rating structure follows the areas a QA directorate already assesses: course design, lecturer attendance, teaching delivery, assignments and feedback, interaction and support, and the learning environment.
A fair process for lecturers
Lecturers see flagged comments first, can formally dispute a comment that breaks the rules, and are ranked with Bayesian shrinkage so small samples cannot outrank large ones.
Your system, not a vendor’s
Colours, logo, crest, the name of the QA office, schools, programmes and even whether periods are called semesters or trimesters are set from admin screens. To students and staff it looks like your institution’s own system.
On infrastructure you control, if you want it
Self-hosted installs run the AI on the institution’s own hardware with an open model, so student comments never leave campus. The hosted edition uses a vetted inference provider. Either way, sign-in uses the Google and Microsoft accounts people already have.
Custom questions per programme
Institution-specific evaluation items, including questions that appear only after a particular earlier answer, sit alongside the standard rubric.
We do not name customers or publish quotes and outcome figures without written consent, and never before an institution has completed a full evaluation cycle on the platform.
Design partners
Help shape it ahead of launch.
We are working with a small number of universities and polytechnics before general availability. The fit is a Quality Assurance office that already runs evaluations every term and wants to show its council what changed as a result.
What a design partner gets
- Early access on the hosted service or a self-hosted install, your choice
- Direct input on the roadmap and on institution-specific terminology
- A named engineering contact and written answers within 5 business days
- The security documentation and compliance statements for your procurement file
- Pricing terms agreed before public pricing is announced
What we ask in return
- One real evaluation period run on the platform
- A QA-office contact who can meet fortnightly during the cycle
- Candid feedback on what is confusing, missing or wrong
- Permission to describe the partnership in the terms you approve, and nothing more