Browse help docs
Running the IB Engine
The IB Engine is one connected chain rather than a set of separate tools. This is the order the work happens in, who does each part, and the points where something cannot move forward until a named person decides.
For IB coordinators, programme coordinators and teachers · reviewed 23 August 2026
The 6 points where someone must decide
Everything else can be worked on in any order. These cannot move without a person.
- ApprovalProposed → Approved or rejected
- StandardisationOpen → Consensus
- ReleaseDraft → Released
- Student workSubmitted → Reviewed
- AI draftsPending → Approved or rejected
- PublicationDraft → Published
Set the year and load the frameworks
/teacher/academic-years · /teacher/curriculum-library · /teacher/concepts · /teacher/ib-roles


Mrs. Johnson
Teacher
Academic years
Every IB record is stamped with the year it belongs to
2026–27
1 Aug 2026 – 31 Jul 2027
2025–26
Closed · records preserved
Framework elements
412
loaded
School standards
28
your own
Concepts
61
PYP + MYP
Create the academic year first. Every IB record made afterwards is stamped with it, which is what keeps a past year reproducible once the current year's records start changing.
Then load the framework your programmes run against, along with any standards, objectives and policies your school adds on top of it.
- Curriculum library holds framework elements alongside your school's own standards.
- Concept library holds key and related concepts per programme. Its coverage dashboard stays empty until units are mapped in stage three.
- IB roles is where coordinators and supervisors are named. Do this now — later stages check it before allowing an approval.
Map the programme
/teacher/curriculum-maps · /teacher/pyp · /teacher/myp · /teacher/interdisciplinary


Mrs. Johnson
Teacher
Programme of inquiry
Year 4 · six transdisciplinary themes
Who we are
Central idea · Identity is shaped by the communities we belong to
How the world works
Central idea · Systems depend on the balance between their parts
Sharing the planet
Central idea not written yet
Version history keeps a unit revised in March from rewriting what was taught in October.
Build the map before the units. PYP schools work in the programme of inquiry — central ideas, lines of inquiry and concepts across the transdisciplinary themes. MYP schools build units carrying a statement of inquiry, a global context and criteria-tagged tasks.
Curriculum maps keep version history, so a unit revised in March does not silently rewrite what was taught in October.
Connect units to the framework
/teacher/mappings · /teacher/gaps · /teacher/learning


Mrs. Johnson
Teacher
Unit mappings
Typed links from units to objectives — only approved links are counted
Migration stories → B.2 Organising
Added by R. Mehta · approved as created
Migration stories → C.1 Producing text
Suggested by AI · waiting for a person
Water systems → A.1 Knowing
Imported from last year's map · waiting
Counted toward coverage
1
approved only
Waiting on approval
2
AI + imported
This is the stage schools most often skip, and the one everything downstream depends on. A mapping is a typed link from a unit to an objective or standard. Coverage, gap detection and accreditation readiness are all counted from these links.
Learning experiences are the activities between a unit and its assessment, tagged to the same elements. The gap detector reads all of it and reports unmapped objectives, under-assessed ones, and elements over-used across the school.
Gate · Approval
Proposed → Approved or rejected
A mapping a person creates is approved as they make it — professional judgement is not queued for review. Mappings suggested by AI or brought in by an import land as proposals instead, and do not count toward coverage until somebody with teaching access approves them. That approval is not restricted to a coordinator.
Teach, gather evidence and assess
/teacher/myp-criteria · /teacher/grades · /teacher/standardisation · /teacher/evidence


Mrs. Johnson
Teacher
MYP grades
Criterion levels 0–8 · the 1–7 grade is derived, not typed
Standardisation · Task 3
OpenStays open until a consensus level is recorded.
Ayaan R.
A 6 · B 5 · C 6 · D 5 → grade 5
Navya P.
A 7 · B 7 · C 6 · D 7 → grade 6
Ishaan V.
A 4 · B 5 · C 4 · D 4 → grade 3
Nothing reaches a student or a family while it is still a draft.
Criteria and strands are defined once per subject and versioned, so a judgement made in September can still be read correctly in June. Teachers record criterion levels from 0 to 8 against tasks, and the 1 to 7 grade is derived rather than typed in.
Where several teachers mark the same task, each records an independent judgement first. The standardisation session shows the variance between them and records the agreed position, so the conversation that resolved a disagreement is part of the record rather than a memory.
The evidence graph is the single store every other area links into. One artefact can support a unit, an ATL judgement and an accreditation practice at once without being uploaded three times.
Gate · Standardisation
Open → Consensus
Where several teachers mark the same task, the session stays open until the agreed position is recorded as consensus. Recording it is what puts the conversation that resolved a disagreement into the record rather than leaving it as a memory.
Gate · Release
Draft → Released
A grade stays a draft until it is released, and nothing reaches a student or a family before that. This is what makes it safe to enter marks as you go.
Track growth over time
/teacher/atl · /teacher/growth · /teacher/projects · /teacher/dp · /teacher/inquiry


Mrs. Johnson
Teacher
ATL progression
Introduced → demonstrated, each step carrying evidence
Research · evaluating sources
Ayaan R. · 3 pieces of evidence
Self-management · meeting deadlines
Ayaan R. · 1 piece of evidence
Thinking · transfer
Ayaan R. · no evidence yet
Student submissions
2 waitingWork learners added themselves, waiting for a teacher to look before it counts.
ATL progression moves per student from introduced to demonstrated, each step carrying evidence. Growth and reflection show that timeline alongside learner profile coverage and the student's own reflections.
- Projects — the PYP exhibition, MYP personal and community projects, and service as action.
- DP and CP core — internal assessment, extended essay, TOK and CAS through their milestones, with the supervisors named in stage one.
- DP risk and drafts — where a component is slipping, plus the draft and supervisor feedback loop.
- Inquiry engine — student questions moving from wonder, to investigation, to answer.
Gate · Student work
Submitted → Reviewed
Work a learner adds to their own IB portfolio arrives in student submissions for a teacher to look at before it counts as evidence.
Let the copilots draft, and approve what they produce
/teacher/ai-hub · /teacher/ai · /teacher/school-copilot · /teacher/student-risk


Mrs. Johnson
Teacher
AI copilots
Drafts wait for a named approver — nothing publishes itself
Report comment · Ayaan R.
Drafted from released grades and 3 reflections
Rubric · Water systems summative
Aligned to MYP criteria B and C
Unit plan · Migration stories
Approved by A. Iyer · 14 Aug
Every approval is recorded against the person who gave it.
The copilots draft; people decide. Unit plans, rubrics, feedback and report comments are generated from your school's own records and arrive as drafts with a named approver.
The AI Hub is the one front door: ask about your school, your documents, the research or a piece of writing, and it routes the question to the right specialist — the Writer, the Data Analyst, school knowledge or research — and cites what it used. Drafts are edited before anything is sent, and proposed actions become tasks only when a person approves them.
Intelligence, inside the hub, shows what is likely next if nothing changes: a weekly attendance projection with its assumptions and range, and early warnings that show their evidence before their severity, each one a click from a task or a grounded question.
School Copilot answers questions in plain language through permission-checked tools and cites the data behind each answer. Students to review surfaces school-observable patterns worth an educator's eye — it is not a diagnosis and makes no judgement about a child.
Gate · AI drafts
Pending → Approved or rejected
Nothing an AI produced reaches a student, a family or a report card without a person approving it first, and the approval is recorded against the person who gave it.
Report, review and evidence the visit
/teacher/report-cards · /teacher/coordinator · /teacher/accreditation


Mrs. Johnson
Teacher
IB command centre
Ordered by exception — what needs attention, not everything
Units mapped
18/24
Awaiting approval
2
Reports published
0
41 in draft
Practices met
7/12
3 objectives assessed once this year
Gap detector · MYP Sciences
Sharing the planet has no central idea
PYP Year 4
Accreditation evidence up to date
Last artefact linked 2 days ago
Report cards pull the whole graph — grades, ATL, reflections, projects — into one publishable card. Because the chain was built in order, nothing here is retyped.
The IB command centre is the coordinator's whole-school view, ordered by exception rather than as a list, and read-only by design. Accreditation runs practices, to linked evidence, to gaps, to actions, moving each practice from not started, to in progress, to met.
Gate · Publication
Draft → Published
Families see a report only once it is published. A draft is a work in progress and stays with staff.
Who can approve what
Designations are assigned in IB roles and are separate from the account role somebody signs in with.
| Designation | Sees | Approves |
|---|---|---|
| IB coordinator | The whole school | Interdisciplinary units; everything else open to teaching staff |
| PYP / MYP / DP / CP coordinator | Their programme | Interdisciplinary units and DP draft feedback for their programme |
| Supervisor | Their assigned students | Feedback on their own students' DP drafts |
| Leadership | The whole school | Nothing — this designation is deliberately view-only |
| Any teacher account | Their programmes | Mappings, grade release, standardisation, report publication and AI drafts |
If something looks empty
Coverage figures show nothing
Mappings may exist but still be proposed rather than approved. Only approved mappings are counted.
The gap detector reports no gaps
It needs mapped objectives to compare against. With no approved mappings there is nothing to find a gap in.
A report card is missing a section
The underlying records — grades, ATL judgements, reflections — have not been entered, or grades are still in draft.
Accreditation readiness sits at nothing
Practices need evidence linked before they can move past not started.
A dashboard is empty on a new school
Coverage, gap and readiness views are counted from real records, so a school that has not reached stage three sees them empty. That is intended: an invented number would be worse than an honest blank.
Still stuck?
Bring the unit you are working on. Thirty minutes with someone who has taught the programme.