Four flagship programmes and five things that run alongside them. Every one of them is a cohort — a fixed group, a fixed calendar, facilitated rooms and marked work.
Pick by what you are trying to change, not by what sounds most comprehensive. The second is the most common mistake in this list.
For a pre-final or final year batch heading into a placement season. Case discussion, technical depth and interview reasoning run as one track, with the readiness distribution visible to the placement cell from the first month rather than after the season.
A placement cell that knows its December outcome and wants to know its August position, while there is still a term in which to move it.
For senior school. Structured argument, evidence handling and written reasoning, run in an existing period against the board calendar rather than on top of it. The skills the board exam does not assess and the years after school depend on.
A school that can see its students can recall a syllabus and cannot defend a position, and has one free period a week to do something about it.
Your staff trained and certified to run the rooms themselves, with calibration so two facilitators mark the same submission the same way. This is the programme that decides whether everything else survives a change of coordinator.
An institution that intends to own the programme rather than renew a service, which in practice is the only kind that still runs it in year three.
For teams rather than classes. Cohorts by level or function on a working-hours cadence, with capability movement reported to managers instead of course completions, and the same rubric-marked submissions underneath.
An L&D team tired of reporting a completion percentage that nobody in the business believes measures anything.
None of these is a programme on its own. Each one is added to a cohort that is already running.
A term-long project run as a cohort: scoped, reviewed at checkpoints, defended in a facilitated room and marked against the same rubric.
Your own hackathon on our infrastructure — registration, teams, submissions, judging and a public leaderboard — run as an institution event.
Any programme above can issue certificates carrying both names on the same public verification path students can put on a CV.
Your own material converted into cases with rubrics and moderator notes. Usually the hardest part of running your own content, so we do it with you.
The content differs. The mechanic does not: one group, one calendar, a facilitator in every room, and written work marked against a rubric by a person.
The mechanic is set out in full on Cohort Learning.
Five steps. Institutions that start at step two usually cannot answer, at the end, whether it worked.
Not which programme you want. The programme follows from the outcome, and occasionally the honest answer is that none of these fit.
One cohort, one track, one term — sized so the result is readable rather than impressive.
Alongside the pilot, so by the end of it your staff can run the next one.
The pilot cohort read against the group that did not run it. Without the comparison the review is a testimonial.
Widen by grade, department or function on what the pilot showed.
Same programmes, described for the office that has to run them.
How a school runs this: cohorts by section, teachers as facilitators, a coordinator dashboard.
Open this pageDepartment tracks, faculty certification and readiness distribution for the placement cell.
Open this pageTeam cohorts, capability reporting and enterprise deployment for an L&D function.
Open this pageWhat a cohort actually is, and why the fixed calendar is the part that makes it work.
Open this pageOccasionally we will tell you none of them fits, which is a cheaper conversation to have now than a term from now.
We use cookies to enhance your browsing experience, serve personalised content, and analyse our traffic. Non-essential cookies stay off until you choose. By clicking "Accept All", you consent to our use of cookies as described in our Cookie Policy.