How does Dock support curriculum development with committee review?
Dock turns curriculum development into an attributed loop. The agent pulls standards from Notion, outcomes from Canvas, and source documents from Google Workspace, drafts a unit, and posts it to a Dock surface where the curriculum committee reviews it. Every row records who proposed, who approved, the mapped standard, and the targeted Canvas outcome. Nothing reaches students until the committee signs the row.
Canvas, Notion, and Google Workspace stay the system of record for the raw data. Dock is the system of record for what the AGENT INTERPRETS. Each Dock row carries a pointer back to the platform record, agent identity, decision, reviewer, and timestamp. The agent re-fetches platform data via fresh API reads when it needs current state.
The Curriculum Unit Review surface
| Unit ID | Subject + grade | Standards (Notion) | Outcomes (Canvas) | Source docs (Drive) | Agent draft | Status | Approver |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CU-204 | Gr 7 Life Science | NGSS MS-LS1-5, MS-LS1-6 | Outcome 41, 43 | drive/bio-unit-2026/* | Photosynthesis, 4 lessons, 2 labs | Approved 2026-05-22 | Dr. Patel |
| CU-211 | Gr 9 Algebra I | CCSS HSA-REI.B.3, C.6 | Outcome 88 | drive/algebra-scope-seq/* | Linear systems, 6 lessons | Revisions requested | Ms. Okafor |
| CU-218 | Gr 4 ELA | CCSS RL.4.2, RL.4.3 | Outcome 17, 19 | drive/ela-anchor-texts/* | Theme + character, 5 lessons | Pending vote | (queued) |
Each row points back to the Notion standards page, the Canvas outcomes object, and the Drive folder it was drafted from. The agent identity is stamped on the row. Approvals carry the committee member name and the meeting date.
One worked workflow
A district wants a new Grade 7 Life Science unit on photosynthesis. The curriculum lead assigns the draft. The agent re-reads NGSS pages in Notion, pulls outcomes from Canvas via the Outcomes API, and reads anchor texts and lab protocols from Drive. It drafts four lessons, two labs, and a summative assessment, then writes CU-204 to the surface. The committee reviews, requests one lab swap, and re-runs the agent on that lab only. Dr. Patel approves the revised row. Canvas then receives a publish call that creates the module. The Dock row stays as the durable audit record.
Why it matters
Curriculum work fails when alignment, outcomes, and source attribution live in separate documents nobody can reconcile during a board challenge. Dock keeps the interpretation layer in one place. When a parent asks why a unit was adopted, the committee opens the row and sees the standard, the outcome, the source, the draft, the revisions, and the approver. The same record satisfies accreditation review. The pattern mirrors the research provenance loop.
Open the Dock for education pillar.
FAQ
Who owns the draft, the agent or the committee?
The agent owns the draft proposal. The committee owns adoption. Dock records both, so a unit shipped to students always has a human approver name attached. See agent audit and compliance for the durable record model.
What if standards change mid-year?
The agent re-fetches the Notion standards page on every run. If a standard is revised, the next draft picks up the new version and the diff appears on the Dock row. The committee re-reviews only the affected units. Agent identity is stamped per run, so you can see which version of the agent produced which draft. More in agent identity.
Can multiple agents contribute to one unit?
Yes. A standards-mapping agent, a lesson-drafting agent, and an accessibility-review agent can each write to the same row with their own identity stamp. The committee sees a layered draft with attribution per layer. See agent collaboration primer.
How does this connect to scholarly sources?
Subject-area units often cite primary research. The agent uses the same fetch-and-attribute pattern documented in the research workflow to pull citations into the draft row, so the committee can verify every claim before adoption.
External references: OECD, Curriculum (re)design: A series of thematic reports from the OECD Education 2030 project (2020); EDUCAUSE, 2024 Horizon Report: Teaching and Learning Edition (2024).
