TudorandClaude Opus 4.8
13253116c2
PR Checks / Frontend Typecheck + Tests (pull_request) Successful in 1m1s
PR Checks / Backend Smoke (pull_request) Successful in 7s
PR Checks / Build Backend (no push) (pull_request) Successful in 10s
PR Checks / Build Frontend (no push) (pull_request) Successful in 41s
PR Checks / Build Pipeline (no push) (pull_request) Successful in 9s
PR Checks / AI Code Review (Claude) (pull_request) Successful in 1m35s
Follow-up to the accuracy pass — the medium-severity wording issues from the same expert review: - KS2 "Exceeding" isn't a DfE term. The above-expected level is the "higher standard" for the reading and maths tests and "greater depth" for teacher-assessed writing. Labelled per subject, and brought the illustrative reading value down from an implausible 73% (national higher standard is ~29%) to a realistic strong-school figure. - Attributed inspection outcomes to Ofsted, not only the DfE (Ofsted is a separate non-ministerial department). - Hero: "2026/2027 admissions results" -> "the 2026/27 admissions round" (admissions produce offers, not results, and we don't hold per-school offer outcomes). Tightened .miniRowHead so the longer "Greater depth" label stays on one line and the three subject columns keep their bars aligned (the visual is desktop-only; hidden on mobile). Verified with tsc --noEmit and next build. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_0146VHeLAWjDVE2B5uU67jCB