What a finished report looks like
This is a fictional example, not a real candidate or a real customer's assessment — every name, score, and comment below is invented, and matches exactly what the real report generator produces from this same data.
Download the sample as a PDF — the same file a staff member would get for a real candidate.
Jordan Example (fictional candidate)
- Objective questions18 / 20
- Written question (reviewed)16 / 20
- Practical exercise (rubric)47 / 60
Objective questions
2 multiple-choice questions, scored automatically at submission — no reviewer involved: 18 / 20 points.
Written question
“Describe your approach to reconciling two datasets that disagree.”
Score: 16 / 20 — Clear reasoning, minor gap on edge-case handling.
Practical exercise — Data Reconciliation Rubric
Each criterion carries a fixed point value, not a percentage weight — a criterion worth more points simply counts for more of the question's total. 2 reviewers scored this submission independently; nothing here is averaged between them.
| Criterion | Max points | Maya Reviewer | Daniel Reviewer |
|---|---|---|---|
| Data accuracy (mandatory) | 25 | 22 Totals reconcile correctly; minor rounding note. | 20 Correct totals, small formatting inconsistency in the summary tab. |
| Methodology | 20 | 16 Reasonable approach; outlier handling not explained. | 15 Same gap noted — outlier method unclear. |
| Presentation | 15 | 13 Clear layout, easy to follow. | 12 Well organized. |
Recorded score: 47 / 60 points, reflecting Daniel Reviewer's most recently submitted review. Maya Reviewer's independent scores above are kept for comparison — a second review never overwrites or gets averaged with the first; whichever reviewer submits most recently becomes the recorded score.
Skill evidence
Scores grouped by the competency each manually-reviewed question was tagged with.
- Written communication: 16 / 20 (80%)
- Data analysis: 47 / 60 (78%)
Integrity summary
What the report states: “No significant integrity concerns detected.” Factual counts — Focus loss events: 1 · Screen-share interruptions: 0 · Webcam interruptions: 0 · Room scan: completed.
This is the report's own automated summary — a fixed sentence plus event counts, nothing narrative. Any interpretation of what an event means (for example, that one recorded focus-loss event lined up with downloading the practical exercise's reference file) happens separately, during human review, and is not itself printed in the generated document.
Recommendation and approvals
Reviewer recommendation: Shortlisted — by Maya Reviewer
Grading review: completed · Proctor review: completed
Results released: Maya Reviewer approved candidate-facing release.
← Back to home · Create an account to build your own assessment.