Assessment Report Sample Candidate
Assessment ReportSample CandidateMechanical ReasoningAptitude
ContentsIntroduction to Assessment Report.3Total Score.4Aptitude & Pace Information. 5Improving Abilities. 6Online Test Access Summary (For Assessor Use). 7About this ReportThis report is based upon Mechanical Reasoning Aptitude, an online test of the ability toreason with information presented in a mechanical format.The results are compared against a mixed occupational group of 628 individuals. Theresults in this report are presented on a 1 to 10 Sten scale, where 1 indicates lowperformance and 10 indicates high performance on the test. The margin of error thatshould be allowed before concluding that there is a difference between scores isindicated by the diamond shape.When reading this report, please remember that it is based on the information gainedfrom the test completion only. It describes performance on this particular test, ratherthan performance at work or study. Research suggests that ability tests can be powerfulpredictors of successful performance in study and work activities.The information contained in this report is confidential and every effort should be madeto ensure that it is stored in a secure place.The information contained within this report is likely to provide a valid measure ofaptitude for 12 to 24 months.The report is based on the results of the online test that the respondent was invited tocomplete under unsupervised conditions. The identity of the actual respondent has notbeen verified by a test administrator. Further testing under supervised conditions isrecommended for high-stake decision making.This report was produced using Saville Consulting software systems and has beengenerated electronically. Saville Consulting do not guarantee that it has not beenchanged or edited. We can accept no liability for the consequences of the use of thisreport.The application of this test is limited to Saville Consulting employees, agents of SavilleConsulting and clients authorised by Saville Consulting.Report for Sample CandidateGenerated on: 2-Jul-2013Page 2Comparison Group: Mixed Occupational Group (IA; 2012) 2016 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved.
Introduction to Assessment ReportThis report provides feedback on the responses of Sample Candidate to the MechanicalReasoning Aptitude test.Total ScoreThis test measures mechanical reasoning, which is important in the world of work fora variety of roles. This section of the report provides a total test score relative to thecomparison group: Mixed Occupational Group (IA; 2012)The Total Score indicates how well Sample Candidate has performed overall on thetest.Aptitude & Pace ComparisonAptitude and pace scores are shown for each of the areas in the test. These scoresare compared in a graph using a 1 to 10 sten scale, with the sten values given inbrackets. The pace score is based on the candidate’s response time for the questionsthey completed compared to the average response time for the same questions. Paceis shown from slow at the bottom of the graph to fast at the top. Aptitude runs fromlow on the left of the graph to high on the right.Report for Sample CandidateGenerated on: 2-Jul-2013Page 3Comparison Group: Mixed Occupational Group (IA; 2012) 2016 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved.
Total ScoreThis page shows the Total Score relative to the Mixed Occupational Group (IA; 2012)comparison group on a 1 to 10 sten scale.TotalScore12345678910Mechanical (High - 99%ile)Performed better than 99 percent of the comparisongroup.Interpretation GuidelinesComparison Group: Mixed Occupational Group (IA; 2012)Sten 1: higher than about 1% of the comparison groupSten 2: higher than about 5% of the comparison groupSten 3: higher than about 10% of the comparison groupSten 4: higher than about 25% of the comparison groupSten 5: higher than about 40% of the comparison groupSten 6: higher than about 60% of the comparison groupSten 7: higher than about 75% of the comparison groupSten 8: higher than about 90% of the comparison groupSten 9: higher than about 95% of the comparison groupSten 10: higher than about 99% of the comparison groupReport for Sample CandidateGenerated on: 2-Jul-2013Page 4Comparison Group: Mixed Occupational Group (IA; 2012) 2016 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved.
Aptitude & Pace InformationThis page displays aptitude and pace information for the test.Aptitude & Pace ComparisonMechanicalPace (5)Worked at an average paceAptitude (10)Report for Sample CandidateGenerated on: 2-Jul-2013Page 5Comparison Group: Mixed Occupational Group (IA; 2012) 2016 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved.
Improving AbilitiesSome tips for improving abilities are provided below:Mechanical Work with tools, equipment and machinery. Maintain, fix and repair things. Build objects with moving parts. Learn about mechanical principles. Look at technical user manuals.Report for Sample CandidateGenerated on: 2-Jul-2013Page 6Comparison Group: Mixed Occupational Group (IA; 2012) 2016 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved.
Online Test Access Summary (For Assessor Use)This section of the report provides additional information about the test completion.Initial Access: 02/07/2013 (10:06 GMT)Responses Saved: 02/07/2013 (10:15 GMT)Language: English (United Kingdom)Administrator Resets: 0Candidate Aborts: 0Time Adjustment: NoneReport for Sample CandidateGenerated on: 2-Jul-2013Page 7Comparison Group: Mixed Occupational Group (IA; 2012) 2016 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved.
Sten 2: higher than about 5% of the comparison group Sten 3: higher than about 10% of the comparison group Sten 4: higher than about 25% of the comparison group Sten 5: higher than about 40% of the comparison group Sten 6: higher than about 60% of the comparison group Sten
SHARE A CANDIDATE As a recruiter, you can share a candidate with a hiring manager. From a Job Requisition: 1. Click the Candidates tab. 2. Click a candidate's name link. 3. Click the candidate's Related Actions button, and select Candidate Actions Share Candidate. 4. Click OK. 5. The candidate name and the requisition to which they are .
CCL 1 EPA's First Contaminant Candidate List CCL 2 EPA's Second Contaminant Candidate List CCL 3 EPA's Third Contaminant Candidate List CCL 4 EPA's Fourth Contaminant Candidate List CCL 5 EPA's Fifth Contaminant Candidate List CDPR California Department of Pesticide Regulation CDR Chemical Data Reporting
Jan 09, 2020 · Candidate Assessment Division – Candidate Relations at (718) 312 -4226 or at CAD@NYPD.ORG. Certain phases of a candidate's processing may continue while the candidate is on medical review. The position of polic
Step 9: To move qualified candidates forward, from the Candidates tab, (1) click the check box next the candidate's name and (2) click Move Forward.The candidate is now sent to the next selected step. If the candidate does not qualify, click Decline and select the correct disposition. (NOTE: declining a candidate will send a system generated notification to the candidate, so do not
PPAT Assessment Candidate and Educator Handbook 5 This Candidate and Educator Handbook will help you understand the history and background of the PPAT assessment and will provide you with a general overview as well as the specific details needed to submit the contents of your performance assessment. The PPAT assessment has been developed by a team of exemplary national educators.
Report. 1 Sample Place, Sample Suburb, Sample State, Sample Postcode Prepared on: Prepared for: . This estimate is provided by CoreLogic, and is a computer generated, statistically derived estimate of the value of the subject property and must not . 1 Sample Place, Sample Suburb, Sample State, Sample Postcode Test ref Test promo
and Results Summary 1.The top of the first page of every CLIK score report displays the candidate’s information, including the candidate’s name, position applied for, the date the candidate took the assessment, and the Test Event ID. 2.In the results summary, the CLIK provides each candidate with a proficiency score. These scores range from .
Demoni Newman, JD candidate, Stanford Law School Reirui Ri, JSM candidate, Stanford Law School Kunal Sangani, BA candidate, Economics Alessandra Santiago, MS candidate, Earth Systems Science Mengyi Xu, JD candidate, Stanford Law School
