Ready to analyse
Click Load Data to pull the latest reviews from Google Sheets and begin your analysis.
Cohort Overview
Summary of all technical and skill review submissions
Technical Score Distribution
Scores out of 55
Communication Score Distribution
Scores out of 45
Technical Decisions
Delivery Decisions
Student Profiles
Filter, sort, then click any row to expand the full breakdown
Technical Review Analysis
Analytical depth, evidence use and checklist performance
Analytical Insight vs External Data
Average criterion scores compared
Rating Distribution
Poor → Excellent breakdown per criterion
Checklist Pass Rates
Hardest items first — red = most commonly failed
Student × Checklist Heatmap
✓ Met · ✕ Not Met · sorted by score
Skill Review Analysis
Communication clarity, persuasion, presence and delivery mechanics
CC vs PP Performance
Communication Clarity vs Persuasion & Presence
Time Management
Did students stay within 5 minutes?
Delivery Checklist Pass Rates
Hardest delivery items first · Yes = full · Partial = 0.5
Slide Group Delivery Rates
Which presentation segment is weakest
Skill Mentor Calibration
Avg CC and PP per mentor vs cohort
CC vs PP Quadrant
Delivery profile — Communication vs Presence
Pitch Duration Distribution
How many students stayed within 5 minutes
Delivery Checklist — Yes / Partial / No Breakdown
Full breakdown per item — Partial shown separately from Not Met
Ready vs Not Ready by Scenario
Delivery readiness across the 5 scenario areas
Scenario Analysis
Click a scenario to expand its full performance breakdown
Combined View
Technical vs communication performance — matched by OA email
Technical vs Communication Scatter
Each dot = one student · Quadrant lines = cohort averages
Score Gap — Technical vs Communication
Students with the biggest divergence between both scores · Blue = tech · Teal = comm
All Matched Students
| Student | Scenario | Tech /55 | Tech Decision | Comm /45 | CC /25 | PP /20 | Delivery Decision | Time OK |
|---|
Study Engagement
How students are using the Study Tool · Activity is captured from clicks, scrolls, completions, flashcards and searches
▼
Engagement vs Performance
X = total study events · Y = technical review score · Quadrants tell you who to intervene with, who to push further, who's coasting and who's grinding but stuck
▼
Chapter Coverage Heatmap
Rows = students · Columns = chapters · Green = sections completed · Amber = viewed only · Grey = never opened
▼
Engagement Leaderboard
Ranked by total study events · Students at the bottom with low review scores are your priority intervention list
| Rank | Student | Events | Sessions | Time on Tool | Chapters Touched | Sections Done | % Complete | Cards Reviewed | Searches | Last Active | Tech /55 | Status |
|---|
▼
What the Cohort is Studying Most
Chapters and topics ranked by total engagement · High activity + high "card_struggle" = likely teaching gap
| Chapter | Students Touched | Section Completions | Cards Mastered | Cards Struggled | Struggle Rate |
|---|
▼
What Students are Searching For
The most-searched terms · If a term comes up often, students are confused about it — worth teaching or clarifying
| Search Term | Times Searched | Unique Students |
|---|
▼
Student Activity Drill-Down
Pick a student to see every action they've taken in the Study Tool
Reviewer Intelligence
Click any reviewer card to expand their full profile — scoring patterns, calibration, checklist rigour, feedback quality and more
— reviewers
Study Plan Recommendations
Auto-generated from cohort data — prioritised by urgency
All Reviews
Complete dataset — searchable and sortable
Exam Readiness
Composite readiness score per student — weighted: Technical 50% · Checklist 25% · Communication 25%
Readiness Threshold
Adjust the minimum % to define "exam ready"
60%
readiness threshold
Readiness Distribution
How the cohort clusters by readiness score
Readiness Breakdown
Student Readiness Table
Sorted by readiness score — lowest first
| Student | Readiness % | Tech /55 | CL /20 | Comm /45 | Status | Action |
|---|
At-Risk Students
Students flagged across multiple dimensions — prioritised for intervention
Issue Intelligence
Which issues students are choosing — popularity, performance, and strategic patterns
Issue Popularity
How many students chose each issue
Avg Score by Issue
Which issue choices produce the best technical scores
Issue × Scenario Heatmap
Student count per issue — darker = more popular
Missing Reviews
Students who have not yet completed both review types
⚠ Tech review only — no skill review yet
| Student | Tech Score | Tech Decision |
|---|
⚠ Skill review only — no tech review yet
| Student | Comm Score | Delivery Decision |
|---|
Reviewer Workload
Reviews submitted per reviewer/mentor
Deep Dive Analytics
Submission timeline · Score percentiles · Inconsistency detection · Cross-scenario · Timing distribution · Coaching patterns
📅 Submission Timeline
When are reviews being submitted?
⏱ Pitch Duration Distribution
Distribution of actual pitch lengths from timer
🏅 Score Percentile Table
Each student's rank within the cohort on both dimensions
| Rank | Student | Tech /55 | Tech Pctile | Comm /45 | Comm Pctile | Combined Pctile |
|---|
🔀 Checklist Inconsistency Detector
Students where rubric score diverges from checklist pass rate — possible over/under-grading
📍 Cross-Scenario Performance
Which scenario area produces the best outcomes
🗣 Coaching Note Frequency
Delivery checklist items that generate the most coaching notes — a partial/no with coaching is more urgent than a plain not-met
Duplicate Records
Students with more than one submission — same name, CASL ID, or email