Example Career Readiness Report (Real Sample)

A career readiness report is a per-student document showing how that student rates themselves on each of the eight NACE competencies, how the employers and faculty who supervised their work rate them on the same eight, and where those two views disagree. It also carries a written development note and the context of the experience being assessed. You can open a real one, on a real sample institution, without signing up.

Open the real one

The fastest way to know whether this is useful to you is to read a report. The sample institution, Riverside State University, is public and needs no signup: open the example report. Nothing in it is real student data.

What is in a career readiness report

The header: what was assessed. A report is always attached to a specific experience, with the term, the placement or course, and who supervised it. A competency rating with no context is not evidence, and this is where most homegrown instruments come apart, because the rating was collected without ever recording what it was a rating of.

Self-assessment across the eight competencies. The student rates how often they demonstrated each of the eight NACE competencies on a five-point frequency scale. Frequency rather than quality, deliberately: it asks about observed behaviour and gets more honest answers than asking a twenty-year-old to grade themselves.

Observer ratings on the same eight. The employers, supervisors and faculty who watched the work rate the identical competencies through a single-use link that requires no account. This is the direct evidence, and it is the part a self-assessment tool cannot produce.

The gap. The two views are shown together per competency. A student rating themselves a full point above their supervisor on communication has something specific to work on. A student rating themselves well below is frequently the strongest performer in the cohort and needs to hear it. This comparison is the reason the report exists.

The spread between observers, where there is more than one. Two supervisors who disagree about the same student are telling you something the average between them hides. Individual observers are never identified, because a rater who can be identified rates differently, and honest ratings matter more than attribution.

A written development note. Two or three paragraphs a student can act on, generated from their own results and reviewed by staff, rather than a score with no instruction attached.

What a careers office sees

Institution staff get the cohort view rather than a stack of individual reports: competency results by cohort, major and term, response rates, and the self-versus-observer gap aggregated across the group. That is the view that answers "which competencies are weakest in our programs", and it is what feeds accreditation evidence.

What a report is not

It is not a grade, and it should not be presented as one. It is not a personality assessment or a predictive hiring score. With a small number of raters, an individual result is a conversation starter rather than a precise measurement, and the cohort aggregate is the sound basis for program decisions. We would rather say that here than have you discover it in a faculty meeting.

See it with your own students

Everything above is free for every institution. Create your institution, import a roster and run a window, or read the getting started guide first.