Review & sign-off
Every brief is reviewed by a working practitioner in your target market against the acceptance criteria the client agreed. Revisions are normal. Rejection is possible. What survives that is worth showing to a hiring manager, which is precisely why it has to be possible to fail.
Your sign-off carries the reviewer's name, their current employer and the date. A hiring manager can check that it is a real person doing real work.
First submissions usually come back. That is what the acceptance criteria are for, and it is the part of the job most courses skip entirely.
Not a generic pass. Each acceptance criterion is marked separately, so the record shows exactly what you met and what you had to fix.
Ten unscripted minutes walking through your own work in English. It is language evidence and interview practice at the same time.
Who does not review your work
Who does
Reviewers are matched by discipline and target market and are paid for the review, not for the outcome. Roughly a third of applicants are told at the readiness gate that they are not ready for a live brief, which is the earlier and cheaper version of the same honesty.
Stage 01
A call about your right to work, your target country, the occupation codes you could realistically land, and what each one requires. Before any payment.
Stage 02 · gate
A short task at working standard. If you're not ready for a live brief we say so and name the course that comes first. Roughly a third of applicants hear this.
Stage 03
Two to six weeks of scoped work from a real employer, with real constraints and a deadline nobody moves for you.
Stage 04
A practitioner in your target market marks it against the acceptance criteria. Revisions are normal. Rejection is possible.
Stage 05
Your exhibit is added to the file, the walkthrough is recorded, and where the client wants to talk to you, we get out of the way.
Original scope, constraints and deadline. Unedited, including the bits that were ambiguous.
Repository, document, model, dashboard, filing. Whatever the brief called for, in the form the client received it.
Named practitioner, current employer, date, and their marks against each acceptance criterion. Not a generic pass.
A plain statement of what you personally owned, at what level, over what period. It is the document HR and immigration both keep asking for.
The constraint you didn't expect and how you handled it. Interviewers hire for this and almost nobody can evidence it.
Ten minutes of you explaining your own work aloud in English. It doubles as language evidence and as the interview you've now already rehearsed.
The reviewer says which criteria were not met and why. You revise and resubmit. If the gap is a teaching gap rather than an effort gap, we name the course that comes first — the same conversation as the readiness gate, just later.
No. The reviewer is matched to the discipline and the target market, and they have no relationship with you before the review. That independence is the whole point of the sign-off.
No. Teaching happens in the course. Review is a mark against criteria plus written reasoning. Mixing the two is how bootcamps end up marking their own work.
The reviewed deliverable, after review. They never receive an unreviewed submission, and they can still ask for revision or reject it.
It is yours. The evidence file is built so it can be sent to a hiring manager, an HR team or an immigration adviser without anything needing to be explained by us.
Fifteen minutes on your right to work and what is realistically open to you. Before any payment, and sometimes the answer is no.
Get your route map