Teach a Free Public Workshop

Proof required

Share the specific topic, format, date, and venue or platform link. Share a screenshot or live link of your promotional listing — it must be publicly visible to someone who does not know you (an Eventbrite listing, Meetup event, Luma event, community board post, or equivalent). Write one sentence explaining what first-hand experience or expertise makes you the right person to teach this specific topic.

What gets checked

• Promotional listing is publicly accessible without a login — a WhatsApp message to personal contacts does not count.
• Topic is specific enough that a stranger could decide whether to attend — 'something useful about careers' is not a topic; 'How to negotiate your first salary offer' is.
• Date, format, and venue are confirmed — not 'sometime next month'.

Common mistakes

• Choosing a topic you researched rather than one you have genuine first-hand experience with — the GOVERNANCE proof standard requires real expertise, not researched familiarity.
• Promoting only to people who already know you — voluntary attendance from strangers is what makes this a public leadership act.
• Including any payment element — the outcome is explicitly free; any charge disqualifies it.

Resources

What a verifier looks for

• Ask for the public URL to the promotional listing and confirm it is accessible without a login.
• Check that the topic matches something the submitter has genuine first-hand experience with — ask one follow-up question about their background in this area.
• Confirm the event is listed as free — any ticket price or donation requirement disqualifies it.

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.

Proof required

Share an attendee sign-in sheet showing 10+ distinct names OR a screenshot of the video call showing 10+ participants (for online events). Write 100 words on how you handled one specific unexpected moment during the workshop — name what happened and what you did.

What gets checked

• Attendance evidence shows 10 or more distinct individuals — 10 entries by the same person do not count.
• At least 8 of the 10 attendees had no pre-existing close personal relationship with you — a workshop of 10 family members is not a public event.
• The 100-word reflection names a specific unexpected moment and a specific response — 'it went smoothly' is not a valid answer.

Common mistakes

• Counting attendees who signed in but left within 10 minutes — the sign-in records arrival, not participation.
• Treating an obligatory work team meeting or school class as a public workshop — attendees must be voluntary.
• No unexpected moment — every real workshop has at least one thing that didn't go exactly as planned; 'nothing unexpected happened' signals the reflection was not genuine.

Resources

What a verifier looks for

• Ask how many of the 10+ attendees were people who had no prior close relationship with the organiser — the voluntary nature of attendance is the core signal.
• If the sign-in sheet has suspiciously similar handwriting or names all signed at the same moment, ask about it.
• The unexpected moment reflection is a calibration check — someone who ran a real workshop will name something specific. If the answer is 'everything went perfectly', probe with a follow-up question.

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.

Proof required

Share the raw feedback responses (anonymised) or a screenshot of the form results summary — at least 5 distinct responses from actual attendees. Share a 150-word reflection on what the feedback revealed about your teaching: one thing the feedback confirmed went well, one thing the feedback challenged that you thought went well, and what you will change if you run this workshop again.

What gets checked

• At least 5 distinct feedback responses are from actual attendees — feedback from people who did not attend does not count.
• The 150-word reflection engages specifically with what the feedback said — naming a piece of feedback that challenged your assumption is required.
• The 'what I will change' answer is specific: 'I will spend 10 fewer minutes on X and add a live Q&A segment' is specific; 'I will improve my delivery' is not.

Common mistakes

• Submitting only positive feedback without engaging with any critical responses.
• Reflection that only confirms your existing beliefs about what went well — the feedback's value is in what it reveals, not what it confirms.
• Identical or near-identical responses across all submissions — manufactured feedback produces suspicious uniformity.

Resources

What a verifier looks for

• Confirm that feedback responses are from actual attendees — cross-reference with the sign-in sheet if there are more feedback responses than attendees.
• The reflection must engage with at least one critical or challenging piece of feedback — a reflection that only affirms positive responses is not genuine.
• Ask about the 'what I will change' item — if the answer changes between the written submission and a follow-up question, the reflection may have been written without genuine consideration.
• Flag identical or near-identical responses as a concern — genuine workshop feedback almost always shows variation in phrasing and emphasis.

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.