Outcomes
Structured programs with verified milestones. Pick one. Start today.
Grow Your Product to 1,000 Users
4 milestones · 16 weeks
Scale from 25 strangers to 1,000 core-action completions — entirely through distribution, not feature-building. Every milestone requires measuring completions of the core action, not signups or page views.
Launch Your First Product Publicly
5 milestones · 8 weeks
Ship your product to strangers — people who find it without being personally invited — define a specific success metric before building, and publish a public retrospective with real numbers.
Learn to Code from Scratch
5 milestones · 16 weeks
Write, run, and ship your first Python programs — from a terminal hello-world to a deployed web app that real strangers can use.
Build and Deploy Your First Web App
5 milestones · 12 weeks
Build a complete web application — frontend, backend, and deployed to a public URL — that real strangers can use without any instructions from you.
Master Python for Real Projects
5 milestones · 12 weeks
Write Pythonic code, work with APIs and external libraries, build and test a data pipeline, and publish a real Python package on PyPI.
Master SQL for Data Analysis
4 milestones · 8 weeks
Write and optimize complex queries across joins, CTEs, window functions, and indexes on a real production dataset.
Master Statistics for Data Analysis
5 milestones · 10 weeks
Apply descriptive statistics, hypothesis testing, regression, and A/B test design to real datasets — every milestone requires working with real data and documenting the decisions, not just the calculations.
Scale an Engineering Team from 5 to 20
5 milestones · 24 weeks
Scale an engineering team from 5 to 20 people — the hardest management transition in software. The skills that made you effective at 5 will actively harm you at 20. Every milestone here is about replacing personal relationships with systems, and replacing your presence with documented authority.
Operate as a Staff Engineer
5 milestones · 20 weeks
Staff Engineer is the most misunderstood title in the industry. Many companies hand out the title for tenure or as a retention tool, without the person ever doing Staff-level work. This outcome's proof standard is about the WORK, not the title — every milestone tests for influence without authority, the hardest skill at this level. The defining shift from Senior to Staff is scope: a Senior engineer is excellent within a defined problem. A Staff engineer identifies which problems matter before anyone assigns them, and influences outcomes across teams they do not manage.
Reach French A1
4 milestones · 8 weeks
Introduce yourself, handle simple exchanges, and understand slow clear speech in French. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Earn AWS ML Specialty Certification
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Pass the AWS Certified Machine Learning Specialty exam on first or second attempt.
Build a Distributed System
0 milestones · 16 weeks
Design and implement a distributed system with consensus, fault tolerance, and observable performance characteristics.
Build an End-to-End ML Pipeline
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Build a machine learning pipeline from raw data to deployed model serving real predictions in production.
Earn Google Data Analytics Certificate
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Complete all 8 courses of the Google Data Analytics Professional Certificate and apply skills to a capstone dataset.
Ship a Design System in Production
0 milestones · 14 weeks
Build and document a component library used by at least one production product — tokens, components, and usage guidelines.
Complete 100-Day UI Challenge
0 milestones · 15 weeks
Design and publish 100 UI elements or screens over 100 consecutive days. Proof: public portfolio with all 100.
Design and Ship a Mobile App UI
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Design a complete mobile app interface from brief to developer handoff, with the app live on an app store.
Deliver 10 Public Talks (Any Venue)
0 milestones · 24 weeks
Deliver 10 prepared talks at meetups, conferences, or public events — recordings or attendance sheets as proof.
Build a Writing Habit (365 Consecutive Days)
0 milestones · 52 weeks
Write and publish at least 200 words every day for 365 consecutive days — public log or newsletter as proof.
Build and Keep a Budget for 90 Days
0 milestones · 13 weeks
Create a personal or household budget and stick to it for 90 consecutive days with weekly log submissions as proof.
Read and Analyze Financial Statements
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Analyze the P&L, balance sheet, and cash flow statement of 5 real public companies and produce a written analysis of each.
Complete Personal Finance Fundamentals
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Complete a structured personal finance course and apply every concept to your own finances with a documented financial plan.
Pass CFA Level 1 Exam
0 milestones · 24 weeks
Pass the CFA Level 1 examination on first or second attempt. Official result notification as proof.
Pass CFA Level 2 Exam
0 milestones · 24 weeks
Pass the CFA Level 2 examination. Requires CFA Level 1 completion. Official result notification as proof.
Complete Six Sigma Green Belt
0 milestones · 16 weeks
Pass a Six Sigma Green Belt examination and complete a DMAIC project with measurable process improvement documented.
Run 5K Without Stopping (First Time)
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Run a continuous 5K for the first time ever. GPS route proof required — app screenshot or wearable export.
Run 10K Without Stopping (First Time)
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Run a continuous 10K for the first time. GPS route proof required — focus on completion, not time.
Build a Half Marathon Training Base (16 Weeks)
0 milestones · 16 weeks
Complete a structured 16-week half marathon training program with full session log submitted as proof.
Lose 5kg of Body Fat (Tracked and Documented)
0 milestones · 16 weeks
Reduce body fat by 5kg using tracked nutrition and consistent training, with before/after measurements and photos as proof.
Gain 5kg of Muscle (Tracked and Documented)
0 milestones · 20 weeks
Build 5kg of lean muscle mass with tracked nutrition and progressive training, with before/after measurements as proof.
Achieve Healthy BMI Range (Documented)
0 milestones · 20 weeks
Reach and maintain a BMI between 18.5 and 24.9 for 90 consecutive days, with wearable or scale data as proof.
Build a Nutrition Tracking Habit (90 Days)
0 milestones · 13 weeks
Log every meal and macro for 90 consecutive days using a tracking app. Export data as proof.
Complete a Body Recomposition Program
0 milestones · 20 weeks
Simultaneously reduce body fat and build lean mass over a structured 20-week program, with before/after DEXA or measurements.
Build Consistent Sleep Schedule (90 Days)
0 milestones · 13 weeks
Maintain the same wake time (±30 minutes) every day including weekends for 90 consecutive days — wearable sleep log proof.
Improve HRV by 20%+ (Tracked)
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Raise your average resting HRV by 20% or more over 12 weeks through consistent recovery practices — wearable data proof.
Complete 90 Days Alcohol-Free
0 milestones · 13 weeks
Go without alcohol for 90 consecutive days. Proof: journal entries every 2 weeks + health markers at end.
Build a Daily Meditation Habit (365 Days)
0 milestones · 52 weeks
Meditate for at least 10 minutes every day for 365 consecutive days. App log or daily journal proof.
Complete Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Complete the 8-week MBSR program with all sessions attended and home practice logged.
Complete a 30-Day Digital Detox Protocol
0 milestones · 5 weeks
Follow a structured digital detox — no social media, limited screens after 8pm — for 30 days with daily journal proof.
Publish First Short Story
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Write and publish a short story in a literary magazine, anthology, or reputable online publication.
Publish 10 Essays (Consistent Theme)
0 milestones · 16 weeks
Write and publish 10 long-form essays under a consistent theme or beat, with public readership metrics as proof.
Build Newsletter to 10,000 Subscribers
0 milestones · 52 weeks
Grow an email newsletter to 10,000 active subscribers with documented open rate above 30%.
Get First Paid Writing Client (Creative)
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Land and deliver a paid creative writing engagement — essay, fiction, or content — with invoice paid.
Complete a Screenwriting Script
0 milestones · 14 weeks
Write a feature-length (90+ pages) or short (10–30 pages) screenplay in industry-standard format, with feedback from a script reader.
Write and Publish a Non-Fiction Book
0 milestones · 52 weeks
Research, write, and publish a non-fiction book — self-published with real ISBN or through a traditional publisher.
Learn to Play Guitar (First Complete Song)
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Learn to play guitar from scratch and perform a complete song start to finish — video recording as proof.
Learn to Play Piano (First Complete Song)
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Learn to play piano from scratch and perform a complete song start to finish — video recording as proof.
Learn to Play Drums (First Complete Song)
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Learn to play drums from scratch and perform a complete song start to finish — video recording as proof.
Learn to Sing (First Performance)
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Develop your singing voice through structured practice and perform a complete song for an audience — video recording as proof.
Release a Full Album
0 milestones · 26 weeks
Write, record, produce, and release a full album (8+ tracks) on major streaming platforms.
Complete 100-Day Creative Challenge
0 milestones · 15 weeks
Create and publish one piece of creative work every day for 100 consecutive days — public portfolio as proof.
Get First Art Commission
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Receive, deliver, and get paid for a commissioned artwork from a real client — brief, invoice, and finished work as proof.
Get Work Exhibited Publicly
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Have your creative work accepted for and displayed in a public exhibition — physical or curated digital gallery.
Master Digital Art Fundamentals
0 milestones · 16 weeks
Complete a structured digital art curriculum — anatomy, colour theory, lighting — and produce a portfolio of 10 finished pieces.
Sell First Original Artwork
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Sell an original piece of artwork — physical or digital — to a buyer who pays market price. Invoice or sale receipt as proof.
Build YouTube Channel to 10,000 Subscribers
0 milestones · 52 weeks
Grow a YouTube channel to 10,000 subscribers through consistent, original content — channel analytics screenshot as proof.
Get Accepted to a Film Festival
0 milestones · 20 weeks
Submit and have a film accepted for screening at a recognised film festival — acceptance letter as proof.
Master Video Editing (Before/After Reel)
0 milestones · 16 weeks
Edit and publish 20 videos demonstrating measurable improvement, culminating in a before/after showreel.
Release a Mobile Game (App Store / Play Store)
0 milestones · 20 weeks
Build and publish a complete mobile game on the App Store or Google Play Store with a real app store listing as proof.
Build and Sell a Complete Game
0 milestones · 20 weeks
Build and sell a game for real money through itch.io, Steam, or a platform storefront — 10+ real purchases as proof.
Build a Waitlist (100 Signups)
0 milestones · 4 weeks
Build and grow a pre-launch waitlist to 100 email signups from real people outside your personal network.
Build a Waitlist (1,000 Signups)
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Build and grow a pre-launch waitlist to 1,000 email signups — documented source breakdown and conversion rate.
Get First 10 Active Users
0 milestones · 4 weeks
Onboard 10 real users who are actively using your product — usage data or testimonials as proof.
Reach $1M ARR
0 milestones · 52 weeks
Grow a product or business to $1,000,000 in annual recurring revenue — documented with revenue dashboard screenshot.
Bootstrap to Profitability
0 milestones · 52 weeks
Reach net monthly profitability without external funding — documented with 3 consecutive months of P&L showing positive margin.
Raise Series A
0 milestones · 24 weeks
Close a Series A funding round with a lead institutional investor — signed term sheet and closing confirmation as proof.
Build a Sales Process from Scratch
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Design and document a repeatable B2B sales process — outreach, qualification, demo, close — with 5 closed deals as proof.
Build a Marketing Engine from Scratch
0 milestones · 16 weeks
Build a marketing system that generates 100+ qualified leads per month on autopilot — documented with traffic and lead data.
Complete PMP Certification
0 milestones · 16 weeks
Pass the Project Management Professional (PMP) exam from PMI. Official certificate as proof.
Pass the Bar Exam
0 milestones · 16 weeks
Pass the state bar examination and be admitted to the practice of law. Bar card or admission letter as proof.
Pass USMLE Step 1
0 milestones · 24 weeks
Pass the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1. Official score report as proof.
Pass USMLE Step 2
0 milestones · 20 weeks
Pass the USMLE Step 2 CK examination. Official score report as proof.
Pass USMLE Step 3
0 milestones · 16 weeks
Pass the USMLE Step 3 examination. Official score report and medical license as proof.
Achieve IELTS 7.0+ (Academic)
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Score 7.0 or above on the IELTS Academic examination. Official test report form (TRF) as proof.
Achieve TOEFL 100+ iBT
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Score 100 or above on the TOEFL iBT examination. Official score report as proof.
Read 24 Books in a Year (2 Per Month)
0 milestones · 52 weeks
Read and summarise 24 books in a calendar year — 2 per month — with notes published to a public log.
Read 52 Books in a Year (1 Per Week)
0 milestones · 52 weeks
Read 52 books in a calendar year — one per week — with published summaries or notes for each.
Build a Personal Knowledge System (1 Year)
0 milestones · 52 weeks
Design and maintain a personal knowledge management system for 1 year with 100+ connected notes and a public output (essay, talk, or article).
Complete a Self-Designed MBA Curriculum
0 milestones · 52 weeks
Design and complete a self-directed MBA across at least four core disciplines (strategy, finance, marketing, operations) — not by logging what you read, but by producing four real module deliverables: a competitive analysis, a financial model, a market research report, and an operations improvement proposal. Each deliverable must be reviewed and challenged by at least one person with relevant professional experience in that module's domain, and the proof submission must include each reviewer's written feedback plus a revision note explaining what changed and why. A syllabus and reading log alone do not satisfy this standard — the four artifacts, each with documented practitioner review, are the proof.
Complete a Master's Degree
0 milestones · 104 weeks
Earn a master's degree from an accredited institution. Diploma or official transcript as proof.
Complete a PhD
0 milestones · 208 weeks
Earn a Doctor of Philosophy from an accredited institution through original research. Degree conferral letter as proof.
Present at an Academic Conference
0 milestones · 16 weeks
Have a paper or abstract accepted and present it at a recognised academic conference. Acceptance email and presentation recording as proof.
Complete Your First Marathon
5 milestones · 20 weeks
Train for and finish a full 42.2km marathon with a focus on health, habit, and safe completion — not time. Unlike the Sport version, proofs here are training logs and health markers, not chip times.
Grow a Business to $1,000 MRR
5 milestones · 24 weeks
Build a product or service and grow it to $1,000 in Monthly Recurring Revenue from real paying customers. Proofs at every milestone require financial evidence — not self-reported numbers.
Run Your First 5K Race with a Chip Time
3 milestones · 10 weeks
Enter an organized 5K race with chip timing and cross the finish line. The official chip time is the proof — not a Garmin watch, not a training run. This is the Sport version: chip time from an official event is required.
Lead an Engineering Team for the First Time
6 milestones · 16 weeks
Transition from individual contributor to engineering manager. Your output is now your team's output — not code you wrote. This 16-week outcome maps the hardest career transition in software engineering.
Reach A2 in a New Language
5 milestones · 16 weeks
A2 is the level where a learner moves from survival phrases to handling familiar, everyday topics with some independence: routines, family, work, shopping, simple plans. This is the level most language apps claim to deliver but rarely do, because app-based learning optimizes for streak retention, not real conversational ability. Every milestone requires proof of real human communication — a recorded conversation with a native speaker. App scores are not accepted at any level.
Reach B1 in a New Language
5 milestones · 20 weeks
B1 is the intermediate plateau — where many learners stall for months or years. Moving from A2 (familiar topics, past and future tense, 20-minute conversation) to B1 requires a genuine expansion into sustained narrative, defended opinions, hypothetical language, and improvised problem-solving. Every milestone requires a real recorded conversation with a native speaker. App scores are not accepted at any level.
Reach B2 Fluency in a New Language
6 milestones · 52 weeks
Reach B2 level in any language — the point where you can hold a sustained conversation on complex topics with a native speaker, understand most of what you read and hear, and express your views with nuance. Every milestone requires proof of real human communication, not an app score.
Mentor Ten People Toward a Real Goal
5 milestones · 24 weeks
This is the second rung of the Community Leadership Path. Where governance-start-study-group tested leading one voluntary group, this outcome tests whether that leadership ability generalises into a repeatable practice across many different individuals — the skill that underlies community organising, teaching at scale, and eventually larger governance roles. Mentor at least 10 different people, each with an individually-defined goal, with evidence of real ongoing guidance per person and durable change after your regular involvement ends. The core risk this outcome guards against: claiming 'I mentored 10 people' based on 10 shallow one-off conversations. Each relationship must show trackable progress toward something the mentee actually wanted.
Lead a Study Group From Zero to Sustained
5 milestones · 16 weeks
This is the entry-level GOVERNANCE outcome — the first rung of community and civic leadership. Recruit at least 4 people to a voluntary study group with a shared goal, sustain it through natural attrition, delegate real responsibility to another member, and bring the group to its defined endpoint. You have no formal authority: anyone can leave at any time with zero consequence. Retention and engagement are the proof, because there is no other leverage keeping people there.
Conduct a Competitive Industry Analysis
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Analyse a real industry using Porter's Five Forces, VRIO, or equivalent frameworks applied to a real company's actual competitive position — not a textbook example. The deliverable is a competitive analysis document covering the real industry structure, the company's genuine competitive advantages and vulnerabilities, and three real named competitors with data. Proof requires submission to at least one practitioner with relevant industry experience whose written review confirms the analysis is non-trivial and grounded in real market dynamics.
Evaluate Strategic Options for a Real Organisation
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Develop and evaluate a minimum of three genuine strategic options for a real organisation facing a specific strategic challenge — not a simulation or hypothetical. The deliverable is a strategy options memo with structured trade-off analysis, a recommendation with documented rationale, and a revision log showing that at least one reviewer with sector-relevant experience challenged the analysis and the recommendation was revised in response. Proof is the memo, the reviewer's written feedback, and the revision note.
Build a Stakeholder Map and Influence Plan
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Map the real stakeholder landscape for a real organisational decision or initiative — identifying at least five distinct stakeholder groups, their interests, influence levels, and likely stances — and develop a corresponding influence strategy. The deliverable is a stakeholder map and influence plan tied to a specific named organisation and decision context. Proof requires validation by someone who knows the organisation or sector well enough to confirm the stakeholder characterisation reflects reality.
Deliver a Strategy Presentation with Expert Q&A
0 milestones · 4 weeks
Present a strategic analysis or recommendation to a live audience of at least three people with relevant business or sector experience, and field substantive questions and objections in real time. The deliverable is an audio or video recording of the full presentation plus a documented Q&A log naming each objection raised and the answer given. Proof requires at least one verifier to confirm that the questions were genuine and not scripted, and that the presenter handled substantive challenge without preparation.
Build a Strategy Implementation Roadmap
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Translate a strategic direction into a concrete 12-month implementation plan for a real organisation — specifying milestones, accountable owners, budget assumptions, resource requirements, and a risk register with mitigation plans. The plan must be tied to a real named organisation and a specific strategic context, not a generic template. Proof requires review by a practitioner who can confirm the roadmap is grounded in the organisation's real constraints and that the budget and resource assumptions are defensible.
Map and Analyse a Real Business Process
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Map a real end-to-end operational process in full — from input to output — including every step, handoff, decision point, time measurement, and cost estimate, using standard process-mapping notation. The process must be a real one at a real organisation (not a hypothetical). The deliverable is the completed process map plus a written analysis identifying where time or cost is lost. Proof requires review by someone who works within or oversees the mapped process and can confirm the map is accurate.
Identify a Bottleneck and Propose an Improvement
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Identify a real bottleneck in a real operational process using data — time measurements, error rates, queue lengths, or throughput metrics — and propose a specific improvement with a before/after metric plan that defines what success looks like. The deliverable is a bottleneck analysis document with the supporting data and an improvement proposal with measurable targets. Proof requires review by an operations professional who can confirm that the identified bottleneck is real and the improvement proposal is technically sound.
Conduct a Supply Chain Audit
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Map the end-to-end supply chain for a real product or service — tracing materials, suppliers, logistics, and distribution — and identify at least three specific vulnerabilities or inefficiencies with supporting evidence. The audit must be grounded in real data from real suppliers or operators, and at least one supply-chain participant must be interviewed. Proof is the audit document plus documentation of the interview(s), confirming the supply chain characterisation is accurate rather than desk research alone.
Build an Operations Metrics Dashboard
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Design and build a dashboard tracking the key performance indicators of a specific real operational function — production, logistics, customer service, or similar — using real data from that function. The dashboard must make at least one non-obvious operational insight visible that was previously hidden in raw data. Proof requires validation by someone who works in the operation, confirming that the metrics captured are the ones that actually matter for managing that function and that the data is real.
Conduct Primary Market Research
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Design and execute original market research using real participants — a minimum of 15 structured consumer interviews plus a survey with at least 50 respondents — and synthesise the findings into a research report that identifies distinct market segments, key purchase drivers, and unmet needs. Proof is the research report plus the interview guides, showing real participant responses rather than fabricated data. A practitioner with marketing or consumer research experience must review the report and confirm the methodology is sound and the insights non-trivial.
Audit a Real Brand's Market Position
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Conduct a rigorous audit of a real brand's market position — covering brand positioning, visual identity, messaging consistency, customer perception, and competitive differentiation — and produce a written audit document identifying specific gaps between the intended and actual brand experience. The audit must address a real named brand using real evidence (public materials, customer reviews, competitor positioning). Proof requires submission to and review by a marketing professional who can confirm the assessment is analytically grounded rather than opinion-based.
Design a Marketing Campaign for a Real Organisation
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Design a complete marketing campaign brief for a real organisation — specifying the campaign objective, target audience, channel strategy, budget allocation, key creative direction, KPIs, and measurement plan. The brief must be for a real organisation with a real marketing challenge, not a simulation. Proof requires that the campaign brief be reviewed by a marketing practitioner before execution begins, or formally presented to the organisation's marketing leadership, with documented feedback on whether the strategy is viable.
Analyse a Real Marketing Campaign's Performance
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Conduct a rigorous retrospective analysis of a real marketing campaign using real performance data — either a campaign you ran, or a real documented campaign with published performance metrics. The analysis must identify what drove results, what failed, and what a future campaign would do differently, grounded in the actual numbers rather than speculation. Proof requires review by someone who has run a real marketing campaign and can confirm the performance attribution is sound and the conclusions non-obvious.
Analyse Consumer Behaviour Using Real Data
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Analyse the purchasing behaviour of a real consumer cohort using real data — transaction records, survey responses, observational data, or published research datasets — and produce a written analysis identifying the key behavioural drivers, segmentation patterns, and business implications. The data source must be cited and verifiable. Proof requires review by a marketing or consumer research practitioner who can confirm that the analysis goes beyond summarising the data to identifying genuinely useful strategic insight.
Build a Three-Statement Financial Model for Industry Analysis
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Build a complete, linked three-statement financial model (income statement, balance sheet, cash flow statement) from publicly available filings for a real company, and use it to identify the key drivers of financial performance — not merely to reconcile the statements. The model must include at least two years of historical data and a one-year projection with documented assumptions. Proof requires review by a finance professional who can confirm that the model links correctly, the projection assumptions are explicit and defensible, and the performance driver analysis is analytically sound.
Value a Real Company Using DCF or Comparable Analysis
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Perform a full valuation of a real publicly traded or recently acquired company using either a discounted cash flow model or comparable company analysis — with fully documented assumptions, sensitivity analysis showing how the valuation changes under different scenarios, and an explicit investment thesis or price target conclusion. The valuation must be for a real company using real financial data. Proof requires review by a finance professional or university finance faculty member who can confirm the methodology is technically correct and the assumptions are documented.
Analyse a Real Corporate Finance Decision
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Analyse a real, documented corporate finance decision — a major acquisition, a restructuring, a capital structure change, or a significant capital allocation choice — applying the relevant analytical frameworks (NPV, WACC, leverage analysis, etc.) and arriving at a reasoned position on whether the decision was correct and why. The case must be a real event with documented financial data, not a textbook example. Proof requires review and challenge by a finance professional who can confirm the framework application is correct and the position is analytically defensible.
Benchmark a Company's Financial Ratios Against Industry Peers
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Select a real company and benchmark its key financial ratios — profitability, liquidity, leverage, and efficiency — against three to five direct industry peers using public financial statements. The deliverable is a written analysis interpreting what the ratio comparisons reveal about the company's competitive position, financial health, and strategic priorities — not just a table of numbers. Proof requires review by a finance or accounting professional who can confirm the ratio calculations are correct, the peer selection is appropriate, and the written interpretation goes beyond the obvious.
Design a Job Analysis and Job Description
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Conduct a competency-based job analysis for a real role at a real organisation — interviewing at least one person who performs or manages the role — and produce a complete job description including required competencies, experience levels, success criteria, and structured interview questions. The job description must be for a real open or existing role, not a fabricated one. Proof requires review by someone at the organisation or an HR practitioner who confirms the job description accurately reflects the real role's requirements.
Design a Recruitment and Selection Process
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Design a structured recruitment and selection process for a specific real role at a real organisation — including a sourcing strategy, a structured interview guide with competency-based questions, an assessment scoring rubric, and explicit bias-mitigation steps. The process must be designed for a specific organisational context, not a generic template. Proof requires review by an HR or talent acquisition professional who can confirm that the structured interview guide is technically sound and that the bias-mitigation measures are meaningful rather than performative.
Design a Performance Management Framework
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Design a complete performance management framework for a specific real team or functional unit — specifying the goal-setting methodology, review cadence, rating criteria, calibration process, and how the framework handles underperformance and exceptional performance. The framework must be grounded in a specific real organisational context with named constraints (team size, culture, reporting structure). Proof requires review by an HR professional or experienced manager who has run real performance cycles and can confirm the framework is coherent, internally consistent, and workable in the stated context.
Conduct a Compensation Benchmarking Analysis
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Research and analyse compensation levels for a specific role in a specific industry and geography using real public data sources — Glassdoor, LinkedIn Salary Insights, BLS Occupational Employment Statistics, or published industry salary surveys — and produce a benchmarking report with a recommendation on competitive positioning. The report must include the methodology, data sources cited with dates, the distribution of pay by experience level, and a written recommendation on what the organisation should pay and why. Proof requires review by an HR or compensation professional who can confirm the methodology is sound and the data sources credible.
Build an HR Analytics and Workforce Plan
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Analyse workforce data for a real or documented organisation — using internal HR data, public proxies, or published workforce analytics datasets — to identify headcount gaps, attrition risk factors, and talent pipeline needs, and produce a workforce plan with specific hiring and retention recommendations. The analysis must include data sources, assumptions, and methodology. Proof requires review by an HR analytics practitioner or senior HR professional who can confirm that the analysis is grounded in real data, the conclusions follow from the data, and the recommendations are actionable.
Analyse a Market Entry Decision for a Real Company
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Produce a full market entry analysis for a real company considering entry into a specific new geography or segment — covering PESTLE analysis, cultural dimensions (Hofstede or GLOBE), market sizing with data sources, regulatory and compliance requirements, and a risk-weighted recommendation on entry mode and timing. The analysis must be for a real company and a real target market. Proof requires review by someone with direct knowledge of the target market — a native professional, academic researcher, or consultant with relevant geography experience — who can confirm the market characterisation is accurate.
Analyse a Real Cross-Cultural Business Challenge
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Identify and analyse a real, documented cross-cultural business challenge — a failed international partnership, a negotiation that broke down due to cultural misalignment, or a product that failed in a foreign market — using Hofstede or GLOBE cultural dimensions as the analytical lens. The primary evidence must include at least one interview with a professional who has direct experience with the cultural context in question. Proof is the written analysis plus interview notes, reviewed by someone with lived cross-cultural business experience who can confirm the cultural interpretation is grounded rather than stereotyped.
Analyse Foreign Exchange Risk for a Real Business
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Analyse the foreign exchange risk exposure of a real business with documented international revenue — identifying the currencies involved, the transaction and translation risk magnitude, and the natural vs. financial hedging options available — and produce a written recommendation on risk management strategy. The analysis must use real data from a real company (public filings, annual reports, or disclosed financials). Proof requires review by a finance professional with international finance or treasury experience who can confirm the exposure analysis is technically correct and the hedging recommendations are practical.
Analyse Trade and Regulatory Barriers for a Market
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Produce a regulatory and trade barrier analysis for a specific real international market pair — identifying applicable tariff schedules, non-tariff barriers, product compliance requirements, import/export licences, and trade agreement implications. The analysis must use real official data sources (WTO, trade ministry databases, customs tariff schedules) and culminate in a compliance checklist and risk summary for a real business context. Proof requires review by a practitioner or trade specialist with knowledge of the specific market pair who can confirm the regulatory characterisation is accurate and current.
Complete an Integrated Business Case Analysis
0 milestones · 16 weeks
Produce a multi-domain analysis of a real organisation facing a complex strategic challenge — addressing strategy, finance, operations, and people dimensions in a single coherent document of at least 3,000 words. The analysis must demonstrate genuine integration: the financial implications of the strategic options must be modelled, the operational capacity to execute must be assessed, and the people and change management dimensions must be addressed. Proof requires review by at least two practitioners from different disciplines who confirm the analysis is non-trivial and that the integration is genuine rather than four separate sections glued together. The revision log must document substantive pushback absorbed.
Apply Discrete Mathematics Through Formal Proofs
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Produce written solutions to 30+ proof exercises spanning propositional logic, mathematical induction, graph theory, and combinatorics — not just correct answers, but proofs with valid structure (base case, inductive step, conclusion) that a mathematician would accept. Each proof must show your reasoning, not just the result. Proof: the submitted exercise set reviewed by a CS lecturer or maths researcher who also presents 2–3 unseen claims during the review and asks you to prove or disprove them live — the live reasoning is what demonstrates understanding rather than memorisation.
Understand Computer Architecture by Building Below the Language
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Build a working assembler, simple CPU emulator, or cache simulator from scratch — the artifact must demonstrate that you understand what happens below the programming language you normally use: instruction encoding, pipeline stages, cache line behaviour, or memory hierarchy trade-offs. The implementation must be accompanied by a written explanation of every design decision in terms of the specific hardware constraint it addresses. Proof: the working implementation and write-up reviewed by a CS lecturer or systems engineer who traces the execution of a program they haven't shown you through your implementation and asks you to explain every step.
Implement an OS Component to Prove Systems Understanding
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Implement a working process scheduler, memory allocator, or file system component from scratch, accompanied by a written trade-off analysis comparing your design choice against at least two alternatives (e.g. preemptive vs. cooperative scheduling; paging vs. segmentation; linked-list vs. buddy allocator). The analysis must explain the specific workloads under which your choice outperforms alternatives and the specific conditions under which it does not. Proof: the implementation and analysis reviewed by a CS lecturer or systems engineer who asks 'what would happen to your scheduler if you had 1000 threads all waiting on the same lock?' — you must answer using your implementation, not a generic description.
Demonstrate Network Understanding Through Traffic Analysis and Implementation
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Capture real network traffic from your own machine using Wireshark (your IP address must be visible in the capture file), implement a working TCP client/server from scratch using raw sockets (not a framework), and write a report explaining how your specific captured traffic maps to each layer of the protocol stack. The report must explain what each packet header field means in the context of your capture — not as a textbook definition. Proof: the capture file, the working code, and the report reviewed by a CS lecturer or network engineer who provides a previously-unseen packet capture and asks you to diagnose what is happening at each protocol layer.
Implement Core Data Structures From Scratch with Complexity Analysis
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Implement a linked list, binary search tree, hash table, min-heap, and adjacency-list graph from scratch in any language — no library primitives for the core data structure logic. Each implementation must include a full test suite covering edge cases and a documented time and space complexity analysis explaining why each operation has the stated complexity (not just stating it). Proof: the implementations and analysis reviewed by a CS lecturer or senior software engineer who asks 'why is your hash table O(1) amortised for insertion rather than O(1) worst-case?' — you must answer by pointing to your specific implementation and the conditions that trigger rehashing.
Implement 10 Classic Algorithms with Written Complexity Analysis
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Implement 10 classic algorithms from scratch — spanning at least three of: sorting (merge, quick, heap), graph traversal (BFS, DFS, Dijkstra, A*), dynamic programming (LCS, knapsack, edit distance), and string algorithms (KMP, Rabin-Karp). Each implementation must include a written complexity analysis documenting the best, average, and worst-case time and space complexity with a brief explanation of the dominant operations, and documented trade-offs against at least one alternative algorithm. Proof: the implementations and analyses reviewed by a CS lecturer or senior engineer who provides a novel input case you haven't tested and asks you to predict your algorithm's behaviour before running it.
Prove Algorithm Correctness Using Formal Methods
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Write formal correctness proofs for 5 of your algorithm implementations using loop invariants, structural induction, or reduction to a known problem. Each proof must include: the invariant or inductive hypothesis, the proof that it holds at initialisation, the proof that it is maintained through each iteration or recursive step, and the proof that it implies the postcondition. Proof: the written proofs reviewed by a CS lecturer or engineer with formal methods background who asks you to prove correctness for a sixth algorithm you haven't prepared — you must apply your chosen proof technique to the new algorithm during the review session.
Achieve a Verified Competitive Programming Rating
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Reach Codeforces rating 1400+ OR achieve a LeetCode contest rating placing you in the top 25% of contest participants — with your public profile URL as proof. The rating is your proof: it is earned by solving unseen algorithmic problems under time pressure in real contests, and the public rating history with contest participation timestamps cannot be fabricated retroactively. Codeforces rating 1400 corresponds to solving Division 2 A and B problems consistently. LeetCode top 25% corresponds to solving medium-difficulty problems reliably within contest time. Either platform qualifies; both alternatives appear on the same profile URL.
Derive the Linear Algebra Behind Machine Learning
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Produce hand-derived solutions to 20 exercises spanning matrix operations (multiplication, inversion, transposition), eigendecomposition, singular value decomposition, and PCA derivation — all derivations must be symbolic or hand-worked (no NumPy for the derivation steps, only for verification afterwards). The work must show the derivation reasoning, not just the result. Proof: the solutions reviewed by a maths lecturer or ML researcher who presents 2–3 unseen problems during the review session — you must work through them live and explain your reasoning at each step, not just produce an answer.
Apply Statistical Learning Theory to Your Own Dataset
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Document the bias-variance trade-off, model selection using cross-validation, and hypothesis testing applied to a dataset you collected yourself — not a pre-built Kaggle dataset. Your write-up must explain your data collection methodology, the specific modelling decisions you made and why, and the statistical tests you ran to validate each decision. Using your own data is the proof standard: it means the analysis cannot be pre-generated from a known dataset. Proof: the write-up and dataset reviewed by a statistician or ML practitioner who asks 'what would your cross-validation results look like if you doubled the number of folds?' — you must answer using your specific data and analysis, not the general principle.
Implement Machine Learning Algorithms From Scratch (NumPy Only)
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Implement logistic regression, a decision tree, k-means clustering, and a feedforward neural network from scratch using NumPy only — no PyTorch, TensorFlow, or sklearn for the core algorithm logic. Each implementation must be tested on a held-out dataset and benchmarked against the equivalent sklearn implementation on the same data, with documented results explaining any performance differences. The from-scratch implementation is what demonstrates understanding: it is possible to use sklearn without understanding gradient descent; it is not possible to implement gradient descent in NumPy without understanding it. Proof: the implementations reviewed by an ML engineer or CS researcher who provides a different dataset and asks you to predict which of your algorithms will perform best and why — you must reason from your implementation, not just run it.
Implement a Transformer Component From a Published Paper Specification
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Implement a core transformer component — attention mechanism, positional encoding, or byte-pair encoding tokenizer — directly from the specification in a published paper (Attention Is All You Need, or equivalent). The implementation must faithfully replicate the paper's equations in code with comments linking each line of code to the specific equation or paragraph in the paper it implements. Write-up must explain every design decision in terms of the specific constraint or property in the paper that motivated it. Proof: the implementation and write-up reviewed by an ML researcher or senior ML engineer who asks 'what would change in your attention output if you doubled the number of heads but kept the total dimension constant?' — you must answer by reasoning through your specific implementation.
Implement a Cipher From Mathematical Specification and Analyse a Real Vulnerability
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Implement a symmetric cipher (AES, ChaCha20, or equivalent) from its published mathematical specification — no library calls for the core cipher operations, only for testing correctness against known test vectors. Additionally, write an analysis of one published cryptographic vulnerability (a CVE with a known mathematical weakness such as padding oracle, timing side-channel, or nonce reuse) explaining the exact mathematical flaw exploited and how the implementation deviated from the secure specification. Proof: the implementation and vulnerability analysis reviewed by a security practitioner or CS lecturer with cryptography background who presents a different cipher specification you haven't seen and asks you to implement the key schedule or identify the flaw in a published attack — you must engage with the new material in real time, not describe your prepared examples.
Conduct a Network Security Analysis in a Sanctioned Environment
0 milestones · 8 weeks
In a controlled environment you own and control (your own machine, a home lab, or a sanctioned CTF lab), capture real network traffic with Wireshark and use OWASP ZAP or equivalent to document 3 specific vulnerabilities — each with the vulnerability class, the exact evidence in the traffic capture, and a written remediation recommendation explaining what needs to change in the system or protocol. Your Wireshark capture file must show your own IP address as evidence the capture is from your controlled environment. ALL testing must be on systems you own or have explicit written authorisation to test. Proof: the capture files and analysis report reviewed by a security practitioner who provides a previously-unseen packet capture and asks you to identify what is happening and whether it indicates a vulnerability.
Complete a CTF Challenge and Publish a Methodology Write-Up
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Complete a minimum medium-difficulty CTF challenge on a recognised platform — HackTheBox, PicoCTF, or a CTFtime-listed event with 100+ participating teams — and publish a write-up explaining every exploit used: the specific vulnerability class, how you identified it (what indicator told you the target was vulnerable), the exact exploitation technique, and what the vulnerability reveals about the underlying system's security model. The flag submission proves completion; the write-up proves understanding of the exploit chain. ALL testing must be within the sanctioned CTF platform — never test systems you do not own or lack explicit written authorisation to test.
Build a Threat Model for a Real System You Control
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Apply STRIDE or PASTA threat modelling methodology to a real system you built, are actively building, or have direct operational access to — not a hypothetical or textbook system. The threat model must document: the system boundary and trust levels, each identified threat with a specific threat actor and affected asset, the likelihood and impact assessment, and for each threat either the specific mitigation implemented or an explicit documented decision to accept the residual risk with rationale. Proof: the threat model reviewed by a security engineer or security architect who asks 'what would change in your threat model if you added an API gateway in front of this service?' — you must reason through your actual system's threat surface, not describe the general concept.
Implement Cloud-Native Design Patterns on a Real Deployment
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Implement 3–5 cloud-native design patterns — circuit breaker, bulkhead, retry with exponential backoff, saga, or event sourcing — on a real deployment on AWS, GCP, or Azure, producing a working system with a deployment URL the reviewer can access. For each pattern implemented, write a trade-off analysis explaining: why this pattern was chosen over alternatives, what failure scenario it addresses, and what complexity cost it introduces. The running deployment is the proof that the patterns actually exist in the system, not just in a diagram. Proof: a cloud architect or senior SRE inspects the running deployment during the review and asks 'what happens if I call this endpoint while the circuit is open?' — you must demonstrate the live behaviour, not describe it from the documentation.
Design and Deploy a Multi-Region Cloud Architecture
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Design a multi-region, active-active or active-passive architecture for a real or realistic system — deployed in at least two regions on a real cloud provider — with a written architecture document that includes: failure domain analysis (what breaks when Region A loses its primary database), stated RPO and RTO targets with justification, and cost-vs-resilience trade-off analysis explaining every architectural decision in terms of the specific failure scenario it addresses. The deployment must be live and accessible to the reviewer during review. Proof: a senior cloud architect or SRE asks 'what happens to your users in Region A if Region B loses its primary database right now?' — you must walk through your actual architecture's failure behaviour, not a hypothetical response.
Author Architecture Decision Records for Systems You Own
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Author 3 Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) for real systems you built or are actively working on — not hypothetical or textbook systems. Each ADR must include: the problem context (what constraint or requirement forced a decision), at least 3 considered alternatives with documented trade-offs for each, the final decision with explicit rationale, and the consequences you have already observed or expect to observe (positive and negative). ADRs for systems you own are defensible because they include evidence of consequences — either already observed or verifiably testable. Proof: a principal engineer or senior architect asks 'what would make you revisit the decision in your second ADR?' — you must answer in terms of your actual system's constraints and what specific evidence would change the decision, not the general principle.
Anatomy Mastery
0 milestones · 16 weeks
Master gross and regional anatomy across major body systems. Proof requires three components: (a) a spot-test performance log — minimum 50 anatomical structures identified from unlabelled diagrams or prosection images, with scores recorded per session; (b) annotated anatomy diagrams created independently (not copied) for at least 3 body regions, showing structures and their clinical relevance; and (c) a clinical correlation case — given a real clinical scenario, identify the anatomical structures involved and explain their relevance to the clinical presentation in writing. Submission reviewed and annotated by a medical professional or anatomy faculty member who may ask follow-up questions about structural relationships. The proof documents learning under guidance, not independent clinical assessment.
Physiology Mastery
0 milestones · 16 weeks
Demonstrate functional understanding of human physiology across major body systems. Proof requires: (a) system-by-system concept maps created independently (not copied or AI-generated) covering at least 6 systems — each map must show inputs, outputs, regulatory mechanisms, and the consequence of dysfunction; and (b) 20 reasoning responses per system explaining the physiological mechanism behind a scenario — the reasoning is the proof of understanding, not just the answer. A medical professional or physiology faculty member reviews at least one system's concept map and responses, provides written feedback, and may ask 'what happens if this regulatory mechanism fails in the context of your patient scenario?' The proof documents learning progression, not clinical conclusions.
Biochemistry Mastery
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Demonstrate mastery of core metabolic pathways and their clinical relevance. Proof requires: (a) reconstruction of 5 major metabolic pathways from memory — documented as hand-drawn or hand-typed without reference materials, photographed or timestamped to confirm independent production; and (b) a clinical correlation case — a real or realistic biochemistry-related clinical condition worked through using pathway knowledge, with the connection between the pathway defect and clinical presentation explicitly explained. Reviewed by a medical professional or biochemistry faculty member. The proof documents the student's learning, not a clinical diagnosis to be acted upon.
Pharmacology Mastery
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Demonstrate mastery of drug classes, mechanisms of action, and clinical application principles. Proof requires: (a) drug class summary cards covering at least 8 major drug classes (mechanism, indications, contraindications, key side effects — created independently, not copied from a textbook); and (b) a prescribing rationale for a realistic clinical scenario: given a patient presentation, justify the drug choice, dose rationale, and monitoring plan in writing. Reviewed by a medical professional or clinical pharmacologist who MUST challenge the rationale with real-time follow-up questions (e.g. 'what would you change if this patient also had renal impairment?' or 'why did you choose this drug class over the alternative?'). The reviewer's Q&A exchange — not the written document alone — is the proof artifact that demonstrates understanding. The proof is the reasoning, not a prescription to be implemented.
Pathology Mastery
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Demonstrate understanding of disease mechanisms and histopathological features. Proof requires: (a) a histology identification log — minimum 30 slides identified with pathological features described, using a recognised digital pathology resource (PathPresenter, PathologyOutlines, or equivalent) with slide IDs logged for verification; and (b) a Q-bank session log showing documented performance of ≥70% on at least 50 pathology MCQs from a recognised Q-bank (Amboss, Pathoma, or equivalent), with screenshots of the session results showing date, question count, and score. The 70% threshold reflects the safety-critical context of pathology knowledge. Peer review is acceptable for this outcome as the verification systems (digital pathology platforms, Q-bank sessions) provide independent external confirmation of performance.
Microbiology Mastery
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Demonstrate mastery of clinically relevant microbiology and infectious disease principles. Proof requires: (a) an organism classification framework created independently — a taxonomy of at least 20 clinically important organisms organised by gram stain, morphology, virulence factors, and key diseases; and (b) a clinical case correlation — given a real or realistic infectious disease presentation with culture results provided, identify the likely organism and explain the connection between its pathogenicity mechanisms and the clinical features in writing. Reviewed by a medical professional or microbiology faculty member. The proof documents the student's learning, not a clinical treatment decision. The reviewer confirms the reasoning is sound; they do not validate it as a treatment plan.
Clinical Observation & Documentation
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Complete a supervised clinical placement with documented patient observations. Proof requires a structured observation log covering at least 10 patient contacts (no patient-identifying information in the submitted proof), with documented vital signs, clinical findings observed, and the student's clinical reasoning notes for each contact. The log must be signed off by a registered nurse or clinical educator who supervised the contacts. Peer verification is NOT sufficient for this outcome — qualified supervisor attestation is required. The proof documents the student's learning under supervision, not independent clinical assessments.
Medication Administration Competency
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Demonstrate supervised competency in safe medication administration. Proof requires a clinical supervisor's signed competency assessment covering the Rights of Medication Administration (right patient, right drug, right dose, right route, right time, right documentation). The supervisor must be a registered nurse or clinical educator. Self-verification and peer verification are NOT accepted for this outcome — qualified supervisor attestation on an official competency form is the only valid proof artifact. The proof documents supervised competency development, not a record of medications independently administered.
Patient Communication & History Taking
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Demonstrate structured history-taking and therapeutic communication skills in a supervised clinical setting. Proof requires a documented structured history (SOAPIE or equivalent format) for at least 3 patient encounters, with clinical supervisor feedback on communication quality for each. Patient details are anonymised in the submitted proof. Supervisor attestation from a registered nurse or clinical educator is required. The proof documents the student's communication skill development under supervision — not clinical notes to be used in patient care.
Clinical Procedures Portfolio
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Build a supervised clinical procedures portfolio with competency ratings. Proof requires documentation of at least 5 different supervised procedures (e.g. wound care, catheterisation, venepuncture, IV cannulation, nasogastric tube insertion) with a supervisor competency rating for each. Supervisor must be a registered nurse or clinical educator. Ratings must be recorded on the official placement assessment form — not a student-authored document. Peer verification is NOT accepted for any clinical procedure in this portfolio. The proof documents supervised skill development.
Nursing Care Plan Design
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Design a comprehensive nursing care plan for a real or realistic patient scenario. Proof requires a care plan covering: assessment findings, nursing diagnoses (NANDA format or equivalent), SMART goals, nursing interventions with documented rationale for each, and evaluation criteria. Reviewed and annotated by a qualified nursing educator who confirms the plan is clinically sound and internally consistent. The scenario must be specific — a care plan for 'patient with hypertension' is not sufficient; the proof must reference specific clinical findings and individualised interventions. The proof is a learning exercise reviewed by a qualified educator, not a care plan to be implemented in a clinical setting.
Epidemiological Study Design & Analysis
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Design and analyse an epidemiological study using real or publicly available health data. Proof requires: (a) a study design document (research question, study type, population, sampling strategy, outcome measures, bias considerations — minimum 1,000 words); and (b) a data analysis of a real dataset (publicly available datasets from WHO, CDC, ONS, or equivalent are acceptable) with documented methodology, results, and a critical discussion of limitations. Reviewed by a public health practitioner or researcher with epidemiology experience who can challenge the study design choices. Proof is the analysis and design reasoning, not the dataset itself.
Public Health Data Communication
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Create a data visualisation or infographic communicating a real public health finding to a non-technical audience. Proof requires: (a) the published visualisation (public URL or uploaded file); (b) the underlying dataset with documented source and data cleaning steps; and (c) a written explanation of the design choices made specifically for a non-technical audience (why this chart type, why these colours, what was simplified and what was omitted). Reviewed by a public health professional. The dataset must be real — not synthetic or hypothetical.
Public Health Intervention Design
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Design a real public health intervention for a specific population and health problem. Proof requires a proposal covering: problem statement with epidemiological evidence (cited), target population with demographic specificity, intervention logic model (inputs → activities → outputs → outcomes), implementation plan with timeline, evaluation framework with measurable indicators, and budget rationale. Must be for a real community or population — not a hypothetical scenario. Reviewed by a public health practitioner with experience in intervention design or programme management.
Systematic Review & Literature Synthesis
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Conduct a systematic literature search using PRISMA methodology on a real health question. Proof requires: (a) a PRISMA flow diagram showing search results at each stage (records identified, screened, assessed for eligibility, included); (b) a documented search strategy with database names, search terms, date ranges, and inclusion/exclusion criteria; and (c) a synthesis table summarising included studies (author, year, design, population, intervention, outcome, findings). Reviewed by a researcher or academic with systematic review experience. The health question must be specific and the search must be reproducible from the documented strategy.
Health Policy Brief
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Write a health policy brief for a specific decision-maker audience on a real public health issue. Proof requires a brief (maximum 4 pages) covering: the problem with epidemiological evidence, at least 2 policy options with documented trade-offs, a recommendation with implementation considerations, and a budget implication note. The audience must be specific — a named government department, health board, or named NGO — and the brief must be formatted and scoped for that audience. Reviewed by someone with health policy experience. Generic policy briefs on abstract topics are not accepted.
Drug Interaction Analysis
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Analyse a real polypharmacy case for clinically significant drug interactions. Proof requires: (a) a documented case (real or realistic) with the patient's medication list (minimum 5 concurrent medications); (b) identification of all clinically significant interactions using a recognised interaction checker (Stockley's, BNF, Drugs.com interaction checker) with the mechanism of each interaction documented; and (c) a recommended management plan for each interaction identified. Reviewed by a registered pharmacist. The proof is the analysis and reasoning — not AI-generated output submitted as evidence. The pharmacist confirms the interaction assessment is accurate before the proof is considered complete.
Patient Medication Counselling
0 milestones · 4 weeks
Demonstrate patient medication counselling skills in a supervised or observed setting. Proof requires a documented counselling session covering: what the medication is, how to take it correctly, what to expect (expected effects and timeline), what to avoid (interactions, foods, activities), and when to seek help. The session must be observed and assessed by a registered pharmacist using a structured assessment form. Proof artifact is the pharmacist's completed assessment form or a recording of the session with the pharmacist's written sign-off. Peer verification is NOT accepted — registered pharmacist attestation is required.
Dispensing Accuracy & Safety
0 milestones · 4 weeks
Demonstrate safe dispensing practice in a supervised setting. Proof requires a documented dispensing accuracy check conducted under supervision of a registered pharmacist, covering at least 10 prescription items. Each item must document: prescribed vs dispensed drug, dose, form, quantity, and label accuracy check result. Supervisor sign-off on the dispensing accuracy log is required. Peer verification is NOT accepted — registered pharmacist sign-off is required. This outcome requires pharmacy placement access. The proof documents supervised practice development, not a record of unsupervised dispensing.
Pharmaceutical Calculations
0 milestones · 4 weeks
Demonstrate accuracy in pharmaceutical calculations. Proof requires a documented set of 20 pharmaceutical calculation problems — covering dose calculations, IV rate calculations, dilution calculations, and unit conversions — completed independently and verified by a registered pharmacist or pharmacy lecturer. Each problem must show the full working, not just the answer. A score of ≥90% is required — this threshold reflects the safety-critical nature of dispensing errors. The verifier confirms both the score and that the working method is sound, not just the final answers.
Clinical Pharmacology Case Analysis
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Apply pharmacological knowledge to a real or realistic clinical case. Proof requires a written case analysis covering: therapeutic objectives for the specific case, drug selection rationale (why this drug class over the alternatives), dose optimisation considerations (renal/hepatic adjustment, weight-based dosing if applicable), monitoring parameters, and patient counselling points. The case must specify a named drug and named clinical indication — generic analyses are not accepted. Reviewed by a clinical pharmacologist or senior pharmacist who challenges at least one decision in the analysis with a follow-up question the student must answer in real time. The proof is a supervised learning exercise, not a prescription to be implemented.
Allied Health Clinical Observation Log
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Complete a structured observation placement across at least 2 allied health settings (e.g. physiotherapy, occupational therapy, speech therapy, radiography, dietetics). Proof requires an observation log covering at least 8 patient contacts per setting, with documented observations and reflections for each contact using a structured format (what was observed, what the practitioner did, what the student learned). Signed off by the clinical placement supervisor at each setting. The specific disciplines and settings must be named. The proof documents supervised observation, not clinical interventions performed independently.
Standardised Patient Assessment
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Demonstrate competency in standardised patient assessment using a validated assessment tool relevant to your allied health discipline. Proof requires: (a) a completed assessment form for at least 3 patients using a named validated tool (e.g. Berg Balance Scale, FIM, NIHSS, MMSE, or equivalent for the discipline); and (b) a clinical supervisor's competency sign-off confirming the assessment was conducted correctly and the student followed the standardised protocol. The specific assessment tool used must be named and cited. Peer verification is NOT accepted — clinical supervisor attestation is required.
Evidence-Based Practice Application
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Apply an evidence-based practice (EBP) framework to a real clinical question in your allied health discipline. Proof requires: a PICO question arising from a real clinical encounter or placement experience; a documented literature search (database, search terms, results); a critical appraisal of the top 3 relevant papers using a validated appraisal tool (CASP, PEDro, or equivalent); and a practice recommendation with implementation rationale. Reviewed by a clinical supervisor or researcher in your discipline. The clinical question must be real — arising from an actual placement or clinical experience, not a hypothetical.
Clinical Reflection Portfolio
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Build a structured clinical reflection portfolio covering at least 5 patient encounters across your placement. Each reflection must use a structured framework (Gibbs, Kolb, or equivalent named model), identify a specific learning point arising from the encounter, and describe how practice will change as a result. The encounters must span at least 2 different clinical situations or case types. Reviewed and signed off by a clinical placement supervisor who confirms the reflections are grounded in real clinical encounters. The portfolio documents learning from supervised practice — not hypothetical reflections.
Interprofessional Collaboration
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Demonstrate collaboration with professionals from at least 2 other health disciplines on a real patient case or health project. Proof requires: (a) a case study or project description (anonymised) explaining the clinical or health context; (b) evidence of the interprofessional interaction — meeting notes, case conference record, or email thread showing real coordination across disciplines; and (c) a reflection identifying what each discipline contributed and what the student learned about collaborative practice. At least one professional from another discipline must provide written confirmation of the collaboration. The case or project must be real — not a simulated interprofessional exercise.
Psychological Theory Application
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Apply a specific therapeutic framework (CBT, psychodynamic, person-centred, ACT, DBT, or equivalent) to a real case conceptualisation. Proof requires a written case conceptualisation for a real or anonymised case from supervised practice, covering: presenting problem, theoretical formulation using the chosen framework, proposed intervention rationale, and potential barriers and how they would be addressed. Reviewed by a qualified clinical supervisor who confirms the conceptualisation is grounded in real supervised encounter material. The proof is a supervised learning exercise documenting the student's clinical reasoning development — not a treatment plan to be implemented independently. Self-derived cases with no supervisor involvement are NOT accepted.
Supervised Counselling Practice Log
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Document supervised counselling practice sessions. Proof requires: (a) a log of at least 10 supervised sessions — each entry covering session duration, presenting issues (anonymised), therapeutic approach used, what went well, what was difficult, and supervisor feedback received; and (b) a qualified clinical supervisor's attestation confirming the sessions occurred under supervision and that the student demonstrated appropriate therapeutic boundaries and skills. Peer verification is NOT accepted for this outcome — qualified clinical supervisor attestation is required. The log must document actual supervised sessions, not role-plays with peers or self-directed practice.
Mental Health Assessment Skills
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Demonstrate competency in structured mental status examination (MSE) in a supervised clinical setting. Proof requires: (a) a documented MSE for at least 3 supervised patient contacts (anonymised), covering all MSE domains: appearance, behaviour, speech, mood, affect, thought content, thought process, perception, cognition, and insight/judgement; and (b) a clinical supervisor's competency sign-off confirming the assessments were conducted under supervision and the student demonstrated appropriate interview skills. The proof documents the STUDENT'S assessment skill development under supervision — not clinical conclusions about the patients assessed. Peer verification is NOT accepted — clinical supervisor attestation is required.
Therapeutic Relationship & Communication
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Demonstrate therapeutic communication skills in a supervised or peer-assessed role-play setting. Proof requires: (a) a recording of a supervised role-play or a real session (with documented consent) assessed against a structured communication rubric covering active listening, reflection, empathy, appropriate challenge, and boundary maintenance; and (b) written feedback from both a clinical supervisor and a peer observer addressing each rubric domain specifically. Generic feedback ('good session') is not sufficient — the feedback must address named specific skills. The recording must be of sufficient quality for a supervisor to assess the interaction.
Ethics & Safeguarding in Mental Health
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Analyse a real or realistic ethical dilemma in mental health practice. Proof requires a written case analysis (minimum 800 words) covering: the ethical principles in tension (autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, justice) applied to the specific case; the relevant legal framework (mental health legislation or safeguarding law in the student's jurisdiction, specifically named); the decision that was made or would be made and its rationale; and what the student would do differently in retrospect. The case must be real or directly grounded in real supervised practice — not a textbook vignette. Reviewed by a qualified mental health practitioner or clinical supervisor. The analysis documents learning from a real ethical challenge, not a theoretical discussion.
Qualitative Research and Fieldwork
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Conduct a real qualitative study — semi-structured interviews (minimum 6 participants) or ethnographic observation (minimum 4 documented sessions with location and date records). Document your research question, methodology rationale, participant recruitment process, ethics consideration, coded analysis, and findings. Anonymised transcript or observation note excerpts must be available to your verifier as evidence of real fieldwork. Proof is your research report plus a methodology challenge from a sociologist or qualitative researcher who questions your coding scheme and sampling approach — your written response addressing their challenge is a required part of the proof.
Biology Experimental Design
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Design a real biological investigation from scratch: state a testable hypothesis, identify independent and dependent variables, define controls, justify sample size using a power analysis or reasoning from published literature, and document ethics considerations for living organisms or human participants. The proof is the complete experimental design document reviewed and approved by a working biologist BEFORE data collection begins — the biologist confirms that the design is methodologically sound and the hypothesis is genuinely testable. For students without lab access, the design may be for a secondary data analysis study using a named publicly available dataset (GBIF, NCBI SRA, iNaturalist) — the design document requirements are identical: hypothesis, variables, sampling methodology, statistical analysis plan. The design precedes data collection; this is a genuine prerequisite, not a formality.
Biology Data Collection and Statistical Analysis
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Execute a real biological investigation by collecting data from a controlled experiment OR from a named publicly available citizen science or genomics platform (iNaturalist, GBIF, NCBI GenBank/SRA) using a documented sampling methodology. The proof is the raw data with full metadata (location, time, conditions, collection method), a statistical analysis with appropriate tests (t-test, ANOVA, chi-squared, regression, or equivalent), and a written interpretation of results. Data collection from open platforms is not lesser proof — a documented GBIF biodiversity dataset with a rigorous sampling protocol and correct statistical analysis demonstrates the same analytical competency as lab-collected data. Reviewed by a biologist who examines both the raw data for methodological consistency and the statistical analysis for appropriate test selection. Fabricated data has characteristic distributional anomalies that a biologist reviewer detects — raw data submission is required.
Species Identification and Taxonomic Classification
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Identify and taxonomically classify at least 20 species from a defined habitat area using a documented dichotomous key or taxonomic reference. The proof is a species identification log with scientific name, common name, taxonomic classification (Kingdom through Species), habitat notes, and either a physical specimen, microscopy image, or high-quality photograph for each entry. For students without access to physical specimens or microscopy, iNaturalist photo observations with community verification and GPS documentation are accepted — but the taxonomic reasoning must still be documented using a named field guide or taxonomic key, not solely community identification. A biologist or naturalist reviews the log and confirms at least 10 identifications, challenging borderline cases and requiring the student to explain the distinguishing features used.
Biology Systematic Literature Review
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Conduct a systematic review of primary biological literature on a specific named biological question using PRISMA methodology: document your database search strategy (databases searched, search terms, date range), specify inclusion and exclusion criteria with rationale, and synthesise the findings — not merely summarise them. The proof is the completed review document including the PRISMA flowchart, data extraction table, and synthesis section that draws conclusions about the state of evidence for the named question. This step is fully accessible — PubMed, Google Scholar, and open-access journals (PLoS Biology, eLife, bioRxiv) are free and provide sufficient primary literature for any systematic review topic. Reviewed by a biologist who challenges your inclusion/exclusion decisions: specifically, why you included or excluded named studies in your results. Your documented methodology — not your summary conclusions — is what the reviewer assesses.
Biology Research Report (IMRaD Format)
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Write a complete research report in IMRaD format (Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, References) documenting a real biological investigation. The investigation can be original wet lab data OR a rigorous analysis of a named publicly available biological dataset (GBIF, NCBI SRA, iNaturalist) — both produce a real artifact with the same documentation requirements. The proof is the report plus a documented review by a working biologist who challenges the methodology section (specifically: are the controls adequate? is the statistical analysis appropriate? do the results support the conclusions?) and provides written feedback that the student must respond to. The Methods section must be detailed enough that another researcher could replicate the investigation. Primary literature (minimum 5 peer-reviewed sources) is required in the Introduction and Discussion.
Chemical Lab Safety and Risk Assessment
0 milestones · 4 weeks
Write a complete laboratory risk assessment for a real specific named chemical procedure — for example, 'acid-base titration of sodium hydroxide with hydrochloric acid' or 'recrystallisation of acetanilide from water.' A generic 'working in a chemistry lab' assessment is not accepted; the procedure must be specific and named. The assessment must identify the actual chemical hazards of the specific reagents and products (not generic lab hazards), control measures, required PPE with justification for each item, emergency procedures, and disposal protocols for the specific waste streams generated. Proof is the completed COSHH/MSDS-based risk assessment reviewed by a qualified chemist who confirms it correctly identifies the actual chemical risks of that specific procedure — a reviewer can immediately distinguish a real hazard assessment from a generic template. For students without lab access, the risk assessment may be written for a procedure to be performed as a secondary data analysis exercise using published data; the assessment must still document the real hazards of the specific named reagents involved.
Quantitative Chemical Analysis
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Perform a quantitative chemical analysis using a standard analytical technique: titration (acid-base, redox, complexometric, or precipitation), gravimetric analysis, or spectrophotometric quantification. The proof is the raw data (all trial results, not just concordant ones), calculations with error propagation, comparison to a reference or literature value with calculated percentage error, and a written discussion of systematic and random error sources. For students without lab access, the accessible alternative is a rigorous error propagation analysis using published reference analytical data from NIST Standard Reference Data or IUPAC certified reference values for a named compound — the mathematical analysis of precision, accuracy, and error sources demonstrates the same analytical reasoning as laboratory work. Reviewed by a chemist who examines the raw data for internal consistency and the error analysis for correct error propagation methodology.
Spectroscopic Data Interpretation
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Interpret real spectroscopic data — NMR (¹H, ¹³C, or DEPT), IR, or mass spectrometry — for a specific named compound. Document the reasoning for every peak assignment: chemical shift interpretation and multiplicity analysis (NMR), functional group identification (IR), or fragmentation pattern (MS). The proof is the annotated spectrum with documented reasoning for each assignment, a proposed or confirmed structure, and a written comparison to reference values. For students without lab access, authenticated spectra from SDBS (Spectral Database for Organic Compounds — free) or NIST Chemistry WebBook (free) are accepted — the interpretation methodology and documentation requirements are identical to lab-acquired data. Reviewed by a chemist who provides an unseen spectrum during the review session and asks you to assign it in real time — the live assignment is required to confirm you understand the methodology, not just the reference data.
Chemical Synthesis and Characterisation
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Plan and execute (or rigorously analyse) a chemical synthesis: document the procedure (reagents, quantities, reaction conditions, safety precautions), isolation methodology, percentage yield calculation, and full characterisation data (melting or boiling point, spectroscopic data including at least one of NMR, IR, or MS). The proof is the lab notebook record or equivalent documentation plus characterisation data with comparison to published literature values. For students without lab access, the accessible alternative is a rigorous comparative analysis of characterisation data from ChemSpider, Cambridge Crystallographic Data Centre (CCDC — free for academic use), or SDBS for a named literature compound — documenting each characterisation value, comparison to the reference, and what discrepancies would indicate about purity or identity. Reviewed by a chemist who challenges the characterisation interpretation, specifically asking about discrepancies between measured and reference values and what they indicate about the sample.
Chemistry Primary Literature Problem Solving
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Select a named primary chemistry paper (journal article, not a textbook) and work through a key calculation, derivation, or experimental result from that paper step by step. Document every step in the calculation or reasoning chain, identify approximations or assumptions made, and evaluate whether the methodology is sound. The proof is your documented step-by-step working for the selected problem plus a written assessment of the methodology's limitations. Primary chemistry papers are accessible via Royal Society of Chemistry open access, ACS Publications, PubMed, and arXiv chemistry preprints — entirely free. Reviewed by a chemist who presents a second related paper during the review session and asks you to identify the key calculation step — requiring you to demonstrate that you understand the methodology, not just the specific paper you prepared.
Mathematical Proof Construction
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Construct a complete formal mathematical proof in continuous mathematics — real analysis (limits, continuity, differentiation, integration), linear algebra (eigenvalues, vector spaces, matrix decomposition), differential equations (existence, uniqueness, stability), or probability theory (convergence, distributions, central limit theorem). The proof may be original or a reconstruction of a named non-trivial result with all steps made explicit and no reasoning omitted. Mathematical proof construction is an applied intellectual skill — the same reasoning that places legal argumentation in SKILLS rather than LEARNING. The skill is not knowing what a theorem says but demonstrating you can derive it from first principles with all logical steps documented. Mathematical proofs require no equipment — paper, pen, and primary mathematical texts are sufficient. Reviewed by a mathematician or physicist who confirms the proof is logically valid and complete; the reviewer presents an unseen claim during the review session for the student to work through live, confirming that the student can construct proofs rather than reproduce memorised ones.
Physics Experiment Execution and Analysis
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Design and execute a real physics experiment: state a specific testable prediction from physical theory, collect raw data with documented methodology and measurement uncertainty, perform error analysis (systematic and random errors, error propagation), and compare results to theoretical predictions with a quantitative assessment of agreement. The proof is the complete experimental record including raw data, error analysis, and a written conclusion discussing the comparison to theory. For students without lab access, analysis of a named real physics dataset from CERN Open Data Portal, NASA Exoplanet Archive, SDSS, or LIGO Open Science Center constitutes an equally valid proof — the methodology documentation requirements (data provenance, analysis steps, uncertainty quantification, comparison to theory or published values) are identical to lab work. Reviewed by a physicist who examines the error analysis methodology and asks how the results would change if a specific systematic error were introduced.
Computational Physics Modelling
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Build a real computational physics model or simulation using numerical methods — finite difference, Monte Carlo, molecular dynamics, or numerical integration of differential equations — implemented in code (Python with NumPy/SciPy, Julia, or equivalent). The proof is the submitted code (must be runnable as-is with documented dependencies), parameters with rationale, numerical outputs, visualisation of results, and a written validation section comparing the model output to an analytical solution or published reference value where one exists. Computational physics modelling is fully accessible — all tools are free and open source. Reviewed by a physicist who runs the submitted code independently to confirm it produces the documented outputs; the reviewer also asks you to modify a specific parameter and predict the outcome, then verify it during the review session.
Physics Open Data Analysis
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Analyse a named real publicly available physics dataset from a recognised source: CERN Open Data Portal, NASA Exoplanet Archive, IPAC Infrared Science Archive, Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS), LIGO Open Science Center gravitational wave data, or equivalent. Document the full analysis methodology: data source and version, preprocessing steps, statistical analysis with appropriate tests, results with uncertainty quantification, and conclusions with physical interpretation. The proof is the analysis report plus the code or documented methodology sufficient for independent reproducibility. Real physics datasets contain real measurement noise, real systematic effects, and real signal-to-noise challenges — rigorous analysis of them produces artifacts of equal scientific value to lab-collected data. Reviewed by a physicist who challenges your interpretation of uncertainty in the results and asks whether alternative explanations for the observed pattern are consistent with the data.
Physics Derivation from Primary Literature
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Select a named primary physics paper (arXiv, Physical Review, Nature Physics, or equivalent) and work through a key derivation from that paper step by step — filling in all algebraic and physical reasoning steps that the authors compressed or omitted. Document every step with physical justification, identify approximations and their domain of validity, and write a brief assessment of what the derivation assumes and therefore cannot claim. This is fully accessible — arXiv (free), Physical Review Letters open access, and many Nature Physics papers are freely available. Reviewed by a physicist who selects a second related paper during the review session and asks you to identify the key step in a derivation you have not previously seen — requiring you to demonstrate that you understand the methodology, not just the specific paper you prepared.
Environmental Monitoring Data Collection
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Collect real environmental monitoring data from a specific named location using a documented methodology: air quality (PM2.5, NO₂, CO₂), water quality (pH, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, conductivity), biodiversity count, temperature, or equivalent environmental parameter. Document location coordinates, measurement dates and times, equipment or method used, and any data quality flags. For students without field access or equipment, monitoring data from named open government or citizen science networks is accepted: NOAA monitoring stations, EPA Air Quality System (free), OpenAQ (free), iNaturalist (for biodiversity), or Copernicus atmospheric data — but the provenance (station name, coordinates, data version) must be fully documented. The proof is a real documented dataset with full provenance — not a description of what you would measure, but actual data from an actual named location. Reviewed by an environmental scientist who examines the methodology for sampling bias and asks how the monitoring protocol would need to change to answer a specific environmental question.
Ecological Field Assessment
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Conduct a real ecological assessment of a specific named site using a standard methodology: point count or transect survey for bird species, quadrat sampling for plant communities, pitfall or sweep net survey for invertebrates, or equivalent standardised ecological method. Calculate at minimum one ecological index (species richness, Shannon diversity index, Simpson's index, or DAFOR abundance scale). The proof is the field survey record including site name, GPS coordinates or map reference, assessment date, methodology documentation, species list with counts or abundance scores, index calculation, and a brief written interpretation of the site's ecological condition. iNaturalist transect observations with documented methodology (defined transect, consistent effort, documented conditions) are accepted for students without access to ecological field equipment. Reviewed by an ecologist who challenges the choice of ecological index and asks how the assessment methodology would need to change for a different site type or ecological question.
Environmental Impact Analysis
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Conduct a real environmental impact analysis for a specific named development, land use change, or infrastructure project using established EIA methodology: baseline environmental conditions, impact identification (direct, indirect, cumulative), significance assessment (magnitude × likelihood), and mitigation recommendations. The proof is the completed analysis document for the named project plus a written statement of methodology and limitations. The project may be a real planned development (planning applications are publicly available from local authorities), a proposed policy change, or a historical project for which outcomes can be compared to predictions. Reviewed by an environmental scientist or EIA practitioner who challenges your significance assessment — specifically, whether you have correctly classified the magnitude and likelihood of named impacts — and asks whether a specific ecological receptor was adequately considered in your assessment.
Climate and Environmental Open Data Analysis
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Analyse a real named publicly available climate or environmental dataset: NOAA Global Surface Temperature, NASA GISS Surface Temperature Analysis, Copernicus Climate Change Service ERA5 reanalysis, EPA Air Quality System historical data, or equivalent. The proof is a documented analysis report: data source and version, preprocessing decisions with rationale, statistical analysis (trend detection, anomaly identification, spatial or temporal comparison), uncertainty quantification, and written conclusions with specific physical interpretation. All sources listed are free and publicly accessible. Real climate datasets contain real measurement uncertainty, coverage gaps, and confounds that require genuine scientific reasoning to navigate — rigorous analysis produces real artifacts of scientific value. Reviewed by an environmental scientist who challenges the statistical methodology — specifically asking whether the identified trend is robust to a specific alternative specification — and asks you to interpret a specific dataset feature you did not discuss in your report.
Environmental Policy Brief
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Write a policy brief (maximum 4 pages) on a specific real environmental issue for a specific named decision-maker — a government environment agency, a planning authority, a local authority, a conservation body, or a named NGO. The evidence base must draw primarily on environmental monitoring data and ecological science: air quality records, biodiversity survey data, climate projections, EIA findings, or conservation science research. The brief must not rely solely on social science or health evidence — those are covered by separate outcomes (social-policy-analysis-recommendation and health-policy-brief respectively). What distinguishes this outcome is its evidence domain: environmental science data analysed through an environmental regulatory and conservation framework, for a decision-maker whose remit is environmental protection or resource management. The policy recommendation must be specific and actionable. Reviewed by an environmental scientist or environmental policy practitioner who challenges the evidence base — specifically, whether the cited monitoring data supports the claimed environmental impact at the stated confidence level — and asks what monitoring data would change the recommendation.
Neuroanatomy and Systems Neuroscience Analysis
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Analyse the structural or functional neuroanatomy of a specific neural system or brain region using real neuroimaging data from a named open dataset — OpenNeuro (free), Human Connectome Project (free), or Allen Brain Atlas (free). Alternatively, produce a documented systems neuroscience literature synthesis using PRISMA methodology, focusing on a specific circuit or system (visual system, hippocampal-cortical memory network, basal ganglia-thalamo-cortical loop, or equivalent). The proof is the analysis report or PRISMA synthesis, documenting the data source, analysis methodology or search strategy, and interpretations with primary literature support. Both routes are fully accessible to students without neuroimaging equipment. Reviewed by a neuroscientist who presents an unseen neuroimaging image or anatomical cross-section during the review session and asks you to identify specific structures and describe the functional circuits connecting them — requiring spatial anatomical knowledge, not just familiarity with names.
Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience Analysis
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Analyse a specific cellular or molecular neuroscience mechanism at research depth: ion channel kinetics, action potential propagation, synaptic plasticity (LTP/LTD), neurotransmitter system dynamics, or intracellular signalling cascades. The proof is either a documented analysis of real electrophysiological or imaging data from an open dataset (CRCNS.org — free; Allen Brain Observatory — free), or a documented primary literature synthesis using PRISMA methodology on a specific cellular mechanism with identified gaps and methodological limitations. Both routes are accessible without specialised laboratory equipment. Reviewed by a neuroscientist who presents an unseen electrophysiology trace or imaging dataset segment during the review session and asks about the underlying cellular mechanism — the student must correctly identify the mechanism, not just describe the observed phenomenon.
Cognitive Neuroscience Experimental Design
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Design a complete cognitive neuroscience experiment to test a specific hypothesis about a cognitive process — attention, working memory, decision-making, language, emotion, perception, or executive function. The design must specify: research question and hypothesis, experimental paradigm (blocked vs. event-related; stimulus presentation; trial structure), participant criteria and sample size with power analysis, neuroimaging or physiological methodology (fMRI, EEG, MEG, eye-tracking, or equivalent), analysis pipeline, and ethics considerations. A complete experimental design requires no equipment — the methodology document is the artifact. The proof is the design document reviewed by a neuroscientist who identifies at least one uncontrolled confound in the design; the student's written response proposing either a methodological fix or arguing that the confound does not threaten the primary hypothesis is a required part of the proof. This documented exchange confirms that the student can engage with methodological criticism, not just produce a design document.
Neuroscience Systematic Literature Review
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Conduct a systematic review of primary neuroscience literature on a specific named research question using PRISMA methodology: document your database search strategy (PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library — all with free access), specify inclusion and exclusion criteria with rationale, extract data using a documented extraction table, and synthesise findings with a conclusion about the state of evidence. The proof is the completed PRISMA-format review document including the flowchart, extraction table, and synthesis section identifying agreements, contradictions, and gaps in the evidence base. This step is fully accessible — PubMed and PubMed Central are free; bioRxiv and Google Scholar provide additional coverage. Reviewed by a neuroscientist who challenges your exclusion decisions — specifically, why you excluded a named study that appears to meet your stated criteria — and asks about the quality of the evidence in a specific included study.
Bioinformatics Analysis Pipeline
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Conduct a real bioinformatics analysis on a named publicly available genomic dataset from NCBI, Ensembl, or equivalent open repository: sequence alignment using BLAST, multiple sequence alignment (MUSCLE or MAFFT), phylogenetic tree construction (PhyML, IQ-TREE, or equivalent), variant annotation (Ensembl VEP, ClinVar), or RNA-seq differential expression analysis (DESeq2, edgeR). Document the complete methodology: dataset accession numbers, software tools with version numbers, parameters with rationale, and biological interpretation of outputs. The proof is the documented methodology, submitted code or pipeline, output files, and written interpretation of the biological significance of the results. All tools named are free and widely used by professional researchers — bioinformatics is among the most accessible postgraduate-level research skills available. The submitted code must be independently runnable. Reviewed by a geneticist or bioinformatician who examines the parameter choices and asks why specific settings were chosen over alternatives — requiring methodological understanding, not just tool operation.
Genetic Data Interpretation
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Interpret real genetic data from a named publicly available source: annotate a set of variants using ClinVar and Ensembl Variant Effect Predictor (VEP — free), interpret a GWAS result from a published study by tracing a named variant through the statistical and functional evidence, or analyse sequencing results for a named genetic question using published population data. Document the evidence base for each interpretation claim: variant frequency, functional consequence predictions, clinical significance classifications, and limitations of the evidence. Reviewed by a geneticist or bioinformatician who presents an unseen variant of uncertain significance during the review session and asks you to classify it and justify the classification using ACMG/AMP variant interpretation criteria — requiring real-time reasoning about evidence quality, not recall of known variant classifications. All data sources and annotation tools are freely accessible.
Biotechnology Application Case Analysis
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Conduct a real case analysis of a specific named biotechnology application: a named CRISPR therapy in clinical trials (using a named IND in the ClinicalTrials.gov registry), a specific named synthetic biology product with regulatory status, or a named agricultural biotech product with a published safety assessment. The analysis must address three dimensions: (1) scientific validity — what does the evidence actually show about efficacy and mechanism? (2) regulatory status — what approvals exist, what is still pending, and what evidence gaps remain? (3) ethical implications — what are the genuine contested trade-offs, using a named ethical framework applied explicitly? Public clinical trial registries, regulatory agency filings (FDA, EMA), and peer-reviewed literature provide the evidence base, all publicly accessible. Reviewed by a biotechnology researcher, bioethicist, or industry practitioner who challenges whether the evidence you cited is sufficient to support your conclusions about efficacy — requiring you to evaluate evidence quality, not just summarise published claims.
Genetics Ethics and Policy Analysis
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Analyse a real genetics ethics case using an explicitly named ethical framework: direct-to-consumer genetic testing regulation (naming a specific product and jurisdiction), gene drive technology deployment proposals (naming a specific ecosystem and target species), germline editing policy (analysing a specific national framework against ISSCR 2021 guidelines), or prenatal genetic diagnosis policy (naming a specific condition and jurisdictional framework). The analysis must apply the ethical framework explicitly — not just describe it — and reach a substantive conclusion about the policy question. Policy documents, bioethics committee reports, regulatory filings, and academic bioethics journals (Journal of Medical Ethics, American Journal of Bioethics — many open access) provide the evidence base. Reviewed by a bioethicist, genetics researcher, or policy specialist who challenges the application with a real counter-example — 'this argument implies that [named real policy decision] was wrong; was it?' — requiring you to reason about a specific real-world case you may not have prepared for.
Water Treatment Process Design
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Design a water treatment process for a defined water quality problem — drinking water treatment, wastewater treatment, or industrial water reuse. The design must include: a treatment objectives statement (inlet quality, target outlet quality, and applicable standards or guidelines), a treatment train selection (the sequence of unit processes chosen with alternatives considered and screening rationale), sizing calculations for at least 2 unit operations (e.g. coagulation–flocculation basin, sedimentation tank, filtration bed, disinfection contact time) with documented methodology and design parameters, a treated water quality estimate comparing the calculated performance against the treatment objective, and identification of the primary operational challenges (sludge handling, chemical storage, energy use). Preferred proof: design calculations from a real water treatment project. Accessible alternative: hand sizing calculations using EPA Design Manual for Wastewater Treatment (freely available), WHO Drinking Water Quality Guidelines (free), or equivalent national guidance — applied to a real water quality dataset from a public environmental monitoring database (USGS NWIS, EPA STORET, or equivalent). Proof artifacts: the treatment train flowsheet (design artifact) and the unit operation sizing calculations and performance estimate (analysis artifact). Verification: an environmental engineer reviews the sizing — 'your detention time assumes a surface loading rate of X — if the influent flow peaks at 150% of design, what happens to your effluent quality?' — requiring you to reason from your own design parameters.
Become Researcher
4 milestones · 12 weeks
Apply research methods to real-world decisions: user research, market analysis, competitive intelligence, and synthesis. Proof is a published finding that changed a product decision or business direction — not an academic paper.
Improve Campaign Delivery
4 milestones · 12 weeks
Deliver a volunteer-led advocacy, civic, or community campaign — not a commercial marketing campaign. Proof requires a non-commercial campaign context, volunteer team, and a community impact metric (not revenue or conversion KPI).
Launch a Podcast
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Produce and publish 10 episodes with a consistent audience.
Build a Personal Brand
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Grow a recognizable online presence in your niche.
Grow a YouTube Channel
3 milestones · 16 weeks
Reach 1,000 subscribers with consistent video output.
Build a Photography Portfolio
3 milestones · 10 weeks
Develop a professional portfolio of 30 strong images.
Learn Illustration
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Go from sketch to a finished series of 10 illustrations.
Release Original Music
3 milestones · 14 weeks
Write, record, and release an original EP on streaming platforms.
Write and Publish an Essay
3 milestones · 6 weeks
Research, write, and publish a long-form essay with real readers.
Produce a Short Film
3 milestones · 14 weeks
Script, shoot, edit, and screen a short film.
Design a Typeface
3 milestones · 16 weeks
Complete a full working typeface with A–Z and numbers.
Build a Daily Writing Habit
3 milestones · 13 weeks
Write 500 words every day for 90 days without breaking the chain.
Launch a Newsletter
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Build a newsletter to 500 subscribers with consistent weekly issues.
Write a Children's Book
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Write and illustrate a picture book ready for submission.
Curate an Art Exhibition
3 milestones · 10 weeks
Organize and host a physical or online group art exhibition.
Build a Design Practice
3 milestones · 14 weeks
Complete 5 client projects and publish a case-study portfolio.
Perform Live
3 milestones · 10 weeks
Perform in front of a live audience — music, comedy, spoken word, or theatre.
Build a Creative Coding Project
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Build an interactive or generative creative project — art, music visualizer, or game — using code.
License Your Creative Work
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Negotiate and sign a commercial license for a piece of your original creative work.
Complete a Game Jam
3 milestones · 2 weeks
Design, build, and submit a complete game during a timed game jam (48–72 hours).
Get Your First 10 Paying Customers
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Sign 10 real customers who pay for your product or service.
Validate a Business Idea
3 milestones · 6 weeks
Run experiments to confirm real demand before building.
Build an E-Commerce Store
3 milestones · 10 weeks
Launch a Shopify store to $5,000 in first-month revenue.
Close a Consulting Contract
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Land your first $5,000+ consulting engagement.
Launch a Marketplace
3 milestones · 16 weeks
Build a two-sided marketplace with 10 suppliers and 50 buyers.
Make Your First Hire
3 milestones · 10 weeks
Define the role, recruit, and onboard your first employee.
Raise a Pre-Seed Round
3 milestones · 16 weeks
Raise $250k–$1M from angels or a pre-seed fund.
Build a Content-Led Business
3 milestones · 16 weeks
Grow a business where content drives 80%+ of customer acquisition.
Launch a Freelance Agency
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Build a service business with 3+ clients and a repeatable delivery model.
Launch a Micro-SaaS
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Build and ship a focused tool that solves one problem for one audience.
Build a Subscription Business
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Launch a subscription model reaching 100 active subscribers.
Reach $100k MRR
3 milestones · 52 weeks
Grow a product to $100,000 in monthly recurring revenue.
Raise a Seed Round
3 milestones · 20 weeks
Raise $1M–$5M from institutional seed investors.
Get Into an Accelerator
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Get accepted into YC, Techstars, or a top-tier accelerator program.
File a Patent
3 milestones · 16 weeks
File a provisional or utility patent application for your invention.
Get Your First Press Coverage
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Land a feature in a publication your target customers read.
Find Product-Market Fit
3 milestones · 20 weeks
Reach a 40%+ 'very disappointed' score on Sean Ellis test with real users.
Build and Exit
3 milestones · 104 weeks
Build a product to a point of acquisition and complete a successful exit.
Learn Music Theory
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Understand harmony, rhythm, and form at an intermediate level.
Study Ancient History
3 milestones · 14 weeks
Build a deep understanding of classical civilizations.
Learn to Cook 30 Dishes
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Master 30 recipes across different cuisines from scratch.
Study Investing Fundamentals
3 milestones · 10 weeks
Build a personal investment framework and deploy a real portfolio.
Learn to Read Sheet Music
3 milestones · 10 weeks
Sight-read simple piano pieces fluently.
Complete a Coding Bootcamp
3 milestones · 16 weeks
Go from zero to job-ready developer through an intensive program.
Study Western Philosophy
3 milestones · 16 weeks
Read primary texts from Plato to Nietzsche and develop a philosophical framework.
Learn Data Analysis
3 milestones · 10 weeks
Go from spreadsheets to Python pandas and produce real insights.
Master a Professional Software Tool
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Go from beginner to power user in a tool essential to your work.
Complete a University Degree
3 milestones · 104 weeks
Earn a bachelor's, master's, or equivalent degree.
Write and Publish a Research Paper
3 milestones · 24 weeks
Conduct original research and publish a paper in a peer-reviewed journal or conference.
Teach What You Know
3 milestones · 10 weeks
Create and deliver a course, workshop, or tutorial with real learners completing it.
Earn a Driving License
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Pass theory and practical driving tests to earn a full driving license.
Build a Consistent Gym Habit
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Train 4x per week for 12 weeks without missing more than 2 sessions.
Learn to Swim
3 milestones · 10 weeks
Go from non-swimmer to completing a 400m freestyle swim.
Reach 3.0 Tennis Rating
3 milestones · 20 weeks
Improve from beginner to a 3.0 USTA competitive rating.
Train for and Run a Trail Race
3 milestones · 16 weeks
Complete a 25km trail race over technical terrain.
Squat 315 lbs / 142 kg
3 milestones · 20 weeks
Build strength to three plates on the barbell squat.
Do 100 Consecutive Pushups
3 milestones · 10 weeks
Build to 100 unbroken pushups in a single set.
Complete a 30-Day Yoga Challenge
3 milestones · 5 weeks
Practice yoga daily for 30 consecutive days.
Learn to Rock Climb
3 milestones · 14 weeks
Go from beginner to leading 5.10 routes outdoors.
Complete a 70.3 Half-Ironman
3 milestones · 24 weeks
Train for and finish a 70.3 mile triathlon.
Compete in Martial Arts
3 milestones · 16 weeks
Enter and compete in an amateur martial arts competition.
Earn a Black Belt
3 milestones · 260 weeks
Train consistently in a martial art to earn a black belt from a certified instructor.
Complete the CrossFit Open
3 milestones · 5 weeks
Complete all five CrossFit Open workouts and submit official scores.
Row 1000m Under 3:30
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Achieve a sub-3:30 1000m rowing ergometer time. Screenshot of Concept2 logbook required.
Reach Intermediate Surfing Level
3 milestones · 20 weeks
Consistently ride unbroken green waves, execute basic turns, and duck-dive under breaking waves.
Join and Compete with a Sports Team
3 milestones · 20 weeks
Join an organized team sport league and complete a full competitive season.
Master React (Beginner to Shipped Product)
3 milestones · 10 weeks
Build and deploy a React application that solves a real problem for real users.
Make Your First Open Source Contribution
3 milestones · 6 weeks
Get a pull request merged into a public GitHub repository with 100+ stars.
Pass a Senior Engineering Interview
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Receive and accept an offer for a senior (L5+) engineering role at a tech company.
Earn AWS Solutions Architect Certification
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Pass the AWS SAA-C03 exam on first or second attempt.
Build an AI Agent from Scratch
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Design, build, and deploy an AI agent that takes actions in the world autonomously.
Ship an AI Product to Real Users
4 milestones · 10 weeks
Take an AI feature or product from working demo to 10 active users outside your network. Proven by real usage data, not by the code shipping.
Complete a Kaggle Competition (Top 25%)
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Enter and submit a Kaggle competition, finishing in the top 25% of participants.
Build a UX Design Portfolio
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Create 5 case studies documenting design process from brief to shipped product.
Earn CISSP Certification
3 milestones · 16 weeks
Pass the CISSP exam and complete the endorsement process.
Complete a Full Performance Review Cycle
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Run end-to-end reviews: calibration, written assessments, delivery, and follow-through.
Ship a Team Charter and Ways of Working
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Write, get buy-in, and operate by a team charter for 90+ days.
Build a Hiring Funnel from Scratch
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Design and run a hiring process from JD to offer for 3+ roles successfully.
Ship a Product from 0 to 1 as PM
3 milestones · 16 weeks
Take a product from idea to public launch with measurable user adoption.
Complete SHRM-CP Certification
3 milestones · 16 weeks
Pass the SHRM Certified Professional exam.
Run Consistently for 30 Days
3 milestones · 5 weeks
Run at least 3 times per week for 30 consecutive days without missing a week.
Build a Zone 2 Aerobic Base
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Complete 12 weeks of Zone 2 training with heart rate tracking proof at each session.
Build a Consistent Strength Habit
3 milestones · 13 weeks
Lift weights at least 3x/week for 90 consecutive days. Log every session.
Improve Sleep Average to 7.5 Hours
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Raise your 4-week sleep average to 7h30m or more using a wearable or sleep tracker.
Complete 30 Days Alcohol-Free
3 milestones · 5 weeks
Go without alcohol for 30 consecutive days. Proof: journal entries + health markers.
Build a Consistent Morning Routine
3 milestones · 13 weeks
Execute the same morning routine 90 consecutive days without breaking the chain.
Build a 30-Day Meditation Habit
3 milestones · 5 weeks
Meditate for at least 10 minutes every day for 30 consecutive days.
Reach French A2
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Communicate in simple, direct exchanges on familiar topics in French. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Reach French B1
3 milestones · 20 weeks
Hold spontaneous conversations and understand main points of clear standard French. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Reach French B2
3 milestones · 32 weeks
Interact fluently with native speakers and understand complex texts in French. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Reach French C1
3 milestones · 52 weeks
Express ideas fluently and spontaneously in French without obvious searching for words. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Reach Spanish A1
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Introduce yourself and handle basic interactions in Spanish. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Reach Spanish A2
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Communicate in simple exchanges on familiar topics in Spanish. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Reach Spanish B1
3 milestones · 20 weeks
Hold spontaneous conversations and understand main ideas of clear standard Spanish. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Reach Spanish B2
3 milestones · 32 weeks
Interact fluently with native Spanish speakers and understand complex texts. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Reach Spanish C1
3 milestones · 52 weeks
Express ideas fluently and spontaneously in Spanish. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Pass Mandarin HSK 1
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Understand and use very basic Mandarin expressions and introduce yourself. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Pass Mandarin HSK 2
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Communicate in simple and direct Mandarin in familiar everyday situations. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Pass Mandarin HSK 3
3 milestones · 20 weeks
Communicate in Chinese at a basic level in personal and professional contexts. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Pass Mandarin HSK 4
3 milestones · 32 weeks
Discuss a wide range of topics fluently in Chinese. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Reach German A1
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Understand and use familiar everyday German expressions and introduce yourself. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Reach German A2
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Communicate in simple, direct exchanges on familiar everyday topics in German. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Reach German B1
3 milestones · 20 weeks
Handle most situations when travelling in German-speaking countries. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Reach German B2
3 milestones · 32 weeks
Interact spontaneously with native German speakers with a degree of fluency. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Master Japanese Kana (Hiragana + Katakana)
3 milestones · 4 weeks
Read and write all hiragana and katakana characters fluently. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Pass JLPT N5
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Understand basic Japanese and handle simple exchanges. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Pass JLPT N4
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Understand basic Japanese used in everyday situations. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Pass JLPT N3
3 milestones · 20 weeks
Understand Japanese to a reasonable degree in everyday situations. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Reach Hindi A1
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Understand and use basic Hindi expressions and introduce yourself. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Reach Hindi A2
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Communicate in simple exchanges on familiar topics in Hindi. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Reach Hindi B1
3 milestones · 20 weeks
Hold spontaneous conversations on familiar topics in Hindi. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Reach Portuguese A1
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Understand and use basic Portuguese expressions in everyday situations. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Reach Portuguese A2
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Communicate in simple exchanges on familiar topics in Portuguese. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Reach Portuguese B1
3 milestones · 20 weeks
Hold spontaneous conversations on familiar topics in Portuguese. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Reach Italian A1
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Understand and use basic Italian expressions and introduce yourself. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Reach Italian A2
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Communicate in simple exchanges on familiar topics in Italian. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Reach Italian B1
3 milestones · 20 weeks
Hold spontaneous conversations on everyday topics in Italian. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Master Arabic Script
3 milestones · 4 weeks
Read and write all Arabic letters in their connected forms fluently. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Reach Arabic A1
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Understand and use basic Arabic expressions in everyday situations. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Reach Arabic A2
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Communicate in simple exchanges on familiar topics in Arabic. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Master Korean Hangul
3 milestones · 4 weeks
Read and write all Korean Hangul characters fluently. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Pass TOPIK 1
3 milestones · 16 weeks
Understand basic Korean expressions and handle simple everyday exchanges. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Pass TOPIK 2
3 milestones · 32 weeks
Communicate in Korean at an intermediate level in social contexts. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Run 5K Under 25 Minutes
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Achieve a sub-25 minute 5K in a race or time trial with GPS or chip time proof.
Run 5K Under 20 Minutes
3 milestones · 20 weeks
Achieve a sub-20 minute 5K. GPS data and race result required as proof.
Run a Marathon Under 4 Hours
3 milestones · 20 weeks
Complete a full marathon with official finishing time under 4:00:00.
Run a Marathon Under 3:30
3 milestones · 24 weeks
Complete a full marathon with official finishing time under 3:30:00.
Deadlift 2× Your Bodyweight
3 milestones · 20 weeks
Execute a conventional deadlift of 2× your bodyweight. Video proof required.
Squat 2× Your Bodyweight
3 milestones · 24 weeks
Execute a back squat of 2× your bodyweight. Video proof required, full depth.
Complete Your First Powerlifting Meet
3 milestones · 16 weeks
Register, compete, and complete all three lifts at a sanctioned powerlifting meet.
Earn Your BJJ Blue Belt
3 milestones · 52 weeks
Train consistently and earn a blue belt in Brazilian jiu-jitsu from your coach.
Earn Your BJJ Purple Belt
3 milestones · 104 weeks
Train consistently and earn a purple belt in Brazilian jiu-jitsu from your coach.
Reach 1000 Elo in Chess
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Achieve and maintain a 1000 Elo rating on Chess.com or Lichess.
Reach 1500 Elo in Chess
3 milestones · 16 weeks
Achieve and maintain a 1500 Elo rating on Chess.com or Lichess.
Complete Your First Sprint Triathlon
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Finish a sprint triathlon (750m swim, 20km bike, 5km run) with race result proof.
Master Rust (Beginner to Systems Project)
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Write, test, and publish a Rust project that demonstrates ownership, lifetimes, and safe concurrency.
Master TypeScript (Beginner to Typed Codebase)
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Migrate or build a JavaScript codebase to strict TypeScript with zero `any` usage and full type coverage.
Build and Ship a Mobile App (iOS or Android)
0 milestones · 14 weeks
Design, build, and publish a mobile application to the App Store or Play Store with real users.
Master Docker + Kubernetes
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Deploy a production-grade application with Docker containers orchestrated on Kubernetes, with health checks and autoscaling.
Master System Design (Senior Level)
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Design 10 production-grade systems from scratch, covering scalability, reliability, and trade-offs — peer-reviewed by senior engineers.
Ship a CLI Tool Used by Others (50+ Stars)
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Build and publish a command-line tool that earns 50+ GitHub stars from real users who find it useful.
Complete Advent of Code (All 25 Days)
0 milestones · 5 weeks
Solve all 25 puzzles in a single Advent of Code December, with solutions published to GitHub.
Win a Hackathon
0 milestones · 4 weeks
Place first, second, or third in a competitive hackathon with a working prototype demonstrated to judges.
Build a Business Intelligence Dashboard
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Design and deploy a BI dashboard that drives a real business decision, with documented data pipeline and refresh schedule.
Master Statistical Analysis (A/B Testing)
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Design, run, and analyze 3 real A/B tests with documented statistical significance, effect sizes, and business decisions.
Build an End-to-End Data Science Project
5 milestones · 14 weeks
Complete a full data science project — from a real stakeholder question to a deployed model to a decision a non-technical person acted on. Every step documented and verifiable. No Iris, no Titanic.
Master Figma (Beginner to Shipped Product)
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Design a complete product UI in Figma, from wireframes to high-fidelity prototype handed off to engineers.
Get First Paid Design Client
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Land and deliver a paid design engagement — logo, UI, or brand identity — with a signed contract and invoice paid.
Master Brand Identity Design
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Design a complete brand identity system — logo, color, typography, and usage guidelines — for a real client or project.
Complete First Bug Bounty ($500+)
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Find and responsibly disclose a valid security vulnerability earning $500 or more on a public bug bounty program.
Build a CI/CD Pipeline from Scratch
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Design and implement a complete CI/CD pipeline for a real application — automated tests, build, deploy, and rollback.
Master Infrastructure as Code (Terraform)
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Provision and manage a production-grade cloud infrastructure entirely with Terraform — no manual console changes.
Earn Penetration Testing Certification (OSCP)
0 milestones · 16 weeks
Pass the Offensive Security Certified Professional exam, demonstrating hands-on penetration testing skills.
Master Technical Writing (5 Published Pieces)
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Research, write, and publish 5 technical articles or documentation pieces that get real readership and positive feedback.
Get First Paid Writing Client
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Land and deliver a paid writing engagement — content, copywriting, or ghostwriting — with invoice paid.
Build a 3–6 Month Emergency Fund
0 milestones · 26 weeks
Save 3–6 months of living expenses in a dedicated account, tracked and documented from zero to target balance.
Pay Off a Defined Debt Balance to Zero
0 milestones · 26 weeks
Select a specific debt, create a payoff plan, and reduce the balance to zero — documented with statements as proof.
Pass CFA Level 3 Exam
0 milestones · 24 weeks
Pass the CFA Level 3 examination and earn the CFA designation. Official charter letter as proof.
Pass CPA / ACCA / ACA Professional Exam
0 milestones · 52 weeks
Pass all sections of the CPA (US), ACCA (UK/Global), or ACA (UK) professional accounting examinations.
Earn Series 7 License
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Pass the FINRA Series 7 General Securities Representative Examination. Official license confirmation as proof.
Build a 3-Statement Financial Model from Scratch
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Build a complete, linked 3-statement financial model (P&L, balance sheet, cash flow) for a real company from scratch.
Master Excel/Sheets for Financial Analysis
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Demonstrate advanced Excel or Google Sheets skills by building a complex financial model, dashboard, or data tool.
Reduce Team Time-to-Merge by 50%
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Diagnose and fix the bottlenecks in your team's code review process to halve average PR time-to-merge — before and after metrics required.
Onboard 5 Engineers in 90 Days
0 milestones · 13 weeks
Hire and onboard 5 engineers to production-contributing productivity within 90 days using a documented onboarding program.
Deliver a Major Project On Time and On Scope
0 milestones · 16 weeks
Lead a cross-functional project from scoping to launch, hitting the original timeline and scope commitments.
Run a Successful Product Launch
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Own and execute a product launch from pre-launch to post-launch metrics — press, signups, and adoption targets documented.
Complete Product Management Certification
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Earn an accredited PM certification (AIPMM CPM, Pragmatic Institute, or equivalent) with exam result as proof.
Build a Product Roadmap (Adopted by Engineering)
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Write and present a 12-month product roadmap that engineering formally commits to — adoption confirmation required as proof.
Conduct 50 User Research Interviews
0 milestones · 16 weeks
Plan, run, and synthesize insights from 50 structured user research interviews with documented themes and decisions made.
Become VP Engineering (First Time)
0 milestones · 52 weeks
Earn or be promoted to your first VP Engineering role, with documented scope: team size, budget, and reporting line.
Become CTO (First Time)
0 milestones · 52 weeks
Earn your first CTO title at a funded company or venture-backed startup — offer letter or board resolution as proof.
Build a Company OKR System
0 milestones · 16 weeks
Design, implement, and run a full OKR cycle across a company — from objective-setting to quarterly review and scored results.
Lead a Company Through a Pivot
0 milestones · 24 weeks
Facilitate and execute a strategic pivot — documented with before/after strategy, team communication, and outcome metrics.
Build a Board Presentation Cadence
0 milestones · 36 weeks
Design and run 3 consecutive quarterly board presentations with documented board feedback and action items resolved.
Build a 4-Day Onboarding Program
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Design and run a structured 4-day onboarding program with documented schedule, materials, and new-hire completion rate.
Design a Compensation Framework
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Build a job-level compensation framework with bands, review cadence, and market data — approved by leadership.
Resolve a Major Team Conflict (Documented)
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Facilitate resolution of a significant interpersonal or structural team conflict with documented outcome and follow-through.
Build a Remote Culture Playbook
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Write and adopt a remote culture playbook — async norms, meeting cadence, social rituals — with team sign-off and 90-day usage log.
Implement a Project Management System
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Select, configure, and train a team to use a PM system (Linear, Jira, Notion) — adoption metrics 90 days after launch.
Build an Operations Playbook
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Document every repeating operational process for a function — runbook, checklist, owner, and escalation path — adopted by the team.
Build a Customer Success Function
0 milestones · 16 weeks
Design, hire, and launch a customer success function with NPS baseline, playbooks, and 90-day retention improvement data.
Manage Blood Glucose to Target Range (3 Months)
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Achieve and maintain target blood glucose levels for 3 consecutive months under medical supervision. CLINICAL — private by default.
Reduce LDL Cholesterol to Target Range
0 milestones · 16 weeks
Lower LDL cholesterol to target range through documented lifestyle intervention under medical supervision. CLINICAL — private by default.
Complete a Supervised Weight Loss Program
0 milestones · 20 weeks
Complete a physician- or dietitian-supervised weight loss program with documented outcomes. CLINICAL — private by default.
Achieve Blood Pressure Target Range
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Reduce and maintain blood pressure in a target range through lifestyle and/or medical intervention. CLINICAL — private by default.
Complete Cardiac Rehabilitation Program
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Complete a full medically supervised cardiac rehabilitation program. CLINICAL — private by default.
Pass the DELF/DALF Exam
0 milestones · 4 weeks
Earn an official DELF or DALF diploma in French. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Pass the DELE Exam
0 milestones · 4 weeks
Earn an official DELE diploma in Spanish from the Instituto Cervantes. Certificate upload as proof.
Pass Mandarin HSK 5
0 milestones · 52 weeks
Read Chinese newspapers and magazines fluently and communicate in Mandarin in social and professional contexts. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Pass Mandarin HSK 6 (Near-Native)
0 milestones · 104 weeks
Achieve near-native Mandarin proficiency — understand complex Chinese and express yourself fluently and spontaneously. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Have Your First Conversation in Mandarin
0 milestones · 16 weeks
Hold a 10-minute conversation with a native Mandarin speaker on any topic. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Read a Mandarin Newspaper Article
0 milestones · 52 weeks
Read and summarise a news article written in simplified Chinese without a dictionary. Written summary as proof.
Reach German C1
0 milestones · 52 weeks
Express ideas in German fluently and spontaneously without obvious searching for words. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Pass the Goethe-Zertifikat Exam
0 milestones · 4 weeks
Earn an official Goethe-Zertifikat at your target CEFR level. Certificate upload as proof.
Pass JLPT N2
0 milestones · 40 weeks
Understand Japanese used in a wide variety of circumstances, approaching near-native proficiency in reading. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Pass JLPT N1 (Advanced)
0 milestones · 52 weeks
Understand Japanese used in a wide variety of circumstances at the highest proficiency level. Certificate as proof.
Reach Hindi B2
0 milestones · 32 weeks
Interact fluently with native Hindi speakers and understand complex texts. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Have Your First Conversation in Hindi
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Hold a 5-minute conversation with a native Hindi speaker on any topic. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Reach Arabic B1
0 milestones · 32 weeks
Handle most situations you'll encounter when travelling in Arabic-speaking countries. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Reach Arabic B2
0 milestones · 52 weeks
Interact fluently with native Arabic speakers and understand complex texts in Modern Standard Arabic. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Have Your First Conversation in Arabic
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Hold a 5-minute conversation with a native Arabic speaker. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Reach Portuguese B2
0 milestones · 32 weeks
Interact fluently with native Portuguese speakers and understand complex texts. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Reach Portuguese C1
0 milestones · 52 weeks
Express ideas in Portuguese fluently and spontaneously. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Reach Italian B2
0 milestones · 32 weeks
Interact fluently with native Italian speakers and understand complex texts. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Reach Italian C1
0 milestones · 52 weeks
Express ideas in Italian fluently and spontaneously without obvious searching for words. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Pass TOPIK Level 5
0 milestones · 52 weeks
Demonstrate advanced Korean proficiency for professional and academic contexts. Unlike app-based learning, every milestone requires proof of real human communication — not a score on an app.
Pass TOPIK Level 6 (Advanced)
0 milestones · 104 weeks
Reach the highest level of the TOPIK examination — near-native Korean proficiency. Certificate upload as proof.
Run 5K Under 30 Minutes
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Complete a 5K in under 30 minutes in a race or time trial. GPS data or chip time required.
Run Your First 10K Race
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Complete a 10K running race in an organized event with a recorded chip time or GPS proof.
Run 10K Under 50 Minutes
0 milestones · 14 weeks
Complete a 10K in under 50 minutes. Official chip time or GPS data required as proof.
Run Your First Half Marathon
0 milestones · 14 weeks
Complete a half marathon (21.1km) in an organized event. Official chip time as proof.
Run a Half Marathon Under 2 Hours
0 milestones · 16 weeks
Complete a half marathon with official finishing time under 2:00:00. Chip time proof required.
Run a Half Marathon Under 1:45
0 milestones · 24 weeks
Complete a half marathon with official finishing time under 1:45:00. Chip time proof required.
Run a Marathon Under 3 Hours
0 milestones · 32 weeks
Complete a full marathon with official finishing time under 3:00:00. Official race result required.
Complete Your First 50K Ultra
0 milestones · 20 weeks
Finish a 50K ultramarathon event. Official finisher certificate or results page as proof.
Complete a 100-Mile Ultra
0 milestones · 52 weeks
Finish a 100-mile ultramarathon event. Official finisher buckle photo and results page as proof.
Deadlift 1.5× Your Bodyweight
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Execute a conventional deadlift of 1.5× your bodyweight. Video proof required with weight plates visible.
Deadlift 2.5× Your Bodyweight
0 milestones · 52 weeks
Execute a conventional deadlift of 2.5× your bodyweight. Video proof required — elite-level milestone.
Squat 1.5× Your Bodyweight
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Execute a back squat of 1.5× your bodyweight to full depth. Video proof required.
Bench Press Your Bodyweight
0 milestones · 14 weeks
Execute a bench press of 1× your bodyweight. Video proof required with spotter visible.
Total 4× Bodyweight (Powerlifting)
0 milestones · 52 weeks
Achieve a combined squat + bench + deadlift total of 4× bodyweight at a sanctioned meet. Official meet results as proof.
Earn First Olympic Weightlifting Total
0 milestones · 16 weeks
Compete in an Olympic weightlifting event, successfully lift in both snatch and clean & jerk, and earn an official total.
Complete a Full Ironman
0 milestones · 40 weeks
Finish a 140.6-mile triathlon (3.8km swim, 180km bike, 42.2km run). Official finish time and medal photo as proof.
Earn Yellow Belt (Any Martial Art)
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Earn your first graded belt in any martial art from a certified instructor. Photo of belt ceremony as proof.
Earn BJJ Brown Belt
0 milestones · 208 weeks
Train consistently and earn a brown belt in Brazilian jiu-jitsu from your coach. Photo proof required.
Reach USTA 3.5 Tennis Rating
0 milestones · 24 weeks
Achieve and maintain a USTA 3.5 dynamic rating — documented through USTA match play results.
Reach USTA 4.0 Tennis Rating
0 milestones · 36 weeks
Achieve and maintain a USTA 4.0 dynamic rating — documented through USTA match play results.
Reach USTA 4.5 Tennis Rating
0 milestones · 52 weeks
Achieve and maintain a USTA 4.5 dynamic rating — competitive club and tournament level.
Win a Competitive Tennis Tournament
0 milestones · 24 weeks
Win a first, second, or third place in a sanctioned USTA or club tennis tournament — official bracket result as proof.
Reach Club Squash A-Grade
0 milestones · 52 weeks
Achieve A-grade status at your club squash league. Official club grading confirmation as proof.
Score First Goal in Competitive Football
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Score a goal in an organised competitive football (soccer) match. Match report or video clip as proof.
Complete First Open Water Swim (1km)
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Swim 1km in open water (lake, sea, or river) in an organised event or with a safety kayak. GPS route or event result as proof.
Complete 5km Open Water Swim
0 milestones · 20 weeks
Swim 5km in open water in an organised event. Official result or GPS route with safety escort as proof.
Complete an English Channel Relay
0 milestones · 52 weeks
Swim a leg of an official English Channel relay crossing under Channel Swimming Association rules. Official pilot log as proof.
Earn RYA Day Skipper Qualification
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Complete the RYA Day Skipper practical course and earn the qualification. Certificate as proof.
Complete First Obstacle Course Race
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Complete a Spartan Race, Tough Mudder, or equivalent obstacle course race. Finisher medal photo and results page as proof.
Complete Murph (Strict, Weighted Vest)
0 milestones · 20 weeks
Complete the Murph workout (1-mile run, 100 pull-ups, 200 push-ups, 300 squats, 1-mile run) wearing a 20lb vest with no partitioning. Video proof.
Achieve Sub-7 Minute Mile
0 milestones · 14 weeks
Run a measured mile in under 7 minutes on a certified track or GPS course. GPS data proof required.
Reach 2000 Elo in Chess
0 milestones · 52 weeks
Achieve and maintain a 2000 Elo rating on Chess.com or Lichess — expert level. Profile screenshot or tournament rating as proof.
Win a Rated Tournament Chess Game
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Win at least one game in an official FIDE-rated or national-federation-rated chess tournament. Tournament crosstable as proof.
Teach a Free Public Workshop
3 milestones · 6 weeks
Plan, promote, and deliver a free public workshop with real attendees. Proof: recording or attendee sign-in sheet plus participant feedback.
Tutor Students from Underserved Communities
3 milestones · 20 weeks
Complete 20 structured tutoring sessions with students from underserved communities through an organised programme. Proof: 20 session logs plus coordinator sign-off.
Create a Free Learning Curriculum
3 milestones · 10 weeks
Design, publish, and distribute a free structured learning curriculum used by at least 10 people. Proof: published curriculum link plus usage evidence.
Organise a Community Event (50+ Attendees)
3 milestones · 10 weeks
Plan and execute a community event with 50 or more verified attendees. Proof: photo evidence, attendance count, and a brief on what was achieved.
Lead a Volunteer Team for 3 Months
3 milestones · 14 weeks
Recruit, coordinate, and lead a volunteer team for at least 3 months producing measurable outcomes. Proof: team roster plus outcomes delivered.
Complete a Civic Improvement Project
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Identify a civic problem, organise a response, and deliver a measurable improvement. Proof: before/after documentation plus impact summary.
Raise Funds for a Verified Cause
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Run a fundraising campaign for a registered charitable cause and hit your target. Proof: campaign page link plus amount raised.
Complete a Measurable Environmental Action
3 milestones · 10 weeks
Lead or organise an environmental action with documented, quantified impact — trees planted, waste removed, land restored. Proof: before/after documentation and impact numbers.
Support Peers Through a Mental Health Awareness Initiative
3 milestones · 10 weeks
Design and run a structured, safe peer mental health awareness initiative. Proof: initiative documentation and reach (number of people meaningfully engaged).
Coach Someone for Free for One Year
3 milestones · 52 weeks
Provide structured pro-bono coaching to an individual for 12 months. Proof: monthly session logs plus a year-end coachee reflection.
Make 10 Meaningful Open-Source Contributions
3 milestones · 16 weeks
Have at least 10 meaningful contributions (code, docs, or issues resolved) merged into open-source repositories. Proof: 10 merged PR or accepted contribution links.
Speak at 5 Free Community Events
3 milestones · 20 weeks
Deliver talks at 5 free community events — meetups, schools, civic gatherings — sharing your expertise. Proof: event links, recordings, or photos for each.
Reach C1 (Advanced) in a Language
3 milestones · 52 weeks
Reach C1 advanced proficiency in your target language. At this level you can understand a wide range of demanding texts and speak fluently without obvious searching for expressions. Proof requires a recorded unscripted conversation with a native speaker — no app scores accepted.
Pass a Formal Language Proficiency Exam
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Pass an internationally recognised language proficiency exam (DELF, DALF, JLPT, HSK, TOPIK, IELTS, DELE, or equivalent). Proof is the official result document — not a practice test score.
Read 12 Books in a Year
3 milestones · 52 weeks
Read one book per month for 12 consecutive months. Fiction, non-fiction, and academic texts all count. Proof is a written reflection per book demonstrating real engagement with the content — not a summary.
Complete a Rigorous Online Course
3 milestones · 12 weeks
Complete a full structured online course from a recognised institution (MIT OCW, Coursera, edX, or equivalent) in a subject outside your normal curriculum. Proof is the completion certificate plus a 500-word reflection on what changed in your thinking.
Deliver 10 Public Talks
3 milestones · 52 weeks
Deliver 10 recorded public talks — school debates, community presentations, conference lightning talks, or recorded video essays. Proof for each talk is a recording or event link accessible to a verifier.
Pass a Professional Certification Exam
3 milestones · 16 weeks
Pass any recognised professional certification exam in your chosen domain — technology, finance, project management, HR, or another field. Proof is the official certificate or verifiable digital badge.
Grow a Business to $10,000 MRR
3 milestones · 52 weeks
Scale your business to $10,000 in Monthly Recurring Revenue from real paying customers. Proof at every milestone requires financial evidence — bank statements or payment processor screenshots. No self-reported numbers.
Read 20 Books
3 milestones · 36 weeks
Read 20 books of any length or genre — fiction, non-fiction, or picture books. A parent or teacher sign-off on each finished book counts as proof. The goal is sustained reading, not book reports.
Master the Times Tables
2 milestones · 6 weeks
Memorise and recall all multiplication tables from 1 to 12. A parent or teacher administers a timed quiz (2 minutes, all 144 facts) and confirms fluency. Photo of a completed quiz sheet is accepted proof.
Complete a Science Project
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Design and carry out a hands-on experiment — growing plants, testing materials, observing animals, or anything you're curious about. Share what you predicted, what happened, and what surprised you. A photo of the project is enough proof — no formal report required.
Create Your First Program with Scratch
2 milestones · 6 weeks
Build an interactive project using Scratch (scratch.mit.edu) — a game, animation, or story where something moves or responds to a click. Share the public project URL as proof. Scratch is free, browser-based, and built for ages 8 and up.
Write Your First Story
2 milestones · 4 weeks
Write a story with a beginning, middle, and end — at least one page. Drawings are welcome. A photo of the finished handwritten story, or a typed document shared with your teacher, counts as proof.
Present to Your Class
2 milestones · 4 weeks
Give a short presentation, show-and-tell, or speech in front of your class or a group. A teacher confirmation or a short video clip counts as proof. The goal is speaking in front of others — not a polished performance.
Help in Your Community
2 milestones · 4 weeks
Do something meaningful for others — collecting food, helping a neighbour, organising a donation drive, or volunteering at a school event. A parent or teacher note describing what you did and who it helped counts as proof.
Build Your First Website
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Build a real webpage using HTML and CSS and publish it at a live URL. It can be a personal page, a fan site, or a project showcase — what matters is that you made it and someone else can load it in a browser. Free hosting on GitHub Pages or Netlify works perfectly.
Build Something Physical
3 milestones · 10 weeks
Design and build a physical object or device — a 3D printed model in Tinkercad, an LED circuit, a woodworking project, a cardboard automaton, or anything you made with your hands and tools. A photo or short video of the finished project is proof. What you build and the tools you use are entirely your choice.
Write a Short Story
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Write a complete short story of at least 1,000 words with a real beginning, middle, and end. It can be any genre — adventure, mystery, sci-fi, or something entirely your own. Share it with your teacher, post it on a class blog, or submit it to a school anthology. A document link or file attachment is proof.
Write Your First Research Report
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Pick a topic that genuinely interests you and write a 3–5 page research report with at least 3 cited sources. The topic is entirely your choice. A teacher or parent confirms the report is complete and sources are cited. A document link or file is accepted proof.
Take On a Leadership Role
2 milestones · 12 weeks
Step into a formal leadership role chosen by peers or appointed by adults — class representative, club officer, team captain, student council member, or committee chair. You hold real responsibility for others, not just yourself. A teacher or advisor confirms the role and your term.
Peer Tutor Your Classmates
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Help at least 2 classmates consistently over 6 weeks or more — one-on-one or in a small group. You have no authority to make them show up; they come back because the sessions are useful. Keep a session log and get a short note from your teacher, tutor coordinator, or tutee confirming the sessions happened and helped. Proof is the log plus the attestation.
Set and Achieve a Personal Fitness Goal
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Pick one specific, measurable physical goal — run 2km without stopping, do 20 push-ups in a row, swim 200m, hold a plank for 2 minutes, or anything you choose. Write down your goal and where you're starting from. Train for 8 weeks. Document the moment you hit it. Proof is a written goal at the start plus a video, timed result, or coach confirmation when you achieve it.
Lead a Community Project
3 milestones · 16 weeks
Design and run a project that addresses a real need in your school or local community — something that didn't exist before you started it. You must involve at least 5 other people who choose to help voluntarily (no one has to be there). The project must run for at least 8 weeks and produce a visible result: a physical change, a programme that continues after you're done, or a documented impact that others can confirm. Proof: a written project plan at the start, photo or video evidence of the outcome, and at least 3 short written statements from participants or beneficiaries describing what changed.
Make an Art Portfolio
3 milestones · 10 weeks
Create 5 or more original pieces of visual art in any medium — drawing, painting, digital art, photography, collage, or mixed media — and publish them together in one place. Use Canva (free), Google Slides (free), a physical portfolio you photograph, or any public platform. The goal is to make something and show it. Proof: a link to your published portfolio or a photo of the physical version.
Publish Your First Creative Work
3 milestones · 6 weeks
Finish one creative project and make it public — a story on a free blog (WordPress, Medium, Wattpad), a drawing or photo on any platform, a song on SoundCloud, a video on YouTube, or a game on itch.io. The work must be findable by someone who doesn't already know you. Proof: a public URL to the published work. Quality is not the standard — completing and sharing is.
Earn Your First Income
3 milestones · 4 weeks
Make money through your own effort — babysitting, lawn mowing, selling something you made, walking dogs, a one-time service, or a part-time job. Any legitimate way of earning counts. Proof is a payment record (Venmo screenshot, cash receipt, pay stub, or bank deposit) plus a short account of how you earned it and what you learned about the exchange.
Make Your First Budget
3 milestones · 5 weeks
Track every dollar you spend for one full month. Use a spreadsheet (Google Sheets is free), a notebook, or any budgeting app. List every income source — including pocket money, gifts, and any earnings — and every expense. At the end of the month, look at the numbers honestly and write down one thing you'd change. Proof is your completed income/expense record plus a short reflection.
Save Up for Something You Want
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Pick a specific savings goal — an item, an experience, or a target amount — write it down before you start, and track your progress every week for at least 6 weeks until you hit it. The goal must be real and achievable with your actual income or pocket money. Proof is your written goal at the start, a weekly savings tracker, and evidence you reached the target (bank screenshot, purchase receipt, or a photo of what you saved for).
Build Your First Game in Python
3 milestones · 8 weeks
Write a game in Python that someone else can actually play — a quiz, a word game, a simple platformer, or anything with a win condition. Use Pygame Zero (free, beginner-friendly) or follow the CS50 Games course (free from Harvard). Proof is a video of the game running or a link to the code with clear run instructions — the game must work, not just compile.
Lead an Organisational Change Project
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Design and execute a real organisational change initiative — not a proposal — documenting the change rationale, stakeholder engagement approach, resistance encountered and how it was addressed, and measuring a defined outcome at least 90 days after implementation. The change must be real: something that materially altered how people work at a real organisation. Proof requires at least one organisational stakeholder — a manager, colleague, or direct report affected by the change — to confirm that the documented change was implemented and that the described outcomes are accurate.
Deliver an Executive-Level Business Presentation
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Deliver a substantive business presentation — minimum 20 minutes — to a live audience of at least three people with relevant seniority or domain expertise, and handle unscripted substantive questions in real time. This is not a mock presentation to peers: the verifiers must have the expertise to ask questions that would genuinely challenge an underprepared presenter. Proof is a recording of the full presentation plus a Q&A log documenting each substantive challenge raised and the response given, with at least one verifier confirming the questions were genuine and the presenter's handling was adequate.
Complete a Pro Bono Consulting Engagement
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Deliver a real consulting engagement to a real client — either pro bono or as a simulation with a real organisation as the subject — producing a substantive deliverable (strategy document, market analysis, operational diagnostic, financial model) and receiving formal sign-off from the client or engagement supervisor on its quality. The engagement must involve genuine back-and-forth with the client: at least one instance where the client's reality diverged from initial assumptions and the deliverable was revised in response. Proof is the deliverable, the client sign-off, and a reflection documenting the specific revision and what the engagement revealed about the gap between desk analysis and organisational reality.
Microeconomic Market Analysis
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Produce a microeconomic analysis of a real, named market using real data (ONS, BLS, industry databases, or equivalent). Analyse supply and demand dynamics, price mechanisms, and market structure; document your data sources and methodology throughout. Proof is the written analysis plus a documented Q&A session with an economics graduate or practitioner who challenges at least one of your data choices or core assumptions — your written response to their challenge is a required part of the proof artifact. 'I stand by my choice' is not a response — the response must engage with the substance of the challenge.
Macroeconomic Policy Analysis
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Analyse a real central bank decision or fiscal policy event — named, dateable, and documented in official sources. Your analysis covers the policy rationale, the economic trade-offs involved, and the likely distributional effects, drawing on real economic data throughout. Proof is the written analysis plus a documented challenge session with an economist or policy practitioner who poses the question: 'What would have happened if the opposite policy were chosen?' Your written response to this counterfactual — engaging with the evidence — is required as part of the proof.
Econometric Analysis with Real Data
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Build and run an econometric model (regression or equivalent) on a real, named publicly available dataset (World Bank, FRED, ONS, or equivalent). Document your dataset source, model specification, results, and a limitations section naming the main threats to validity. Proof is your analysis output plus a methodology challenge session with a statistics or economics academic who questions at least one model assumption or specification choice — your written response addressing their challenge in full is a required part of the proof. The model code or methodology must be reproducible.
Policy Cost-Benefit Analysis
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Conduct a cost-benefit analysis for a real government, NGO, or institutional decision — named and documentable, not a hypothetical scenario. Document your assumptions, discount rate choice, sensitivity analysis, and conclusions. Proof is the CBA document plus a written review by an economist or policy practitioner who challenges at least one benefit categorisation, cost estimate, or key assumption — your written response to their critique, engaging with each specific point raised, is a required part of the proof artifact.
Economic Argument Construction and Defence
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Construct a structured written argument (minimum 1,000 words) on a contested economic question — a real policy debate or empirical dispute, not a textbook exercise. State your position, defend it with evidence, and acknowledge the strongest counterargument. The argument alone is not sufficient proof. Proof requires a documented adversarial exchange: an economist or economics academic poses at least three substantive challenges to your reasoning or evidence; your responses to each challenge are recorded and submitted alongside the original argument. The exchange is a required part of the proof for this outcome.
Legal Case Analysis and Reasoning
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Analyse a real published legal case using IRAC (Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion) or an equivalent structured legal reasoning method. Cite actual primary legal sources throughout (statutes, case precedents). Proof is the case brief plus a documented challenge from a qualified lawyer or law academic who presents at least two alternative legal interpretations or specific weaknesses in your IRAC application — your written response to each challenge is required as part of the proof. 'I disagree' without engagement is not a response.
Legal Research Memorandum
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Write a real legal research memo on a specific, named legal question. Document your research methodology (which databases were searched, what search terms were used, and which jurisdictions were covered), cite primary sources (statutes, cases, regulations) throughout, and reach a clear conclusion. Proof is the memo plus a challenge from a qualified lawyer or law academic who identifies one source or argument the memo missed — your written analysis of how that source or argument affects your conclusion is a required part of the proof.
Contract Drafting and Critical Review
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Draft or conduct a detailed legal review of a real contract — employment, service, partnership, or equivalent. Identify key provisions, flag risks, and note missing or poorly drafted clauses. Proof is the draft or marked-up contract plus a documented review by a qualified lawyer who identifies at least one clause risk you missed — your proposed corrective draft with legal rationale explaining the fix is a required part of the proof. The review must be from someone qualified to practise law in a relevant jurisdiction.
Moot Court Oral Argument
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Prepare and deliver a structured oral argument in a moot court or equivalent adversarial advocacy setting. Acceptable settings include: a formal law school moot, a university law society moot, or a structured oral argument conducted before a qualified lawyer or law academic who observes and assesses the argument. Access to a formal law school is NOT required — a qualified observer conducting a structured oral argument session fulfils the requirement. You must research both sides of the legal question. Proof is the assessor's written evaluation, or a recording of the session with the qualified observer's written attestation confirming the argument was prepared and delivered under real adversarial conditions.
Legal Essay with Oral Defence
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Write a substantive legal essay (minimum 1,500 words) on a contested legal question, with full citation of primary sources and a clearly defended position. The essay alone is not sufficient proof. Proof requires a documented oral or written defence: a qualified lawyer or law academic challenges your central argument; your responses are recorded or documented in writing and submitted alongside the essay. The defence is not optional — it is the proof standard for this outcome. A documented written challenge-and-response exchange is acceptable where an oral session is not possible.
Comparative Political System Analysis
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Produce a comparative analysis of two real political systems on a specific, named dimension (federalism, electoral system design, judicial independence, or equivalent). Draw on primary sources throughout (constitutions, official statistics, voting records, parliamentary documents). Proof is the written analysis plus a documented review by a political science academic or practitioner who challenges your comparative framework — specifically, what the chosen dimension misses or distorts about the systems being compared. Your written response addressing their critique is a required part of the proof.
Policy Analysis and Recommendation
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Produce a real policy brief addressed to a named decision-maker (a specific government department, parliamentary committee, or named NGO) on a real, current policy question. Include: a problem statement with evidence, at least two policy options with documented trade-offs and political feasibility assessment, and a concrete recommendation. Proof is the policy brief plus a documented expert challenge session with a policy practitioner or political scientist who questions the feasibility of your recommended option — your written summary of the challenge and your response to it are required as part of the proof.
Electoral and Voting Systems Analysis
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Conduct a real electoral data analysis using publicly available official election data from a named electoral authority. Analyse a specific named election or electoral system and draw a concrete, evidence-based conclusion about voting behaviour or system effects. Document your methodology and data sources. Proof is the analysis plus a Q&A with a political scientist or quantitative analyst who challenges your interpretation — specifically, what alternative explanations exist for the patterns you found. Your written response is a required part of the proof.
International Relations Case Study
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Analyse a real diplomatic, conflict, or cooperation case using a specific named IR theory (realism, liberalism, constructivism, or equivalent). Draw on primary sources throughout (UN documents, treaty texts, official government statements). Proof is the case study plus a Q&A with an IR practitioner or someone with a postgraduate IR qualification who challenges your theoretical framing — specifically, what a different IR theory would conclude about the same case and why. Your written response engaging with that challenge is a required part of the proof.
Political Argument Construction and Defence
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Construct a structured written argument (minimum 1,000 words) on a contested political question — a real policy debate or institutional design issue, not a textbook scenario. State and defend a position with evidence; acknowledge and respond to the strongest objection. Proof is the argument plus a documented adversarial exchange: your interlocutor (a political scientist, policy practitioner, or equivalent) poses at least three specific objections to your reasoning; your written responses to each are recorded and submitted alongside the original argument. The exchange — not the essay alone — is the proof standard for this outcome.
Psychological Research Design
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Produce a complete real research proposal: a specific research question, your study design and its rationale (why this design over alternatives), participant sampling justification, an ethics consideration checklist documenting participant risk assessment and consent procedure for any human participants, and a proposed analysis plan. This is a research-track outcome — not a clinical assessment. Proof is the research proposal plus a documented methodology challenge from a psychology academic or researcher who questions at least one design choice and the threats to validity it creates — your written response is a required part of the proof.
Behavioural Data Collection and Analysis
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Conduct a real behavioural study — observational, survey, or controlled experiment — with documented methodology (participant recruitment, data collection protocol, analysis method) and real results. Where human participants are involved, document your consent procedure. This is a research-track outcome: participants are research volunteers in a non-clinical context, not clients or patients, and no individual clinical assessment of wellbeing takes place. Proof is your methodology record, anonymised data summary, and analysis plus a documented Q&A with a psychologist or behavioural researcher who challenges your interpretation of the findings and asks what alternative explanations exist. Your written response is a required part of the proof.
Psychological Assessment Application
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Apply a validated psychological assessment instrument (such as Big Five personality inventory, a standardised cognitive measure, or equivalent validated tool) to a real participant group in a supervised, non-clinical research setting. This is NOT a clinical assessment — participants are research volunteers in a non-therapeutic context, and no individual clinical interpretation or diagnosis is produced. Proof is your documented methodology, results summary, and limitations analysis plus a review by a psychology academic or researcher who confirms the instrument was applied appropriately and questions at least one aspect of your group-level interpretation. Their written review and your written response are required parts of the proof.
Applied Psychology Case Analysis
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Produce a real applied psychology case analysis — a workplace team dynamics study, a behaviour change intervention design for a real organisation, a UX research synthesis, or an organisational culture assessment. Use a real organisation (with consent) and real observable data. Apply a named psychological framework throughout (organisational behaviour, I/O psychology, behaviour change theory, or equivalent). Proof is the case analysis plus a documented review by a practitioner with industrial-organisational, UX research, or applied psychology experience who challenges your methodology or conclusions and identifies at least one alternative interpretation. Their challenge and your written response are required parts of the proof.
Psychology Research Report with Peer Review
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Write a complete psychology research report in IMRaD format (Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion) and submit it to a structured peer review process — a university journal, a conference submission system, or a structured departmental peer review with at least two independent reviewers. Proof is the submitted report, the documented reviewer feedback received, and your written revision response explaining what you changed and why (or why you disagreed with a specific critique). At least one substantive methodological comment must be addressed in your revision. The peer review system is the adversarial verification: independent reviewers who challenge your methodology are the required assessors.
Quantitative Social Research
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Conduct a real survey study (minimum 40 respondents) or secondary data analysis using a named real dataset (BHPS, GSS, ANES, NLSY, or equivalent). Document your methodology, produce your analysis output (SPSS, R, Stata, or Python), and write a sociologically-framed interpretation of your results. Proof is your methodology record, analysis output, and written interpretation plus a documented review by a sociologist or social statistician who challenges your operationalisation of key variables — specifically, how your concepts were measured and whether the chosen dataset is representative for your question. Your written response is a required part of the proof.
Social Theory Application
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Apply a specific named social theory — Bourdieu's field theory, Goffman's dramaturgy, Foucault's discourse analysis, intersectionality framework, or equivalent — to a real contemporary social phenomenon (not a textbook example). Name the theory, cite primary or secondary theoretical sources, and demonstrate step-by-step application to the phenomenon. Proof is the written analysis plus a documented challenge from a sociologist or social theory academic who questions whether the theory is being applied correctly and whether a different framework would yield a better or different explanation. Your written response addressing both challenges is a required part of the proof.
Social Policy Impact Analysis
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Analyse the differential impact of a real, named social policy (named legislation, government programme, or institutional intervention) on a specific named population. Draw on primary evidence (surveys, interview data) or secondary evidence (published research, official statistics). Identify what impacts are present, what impacts are absent from the official account, and whose experience is underrepresented. Proof is the analysis plus a documented review by a social policy academic or practitioner who challenges your selection of impact metrics — specifically, what your analysis missed and whose perspective is absent. Your written response addressing their critique is a required part of the proof.
Media Text Critical Analysis
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Produce a formal critical analysis of a specific named media text — a news article, broadcast segment, advertising campaign, or social media phenomenon (named and dateable). Apply a named theoretical framework throughout: framing analysis, semiotics, discourse analysis, encoding/decoding, or equivalent. Cite the theoretical framework's primary or key secondary sources. Proof is the written analysis plus a documented review by a media studies or communications academic who challenges your framework application — specifically, whether you are applying the framework correctly and what a different framework would reveal that yours misses. Your written response to both challenges is a required part of the proof.
Journalism Investigation and Editorial Review
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Produce a real investigative piece on a real, named story — documented facts, verified sources, and a clear public interest angle. Document your source methodology (how sources were found, contacted, and verified) and your fact-checking process. Publication is NOT required — the proof is the editorial process: a working journalist or editor with at least three years of experience reviews your piece, provides documented feedback (at least one specific sourcing issue and one editorial decision they would make differently), and you produce a revision with a written response to their feedback. The editorial review, your revision, and your written response to their feedback are the proof artifacts. A rigorous editorial process demonstrates journalism skill more reliably than publication, which depends on editorial decisions outside your control.
Professional Media Production
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Produce a complete media project at a professional standard in a format of your choice: a podcast series (minimum 3 episodes, minimum 15 minutes total), a documentary short (minimum 5 minutes, edited), or a news package (minimum 2 minutes, broadcast-ready). Document your production process (scripts, production notes, edit log). Proof is the completed production plus a documented review by a media practitioner — journalist, broadcaster, or podcast producer — who assesses it against the professional standard for the format and identifies at least two specific production decisions where professional practice would differ from your choices. Their feedback and your written response with rationale are required parts of the proof.
Digital Media and Audience Analysis
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Conduct a real audience or platform data analysis using actual platform analytics (with appropriate consent) or a real publicly available dataset (Ofcom, Nielsen, Pew Research, or equivalent). Document your methodology, analysis output, and conclusions about audience behaviour or platform dynamics. Proof is the analysis plus a documented review by a media practitioner or communications researcher who challenges your interpretation — specifically, what alternative explanations exist for the behaviour patterns you found and whether your sample or dataset is representative for the question you are answering. Your written response is a required part of the proof.
Formal Argument Reconstruction
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Reconstruct a real philosophical argument from a named primary text into standard logical form: premises explicitly numbered, logical structure diagrammed, validity assessed, and at least one potential objection identified and answered. The primary text and the specific argument being reconstructed must both be named and cited. Proof is your reconstruction plus a challenge from a philosophy academic or logician who confirms the accuracy of your reconstruction and asks you to identify a second argument structure in the same text that you did not include — whether you find it and your analysis of its relationship to the first argument are part of the proof.
Original Philosophical Argument with Socratic Defence
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Construct an original philosophical argument (minimum 1,000 words) on a real contested philosophical question. State a clear thesis, defend it with premises and supporting reasoning, acknowledge the strongest objection, and respond to it. The Socratic dialogue is a REQUIRED component of this outcome — not optional. A qualified philosopher, logician, or philosophy academic poses at least four substantive challenges to your argument; your responses are recorded or documented in writing. The full exchange — both the challenges and your responses — is submitted alongside the original argument. This outcome cannot be completed without a real qualified interlocutor: the dialogue is the proof, not a supplement to it. The essay alone is not sufficient.
Applied Ethics Case Analysis
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Analyse a real ethical dilemma — bioethics, AI ethics, business ethics, environmental ethics, or political philosophy — using at least two competing ethical frameworks (consequentialism, deontology, virtue ethics, contractualism, or equivalent). Name each framework, cite primary or secondary philosophical sources, and demonstrate what each framework concludes about the dilemma and why they conflict. Proof is the written analysis plus a documented review by a philosophy academic or applied ethics practitioner who challenges your framework application — specifically, whether each framework is being applied correctly and whether you have identified the genuine point of ethical conflict. Their written questions and your written responses are required parts of the proof.
Logic and Critical Reasoning Applied
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Identify and formally document logical fallacies or reasoning errors in a real public argument — a named political speech, named media editorial, named policy document, or named public figure's published statement (named and dateable). For each reasoning error identified: name the fallacy or error type, quote the specific passage from the text, and explain why that passage commits the error and what a valid version of the argument would look like. Proof is your analysis plus a documented challenge from a logician or philosophy academic who contests at least one of your identifications — specifically, whether it is genuinely a fallacy or a rhetorical move that can be reconstructed as a valid argument. Your written defence of your classification is a required part of the proof.
Software Requirements Specification
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Produce a Software Requirements Specification (SRS) for a real or realistic software system using IEEE 830 or an equivalent structured format. The SRS must cover: functional requirements (at least 15 numbered, testable requirements with input, output, and boundary conditions), non-functional requirements (performance, security, availability, maintainability — each with a measurable acceptance criterion), assumptions and constraints documented explicitly, and use-case or user-story mapping to each requirement. The system described must be real or realistic enough that the requirements can be verified against it. Proof artifacts: the SRS document (design artifact) and a review record in which a software engineer challenges at least 3 requirements for completeness or consistency — with your written responses (documentation artifact). Accessible: no special software required — the SRS is a document artifact. Verification: a software engineer or systems architect who challenges 'this requirement is ambiguous — how would you test it?' for at least 3 requirements before endorsing. Generic fictional systems are not accepted; the reviewer must be able to ask grounding questions about real constraints.
Software Architecture Design Document
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Produce a software architecture document for a real or realistic system covering: a component diagram showing at least 4 logical components with named interfaces, an interface specification for each inter-component communication (message format, protocol, error handling), documented architectural decisions with at least 3 alternatives considered per major decision and explicit trade-off rationale, and a quality attribute analysis (how the architecture addresses 2 chosen quality attributes such as scalability, fault tolerance, or security). Diagrams produced using draw.io (free), Lucidchart free tier, or PlantUML (free, text-based). Proof artifacts: the architecture document with diagrams (design artifact) and a documented trade-off rationale for the primary architectural decisions (documentation artifact). Accessible: draw.io and PlantUML are fully free; no hardware or software license required. Verification: a senior software engineer or architect challenges 'why did you choose this component boundary?' and 'what breaks first when load doubles?' — you must answer in terms of the specific system, not general principles.
Software Test Plan and Coverage Analysis
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Produce a software test plan and coverage analysis for a real software system (your own or an open-source system). The test plan must include: a testing scope statement identifying what is in and out of scope with rationale, a test strategy for at least 3 test levels (unit, integration, system), documented test cases for at least 20 representative scenarios with expected results, risk-based test prioritisation explaining why higher-risk areas receive more coverage, and a coverage analysis showing which code paths, branches, or requirements are covered by the documented tests. Tools: pytest-cov, coverage.py, JaCoCo, or equivalent (all free). Proof artifacts: the test plan document (design artifact) and the coverage report with gap analysis (analysis artifact). Accessible: all coverage measurement tools are free and open-source. Verification: a software engineer reviews the coverage gap analysis — 'these untested paths represent what risk?' — and the test case rationale for at least 5 cases.
Deployment Plan and Operations Runbook
0 milestones · 5 weeks
Produce a deployment plan and operations runbook for a real software system covering: a step-by-step deployment procedure with pre-conditions, execution steps, and post-deployment verification for at least one environment (staging or production), a rollback procedure with decision criteria for when to roll back, an incident response procedure for the 3 most likely failure modes with documented detection, diagnosis, and recovery steps, and an on-call guide documenting the operational state of the system (what healthy looks like, what alerts fire under what conditions). Preferred proof: the runbook for a live system you operate. Accessible alternative: a runbook for a real open-source system you have deployed locally (Railway free tier, Render free tier, or similar) — documented evidence of actual deployment required, not a hypothetical. Proof artifacts: deployment procedure document (design artifact) and runbook with rollback procedure (documentation artifact). Verification: someone who has operated production systems reviews 'would I be able to bring this system back up from a cold start using this runbook alone?' and 'what happens if the rollback itself fails?'
Engineering Design Review
0 milestones · 4 weeks
Conduct a formal engineering design review of a real software design — either as author defending your own design, or as a reviewer leading the review of a peer's design. The review must follow a structured format: design document distributed at least 48 hours before the review, a written review checklist with specific questions prepared in advance, the review session with documented findings (issues, action items, and their severity), and a revision record showing what changed as a result of the review. Preferred proof: a design review in a professional or team context. Accessible alternative: a peer design review conducted with at least 2 qualified reviewers from an open-source project community, a university engineering programme, or a professional network — the design reviewed must be non-trivial (an architectural decision, a data model, or a protocol specification, not a single function). Proof artifacts: the review checklist and findings (analysis artifact) and the revision record documenting what changed and why (documentation artifact). Verification: one of the reviewers confirms the review was substantive — not rubber-stamping — and at least one finding resulted in a real change to the design.
Mechanical CAD Model and Engineering Drawing
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Produce a fully constrained 3D CAD model of a real mechanical component and a 2D engineering drawing to engineering drawing standards. The component must be non-trivial (at least 5 geometric features, not a simple block or cylinder). The engineering drawing must include: all views necessary to fully define the geometry, dimensions with correct GD&T callouts for at least 3 critical features, surface finish specification, material callout with grade/standard (e.g. Al 6061-T6, S275 structural steel), and a title block with part number, revision, scale, and projection standard. Preferred proof: a component designed for a real project (personal, academic, or professional) with physical fabrication evidence (photo of machined or 3D-printed part). Accessible alternative: a CAD model and drawing produced in FreeCAD (free, open-source) or Onshape (free education tier) for a realistic component scenario — no physical fabrication required, but the drawing must be to standard. Proof artifacts: the CAD file and engineering drawing (design artifact) and the material + tolerance specification (documentation artifact). Verification: a mechanical engineer reviews the drawing for standards compliance — 'these tolerances cannot be manufactured — what process were you specifying for?' and 'what does this GD&T callout mean in inspection terms?'
Mechanical Structural Analysis
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Perform structural analysis of a real mechanical component or assembly under defined loading conditions, documenting all assumptions, methodology, and results. The analysis must specify: the loading conditions (forces, moments, pressures) with justification for the values chosen, material properties with source reference, a documented mesh or calculation methodology showing how the problem was discretised or simplified, safety factor calculation with reference to the applicable standard (e.g. ASME, BS, or EN standard for the application), and a sensitivity analysis testing at least one assumption (what happens if the assumed load increases by 20%). Preferred proof: FEA on a component from a real project using professional software. Accessible alternative: FEA using SimScale free tier (browser-based, no install) or ANSYS Student Edition (free download) for a realistic component scenario, OR a fully documented hand calculation for a statically determinate structure using first principles and free textbook references. Proof artifacts: the analysis inputs and results (analysis artifact) and the documented methodology with assumptions (documentation artifact). Verification: a mechanical or structural engineer reviews the methodology — 'your mesh is coarser near this stress concentration; what effect does that have on your result?' — and the safety factor rationale.
Mechanism Design and Kinematic Analysis
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Design a mechanism for a specific function and perform a complete kinematic analysis covering: a kinematic diagram showing all links, joints, and degrees of freedom with Gruebler's criterion applied, position analysis (at least 3 positions in the motion cycle), velocity and acceleration analysis for the critical position, force analysis under the specified load, and identification of any design constraints or singularities (positions where the mechanism locks or becomes indeterminate). The mechanism must be non-trivial — at least a 4-bar linkage or equivalent complexity. Preferred proof: a mechanism designed for a real application with physical prototype evidence. Accessible alternative: kinematic analysis of a documented mechanism scenario using FreeCAD's kinematic analysis module or hand calculation with velocity polygon diagrams — equivalent rigor required. Proof artifacts: the kinematic diagram and analysis (design artifact) and the force analysis results with documented methodology (analysis artifact). Verification: a mechanical engineer reviews the kinematic analysis — 'what is the mechanical advantage at this position, and how does it change across the motion cycle?' — requiring you to reason from your own analysis.
Engineering Materials Selection
0 milestones · 5 weeks
Perform a structured materials selection exercise for a specific engineering application, documenting the full selection process from requirements to final recommendation. The exercise must include: translation of functional requirements into material property targets (at least 4 performance indices with calculated values), screening using an Ashby property chart or equivalent to eliminate unsuitable material classes, ranking of at least 5 candidate materials using a weighted decision matrix (criteria weights justified, not arbitrary), a documentation of supporting information searched for each shortlisted material (manufacturer datasheets, standards, published test data), and a final recommendation with an explicit cost-vs-performance trade-off discussion. The application must be real or physically grounded — not abstract. Accessible alternative: free Ashby chart resources from open mechanical engineering textbooks (Ashby's Materials Selection in Mechanical Design is in many university open-access repositories); CES EduPack student version is free. Proof artifacts: the decision matrix and screening analysis (analysis artifact) and the materials selection report with recommendation (documentation artifact). Verification: a mechanical engineer or materials specialist challenges the decision matrix weighting — 'if fatigue life was 3× more important than density, would your recommendation change?' — requiring you to defend your criteria priorities.
Mechanical Engineering Design Report
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Produce a complete mechanical engineering design report for a real engineering design problem, integrating requirements, design alternatives, analysis, and final design into a single coherent document. The report must include: a problem statement with quantified design requirements and constraints, at least 3 design alternatives with documented screening criteria, the selected design with justification referencing analysis results (structural, kinematic, or materials — from earlier outcomes or conducted for this report), a risk assessment identifying the top 3 technical risks with proposed mitigations, and an implementation recommendation. Preferred proof: a real design project report (academic, personal, or professional). Accessible alternative: a design report for a well-specified open engineering challenge (bridge design challenge, FIRST Robotics design brief, or equivalent publicly available problem specification). Proof artifacts: the design alternatives comparison (design artifact), the analysis summary referenced within the report (analysis artifact), and the complete report document (documentation artifact). Verification: a mechanical engineer reviews the design justification — 'your analysis shows margin of X; would you accept this in a real production context?' and 'what is the first thing that will fail in service?' — requiring specific answers from your own design.
Circuit Analysis and Design
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Design a real electronic circuit for a specific purpose and document the design with analysis. The circuit must be non-trivial — at minimum an active circuit with at least one transistor or op-amp stage, or a passive filter with defined frequency response specifications. Required documentation: a complete schematic with all component values and part references, DC operating point analysis showing all node voltages and branch currents, AC analysis or transient simulation demonstrating the circuit meets its specification, component selection rationale for at least 3 key components (with alternatives considered), and a tolerance analysis identifying which component tolerances most affect performance. Preferred proof: a physically built circuit with oscilloscope or multimeter measurements demonstrating the circuit meets specification. Accessible alternative: LTspice simulation (free, Windows and Mac) or Falstad Circuit Simulator (browser-based, no install required) with documented simulation results and methodology. Proof artifacts: the schematic and component selection (design artifact) and the simulation or measurement results (analysis artifact). Verification: an electrical engineer reviews the design — 'what happens to your output voltage if this supply varies by ±10%?' — requiring you to reason from your own circuit analysis.
Digital Logic Design
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Design a digital logic system to implement a defined Boolean function or finite state machine. The system must be non-trivial — at minimum a 4-bit binary counter with enable and reset, an 8-to-1 multiplexer with documented truth table, or an equivalent sequential or combinational circuit. Required documentation: a complete logic diagram or HDL description, a truth table or state transition table, timing analysis identifying critical path and maximum clock frequency (for sequential circuits), and a documented test plan with at least 10 test vectors with expected and actual results. Preferred proof: an FPGA implementation or physical breadboard build with documented test results. Accessible alternative: Logisim-Evolution (free, open-source, runs locally) or EDA Playground (browser-based, supports VHDL and Verilog) with simulation waveform output. Proof artifacts: the logic diagram or HDL description (design artifact) and the truth table and test results (analysis artifact). Verification: a digital electronics engineer reviews the timing analysis — 'what is your setup time margin at this clock frequency, and what happens if it is violated?' — requiring specific reasoning from your own design.
Power Systems Analysis
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Perform a power systems analysis for a defined electrical network — either a real distribution network (using public utility data) or a documented study network. The analysis must cover: a single-line diagram of the network with all bus voltages, line impedances, and load specifications, a load flow analysis calculating real and reactive power flows on all branches and bus voltages under normal operating conditions, a fault analysis calculating fault current for at least one three-phase bolted fault at a specified bus, and a protection coordination analysis identifying whether the existing protection devices (or proposed devices) will correctly isolate the fault. Preferred proof: analysis of a real utility or industrial distribution network using professional software. Accessible alternative: pandapower (Python library, free and open-source) or OpenDSS (free, from EPRI) applied to a published IEEE test network (IEEE 9-bus, 14-bus, or 30-bus systems — all publicly available). Hand calculation for a simplified 3-bus network is also accepted with documented methodology. Proof artifacts: the single-line diagram and network specification (design artifact) and the load flow and fault analysis results (analysis artifact). Verification: a power systems engineer reviews the fault analysis — 'at this fault level, does the upstream breaker clear within its rated interrupting time?' — requiring you to reason through your own protection coordination.
Signal Processing Application
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Design and implement a signal processing application for a defined signal and task: filter design (low-pass, high-pass, band-pass, or band-stop), spectral analysis, noise reduction, or feature extraction. The application must be non-trivial — a real signal with real noise characteristics, not a textbook ideal case. Required documentation: signal specification (frequency content, noise type, SNR, sample rate), filter or algorithm specification (design method, order, cutoff frequencies, ripple), frequency response plot of the designed filter or algorithm, performance validation comparing before and after processing with quantitative metrics (SNR improvement, stopband attenuation achieved), and a documented sensitivity analysis testing at least one design parameter. Preferred proof: a real signal from physical measurement hardware. Accessible alternative: Python with scipy.signal and numpy (free), MATLAB Online free tier, or GNU Octave (free) applied to publicly available signal datasets (PhysioNet ECG data, NOAA seismic data, urban noise datasets). Proof artifacts: the filter or algorithm specification (design artifact) and the frequency response and performance validation plots (analysis artifact). Verification: an electrical or signal processing engineer reviews the performance analysis — 'this filter removes the noise but what useful signal components are also attenuated?' — requiring you to quantify the trade-off.
Electronics Engineering Design Report
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Produce a complete electronics engineering design report for a real electronics design problem, integrating specifications, design decisions, analysis, and test results into a single coherent document. The report must include: a system specification with quantified performance requirements, a block diagram showing the overall system architecture with signal flow, detailed sub-circuit design documentation with schematic and analysis for each stage, a test plan with documented results demonstrating the system meets its specification (or a clear analysis of where it falls short and why), and a bill of materials with sourcing notes. Preferred proof: a real electronics project report with physical test results. Accessible alternative: a design report with simulation-based validation using LTspice or Falstad — simulation results must demonstrate the design meets its specification under the relevant operating conditions. Proof artifacts: the system schematic and block diagram (design artifact), the per-stage analysis and test results (analysis artifact), and the complete report (documentation artifact). Verification: an electrical engineer reviews the test results — 'your simulation shows this margin; how confident are you this would hold with real component tolerances?' — requiring specific reasoning from your own design and component choices.
Embedded Systems Design
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Design an embedded system for a defined application, documenting the hardware-software interface at the level a firmware developer would need to implement it. The design must include: a hardware schematic showing the microcontroller, relevant peripherals (sensors, actuators, communication interfaces), and power supply with all connections labelled, a pin assignment table mapping hardware signals to microcontroller GPIO pins with electrical characteristics (voltage levels, current drive, pull-up/pull-down requirements), a peripheral interface specification for at least 2 hardware interfaces (I2C, SPI, UART, or ADC) with timing diagrams and documented protocol, a firmware architecture document describing the top-level software structure, interrupt strategy, and memory layout, and a test plan with at least 5 hardware verification tests. Preferred proof: a design for a real embedded hardware project with documented hardware bring-up evidence. Accessible alternative: a complete design in Wokwi (browser-based Arduino/ESP32 simulator, free) with simulation evidence that the hardware interface behaves as specified — Wokwi supports real sensor simulation for common I2C and SPI devices. Proof artifacts: the schematic and pin assignment (design artifact) and the interface timing analysis and test plan (analysis artifact). Verification: an embedded systems or electronics engineer reviews the interface specification — 'this I2C pull-up value seems wrong for this bus capacitance; what does that do to your rise time?' — requiring you to reason from your own interface specification.
Embedded Firmware Implementation
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Implement firmware for a real or simulated embedded system, demonstrating correct hardware control and documented test coverage. The firmware must: control at least 2 distinct hardware peripherals (e.g. read a sensor over I2C and drive an actuator over PWM), handle at least one interrupt-driven event (timer, external interrupt, or serial receive) with documented rationale for the interrupt strategy, implement a defined state machine with at least 4 states and documented transition conditions, and include a documented unit test or hardware-in-the-loop test for each peripheral driver with pass/fail criteria. Code must be readable and documented — variable names, function names, and inline comments must enable a reviewer to follow the logic without running the code. Preferred proof: firmware running on physical hardware (Arduino, ESP32, STM32, or equivalent) with oscilloscope or serial monitor evidence of correct operation. Accessible alternative: firmware implementation and simulation in Wokwi (free, browser-based) with simulation waveform or serial output evidence of correct operation; GitHub public repository with commit history. Proof artifacts: the firmware source code with state machine implementation (design artifact) and the test results or simulation evidence (analysis artifact). Verification: an embedded firmware engineer reviews 'what happens if this interrupt fires while the state machine is in state X?' and 'how does this driver behave if the hardware does not respond to the I2C address?' — requiring you to reason about your own interrupt and error-handling logic.
Civil Structural Analysis and Design
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Perform structural analysis and design of a real or representative civil structural element — a beam, column, slab, or simple frame — to a named structural code (Eurocode 2/3, ACI 318, AS 3600, or equivalent). The analysis must include: load combination calculations to the applicable standard (dead, live, wind, and/or seismic loads as applicable), section design or section adequacy check with documented calculation steps and code clause references for each check, deflection calculation and verification against code limits, a summary table of all utilisation ratios (capacity used / capacity available) for the governing failure modes, and a statement of the critical failure mode. Preferred proof: structural analysis for a real project (academic, professional, or community). Accessible alternative: SkyCiv free tier (browser-based structural analysis software) for a published worked example or standard structural design scenario — input file and output results required, not screenshots alone; OR a complete hand calculation using documented methodology with free reference material (Eurocode and ACI 318 are available through university open access). Proof artifacts: the loading diagram and calculation (analysis artifact) and the design summary with code clause references (documentation artifact). Verification: a structural engineer reviews the governing failure mode — 'you checked flexure but not lateral-torsional buckling; under what conditions would that govern?' — requiring you to reason beyond your submitted calculation.
Site and Geotechnical Assessment
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Produce a geotechnical assessment for a real or documented site, covering the soil and ground conditions relevant to a proposed development or construction activity. The assessment must include: a desk study summary using publicly available geological mapping and ground investigation data for the site (describing the geological setting, likely soil types, and any known geotechnical hazards), estimated soil parameters (bearing capacity, settlement potential, and groundwater conditions) with documented sources and assumptions, a foundation recommendation (type, approximate depth, and sizing approach) with rationale, identification of at least 2 geotechnical risks (e.g. differential settlement, slope instability, liquefaction potential) with recommended investigation or mitigation, and a statement of the additional site investigation required to confirm the desk study assumptions. Preferred proof: a geotechnical assessment for a real development site using real ground investigation data. Accessible alternative: desk study assessment using publicly available geological survey data (British Geological Survey for UK sites — free; USGS for US sites — free; equivalent national survey data available for most countries) for a real publicly documented site — the site must be named and the data source referenced. Proof artifacts: the desk study with geological data (analysis artifact) and the geotechnical assessment report with foundation recommendation (documentation artifact). Verification: a geotechnical engineer reviews the foundation recommendation — 'your assumed bearing capacity of X kPa — what investigation would you need to confirm that number for a real project?' — requiring you to identify the specific test methods and what results you would need.
Infrastructure Design Proposal
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Produce a design proposal for a small-scale civil infrastructure element — a pedestrian footbridge, retaining wall, stormwater drainage system, or equivalent — covering the full engineering design process from requirements to final proposal. The proposal must include: a brief with functional requirements and constraints (span, loading, site conditions, budget order of magnitude), at least 2 design alternatives with documented screening criteria, the selected design with a general arrangement drawing showing principal dimensions and key structural features, at least one supporting engineering calculation demonstrating the design is feasible (structural, hydraulic, or geotechnical as applicable), and a construction sequencing note identifying the key construction stages. Preferred proof: a design proposal prepared for a real project or a structured design challenge (ICE Civil Engineering Challenge, university capstone, or community infrastructure need). Accessible alternative: a design proposal using FreeCAD or LibreCAD (both free) for drawings, with hand calculations or SkyCiv free tier for structural feasibility — the design scenario must be physically grounded (a real site or a published design brief). Proof artifacts: the general arrangement drawing (design artifact) and the supporting calculation (analysis artifact) and the design proposal document (documentation artifact). Verification: a civil engineer reviews the design — 'how does this structure behave during construction before it is complete?' and 'what is the most likely failure mode during a 1-in-100-year flood?' — requiring specific reasoning from your own design.
Sustainable Built Environment Assessment
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Produce a sustainability assessment for a real or documented built environment project — a building, infrastructure scheme, or urban development — evaluating its environmental performance against defined sustainability criteria. The assessment must include: a project description with the sustainability goals and applicable sustainability framework or rating system (BREEAM, LEED, Green Star, or equivalent, even if used as a reference rather than a formal submission), a whole-life carbon analysis covering at least embodied carbon (construction materials) and operational carbon (energy use) with documented calculation methodology and data sources, a materials assessment evaluating at least 3 material choices against environmental criteria (recycled content, embodied energy, and end-of-life recyclability), and a sustainability improvement recommendation identifying the 2 highest-impact actions with estimated carbon savings. Preferred proof: a sustainability assessment for a real project. Accessible alternative: OpenLCA (free, open-source life cycle assessment software) or the RICS Embodied Carbon Calculator (free) applied to a publicly documented building project — data from published Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) and the Inventory of Carbon and Energy (ICE, freely available). Proof artifacts: the whole-life carbon analysis (analysis artifact) and the sustainability assessment report with recommendations (documentation artifact). Verification: an engineer or sustainability specialist reviews — 'your embodied carbon estimate for the concrete structure — have you accounted for the cement replacement ratio, and how sensitive is your total to that assumption?' — requiring you to identify specific data limitations.
Civil Engineering Design Report
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Produce a complete civil engineering design report for a real civil engineering design problem, integrating site assessment, design alternatives, structural or hydraulic analysis, sustainability considerations, and a final design recommendation into a single coherent document. The report must include: a project brief with functional requirements and site constraints, at least 2 design alternatives with documented screening and selection criteria, the selected design with drawings, calculations, and key performance metrics, a construction phasing plan with the critical path identified, and a risk register covering both technical risks (geotechnical, structural, hydraulic) and programme risks. Preferred proof: a report for a real civil engineering project. Accessible alternative: a comprehensive report for a well-specified open design challenge or a publicly documented historical project (post-project analysis of a real built scheme with public drawings available). Proof artifacts: the design drawings (design artifact), the structural or hydraulic analysis (analysis artifact), and the complete report (documentation artifact). Verification: a civil engineer reviews the risk register — 'this geotechnical risk has a high consequence rating — what is your mitigation if the actual soil conditions are worse than your desk study assumed?' — requiring specific reasoning about your own risk analysis.
Mass and Energy Balance
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Perform a complete mass and energy balance for a real or representative chemical process, demonstrating conservation of mass and energy across each unit operation and the overall system. The balance must include: a process description identifying all feed streams, products, by-products, and waste streams, a mass balance table with inlet and outlet flows for all components (in consistent units) demonstrating closure within 1% or documenting any unaccounted losses, an energy balance covering the major energy inputs and outputs (heat of reaction, heat exchange, pump or compressor work) with documented thermodynamic data sources, and a stream summary table presenting all stream compositions, flowrates, temperatures, and pressures. Preferred proof: a mass and energy balance for a real industrial process using professional process simulation software. Accessible alternative: DWSIM (free, open-source chemical process simulator for Windows, Mac, and Linux) — simulation input file submitted alongside the results; OR a complete hand calculation for a simplified 2-3 unit process with documented data sources (NIST Chemistry WebBook for thermodynamic data — free). Proof artifacts: the process flowsheet with stream data (design artifact) and the balance tables demonstrating mass and energy closure (analysis artifact). Verification: a process engineer reviews the energy balance — 'your heat exchanger duty — what driving temperature difference are you assuming, and is that physically achievable given your stream temperatures?' — requiring you to reason from your own streams.
Process Flow Diagram and P&ID
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Produce a Process Flow Diagram (PFD) and a Piping and Instrumentation Diagram (P&ID) for a real or representative chemical or process engineering system to industry standard symbology (ISO 10628 or ANSI/ISA 5.1). The PFD must include: all major process equipment identified with equipment tags, all process streams with stream numbers linked to a stream data table (flowrate, composition, temperature, pressure), the major control loops shown in simplified form, and a process description narrative. The P&ID must include: all equipment with instrument and equipment tag numbers, all instrumentation (sensors, transmitters, indicators, controllers) with ISA function codes, all control loops with instrument tags and signal types, all valves (manual, automatic, check) with valve tags, and line specifications (pipe class, insulation, heat tracing where applicable). Preferred proof: a real PFD and P&ID from a project. Accessible alternative: DWSIM (which includes a PFD drawing environment and equipment library) for the PFD; for the P&ID, draw.io with ISA symbol libraries (free, available as community add-ons) or Lucidchart free tier with P&ID shapes. Proof artifacts: the PFD with stream data table (design artifact) and the P&ID with complete instrument and line annotations (documentation artifact). Verification: a process engineer reviews 'this high-pressure steam line — what line class would you specify, and where is your pressure relief?' — requiring specific reasoning from your own P&ID.
Process Safety Analysis (HAZOP)
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Conduct a Hazard and Operability (HAZOP) analysis for a real or representative process section, applying the HAZOP methodology systematically to identify potential deviations, their causes, consequences, and safeguards. The analysis must cover: at least 2 process nodes (defined sections of the P&ID) with all relevant guide words applied to each parameter (flow, temperature, pressure, composition, level), a completed HAZOP worksheet for each node (deviation, cause, consequence, severity/likelihood rating, existing safeguards, and recommendations), identification of at least 3 significant hazard scenarios with unacceptable risk that require additional safeguards, and a safeguard recommendation table. The analysis must be based on a real or realistic P&ID — not a hypothetical system described in prose. Preferred proof: a HAZOP study conducted as part of a real project safety review. Accessible alternative: HAZOP of a publicly documented process (many published process engineering case studies include simplified P&IDs suitable for HAZOP exercises; IChemE publishes free guidance with example systems). The HAZOP methodology is fully documented in free HSE and CCPS guidance documents — no software license required. Proof artifacts: the HAZOP worksheet (analysis artifact) and the safeguard recommendation table (documentation artifact). Verification: a process safety engineer challenges the consequence assessment for the most severe scenario identified — 'you assessed this as a toxic release to atmosphere; have you considered the domino effect on adjacent equipment?' — requiring you to reason through your own hazard scenario.
Reactor or Separation Process Design
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Design a reactor or separation unit for a defined chemical process objective — reactor design (sizing for a target conversion), distillation column design (sizing for a separation specification), liquid-liquid extraction, or absorption column. The design must include: a clear design basis statement (feed composition, target conversion or separation, operating temperature and pressure), design equations with documented derivation or standard reference (CSTR, PFR, or distillation design methods), sizing calculations with equipment dimensions (volume, height, diameter) and operating conditions, a performance analysis showing the design meets the specification under the base case conditions and identifying the sensitivity to the most important design variable, and identification of the key engineering assumptions and their effect on reliability of the result. Preferred proof: design calculations from a real project. Accessible alternative: DWSIM (free, open-source) with reactor or separation unit operation models — input file submitted alongside the results; for hand calculations, Perry's Chemical Engineers' Handbook is accessible through many university open-access portals, and many design equations are in open textbooks and NIST resources. Proof artifacts: the design equations and sizing calculation (analysis artifact) and the design summary with performance analysis (documentation artifact). Verification: a chemical engineer reviews the sensitivity analysis — 'your design has X% conversion margin; at what feed temperature would this margin be consumed, and what does the process do then?' — requiring specific reasoning from your own design parameters.
Chemical Engineering Design Report
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Produce a complete chemical engineering design report for a real or representative process engineering problem, integrating process concept, mass and energy balance, equipment design, and safety analysis into a single coherent document. The report must include: a process description with a PFD and stream data summary, a mass and energy balance summary demonstrating process closure, design calculations for at least one major piece of equipment (reactor, heat exchanger, column, or vessel), a process safety summary identifying the top 3 hazard scenarios and their safeguards, and an economic feasibility note (order-of-magnitude capital and operating cost estimates with documented basis). Preferred proof: a design report for a real process engineering project. Accessible alternative: a comprehensive report using DWSIM for process simulation with free data sources (NIST WebBook for thermodynamics; open process engineering case studies for reference design basis). Proof artifacts: the PFD and equipment design (design artifact), the mass/energy balance and safety analysis (analysis artifact), and the complete design report (documentation artifact). Verification: a chemical engineer reviews the safety summary — 'you identified toxic release as the top hazard; what is the barrier between the release source and the site boundary, and is that barrier active or passive?' — requiring specific reasoning about your own process design.
Air Pollution Control Analysis and Sizing
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Select and size an air pollution control technology for a defined emission source and pollutant, documenting the analysis from source characterisation to technology recommendation. The analysis must include: a source characterisation (pollutant species, flowrate, concentration, temperature, and relevant physical properties), a screening of at least 3 control technologies (with documented performance data — collection efficiency, operating temperature range, pressure drop) against the source characteristics and applicable emission limit (regulatory limit from a named standard), a sizing calculation for the selected technology (device dimensions or operating parameters with documented methodology), a performance prediction showing the expected outlet concentration versus the emission limit, and a capital and operating cost comparison (order of magnitude, from published EPA cost data or equivalent). Preferred proof: analysis for a real emission source. Accessible alternative: EPA AP-42 (free, online compilation of emission factors and control technology performance data), EPA Air Pollution Control Cost Manual (free, online) applied to a publicly documented industrial source — no measurement equipment required, analysis uses published data. Proof artifacts: the source characterisation and technology comparison (analysis artifact) and the sizing calculation and performance prediction (documentation artifact). Verification: an environmental engineer reviews the performance prediction — 'your calculated control efficiency is X%; what would the outlet concentration be during a process upset when flow increases by 20%?' — requiring specific reasoning from your own sizing.
Environmental Remediation Design
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Produce a conceptual remediation design for a real or documented contaminated site, covering the selection and initial sizing of a remediation approach appropriate to the site conditions and contamination. The design must include: a site conceptual model summarising the contaminant sources, pathways, and receptors (source-pathway-receptor linkage), a remediation objectives statement (target concentrations for each contaminant based on risk-based or regulatory standards), a screening of at least 3 remediation technologies (in-situ chemical oxidation, pump-and-treat, bioremediation, soil excavation, or permeable reactive barrier — as applicable) against the site conditions, the selected approach with a conceptual design showing the treatment area and key design parameters, and an implementation phasing plan identifying the critical uncertainties that would need to be resolved through pilot testing. Preferred proof: a conceptual remediation design for a real project using site investigation data. Accessible alternative: conceptual remediation design using publicly available EPA Superfund site data (CERCLIS database, publicly accessible) — site investigation reports, groundwater monitoring data, and site maps are publicly available for hundreds of documented contaminated sites; EPA and Environment Agency remediation guidance documents are free. Proof artifacts: the site conceptual model and technology screening (analysis artifact) and the conceptual remediation design with phasing plan (documentation artifact). Verification: an environmental engineer reviews the technology selection — 'this site has low hydraulic conductivity; why did you select pump-and-treat, and how does that affect your predicted clean-up timeframe?' — requiring specific reasoning about your own site conditions.
Waste Management System Design
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Design a waste management system for a defined waste stream — municipal solid waste collection and disposal, industrial hazardous waste management, construction and demolition waste recycling, or clinical waste handling. The design must include: a waste characterisation (waste types, quantities, physical and chemical properties, and applicable regulatory classification), a waste management hierarchy analysis (reduce, reuse, recycle, recover, dispose — with quantified diversion targets for each tier), a collection and logistics design (collection frequency, vehicle routing approach, transfer station or direct haul, with documented capacity calculations), a treatment or disposal specification (landfill design criteria, composting system capacity, or hazardous waste treatment method — with performance calculations), and a regulatory compliance summary identifying the applicable permits and standards. Preferred proof: a waste management design for a real project or facility. Accessible alternative: design calculations using WHO, EPA, or UN Environment Programme waste management guidance (all freely available online) applied to a real documented waste scenario — national waste statistics (EPA, Eurostat, or equivalent) provide real waste quantity data. Proof artifacts: the waste characterisation and hierarchy analysis (analysis artifact) and the collection and treatment system design with capacity calculations (documentation artifact). Verification: an environmental engineer or waste management professional reviews the disposal specification — 'your landfill accepts these waste categories; what leachate treatment does this generate, and is your liner design adequate for that leachate chemistry?' — requiring reasoning from your own waste characterisation.
Environmental Engineering Design Report
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Produce a complete environmental engineering design report for a real or documented environmental engineering problem, integrating site characterisation, design alternatives, engineering calculations, and regulatory context into a single coherent document. The report must include: a project brief with environmental objectives and regulatory context (applicable standards, permit requirements), the environmental problem characterisation (water quality data, emissions data, contamination assessment, or waste data — from real or documented sources), at least 2 design alternatives with selection criteria and screening rationale, the selected design with supporting calculations and performance predictions, and a monitoring programme specifying what would be measured, how frequently, and against what performance criteria to confirm the design is meeting its objectives. Preferred proof: a report for a real environmental engineering project. Accessible alternative: a comprehensive report using publicly available environmental data (EPA, WHO, national environment agencies) and free design guidance. Proof artifacts: the design alternatives and supporting calculations (design artifact and analysis artifact) and the complete design report with monitoring programme (documentation artifact). Verification: an environmental engineer reviews the monitoring programme — 'you propose quarterly sampling — what would trigger you to increase frequency, and what would you do if the results show your design is not meeting the performance objective?' — requiring specific reasoning about your own design.
Engineering Project Plan
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Produce a complete engineering project plan for a real engineering project (or a documented project scenario), covering scope, schedule, resources, and risk. The plan must include: a Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) decomposing the project to at least 3 levels with clearly defined work packages and deliverables, a project schedule (Gantt chart or network diagram) with dependencies, milestones, and the critical path identified, a resource plan identifying the engineering disciplines and key personnel required with an effort estimate per work package, a risk register with at least 8 technical and programme risks — each with probability, impact, risk score, and mitigation action, and a project communication plan identifying stakeholders, information needs, and reporting frequency. Preferred proof: a project plan for a real engineering project. Accessible alternative: ProjectLibre (free, open-source MS Project equivalent) or a structured spreadsheet WBS and Gantt — a project planning tool is required; a prose document describing a plan is not sufficient. Proof artifacts: the WBS and schedule (design artifact) and the risk register with probability and impact analysis (analysis artifact). Verification: an engineering project manager or engineering manager reviews the critical path — 'your critical path runs through this structural analysis activity; what happens to the project completion date if the geotechnical investigation takes 2 weeks longer than planned?' — requiring specific reasoning from your own schedule and dependencies.
Technical Risk Assessment (FMEA)
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Conduct a Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) for a real engineering system, product, or process. The FMEA must cover: a scope definition specifying the system boundary, the failure modes being analysed, and the applicable life phase (design, manufacturing, or operation), a complete FMEA worksheet with at least 15 failure modes — each with failure mode description, failure effect (on the immediate function and on the end user), severity rating (1–10 scale with documented criteria), occurrence rating (1–10 with documented frequency basis), detection rating (1–10 with documented detection method), Risk Priority Number (RPN = S × O × D), and recommended corrective action for all failure modes with RPN above the threshold, a Pareto analysis of the top 20% of failure modes by RPN demonstrating where corrective action should be prioritised, and a recommended detection method for the highest-RPN failure mode that does not currently have an adequate detection mechanism. Preferred proof: an FMEA conducted as part of a real engineering design or quality review. Accessible alternative: FMEA of a real product or system using publicly available technical documentation — product manuals, service bulletins, and failure databases (FAA Service Difficulty Reporting System, CPSC recall database, FDA MAUDE database) are free public sources that provide real failure mode data. Proof artifacts: the FMEA worksheet (analysis artifact) and the Pareto analysis with corrective action recommendations (documentation artifact). Verification: an engineering manager or quality engineer reviews the detection ratings — 'this failure mode has a detection rating of 9 (almost undetectable); what specific test or monitoring method would bring that to 4 or below?' — requiring you to propose a specific, feasible detection mechanism.
R&D Portfolio Analysis
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Produce an analysis of a real or documented R&D portfolio using a structured portfolio management framework — stage-gate review, Technology Readiness Level (TRL) assessment, or a risk-return portfolio analysis. The analysis must include: an inventory of the portfolio projects with their current status, objectives, and resource consumption, a TRL assessment for each project (using NASA, EU Horizon, or DoD TRL definitions — all publicly documented) with documented rationale for each TRL assignment, a portfolio balance assessment evaluating the distribution of risk (short-term vs long-term projects, incremental vs breakthrough technology), identification of at least 2 projects where resource reallocation is recommended — with documented rationale — and the expected portfolio impact, and a portfolio governance recommendation covering the decision criteria that should trigger project continuation, escalation, or termination. Preferred proof: an analysis of a real R&D portfolio in an organisation you work in or have access to. Accessible alternative: portfolio analysis of publicly documented R&D programmes — annual reports, government R&D programme documentation (e.g. ARPA-E project portfolios, Innovate UK funded projects, DARPA programmes — all publicly documented) provide sufficient project data for a structured portfolio analysis. TRL definitions are freely available from NASA, ESA, and the European Commission. Proof artifacts: the TRL assessment and portfolio balance analysis (analysis artifact) and the portfolio analysis report with governance recommendations (documentation artifact). Verification: an R&D manager or CTO challenges the resource reallocation recommendation — 'you recommend stopping project X to fund project Y; what is the organisational cost of killing project X beyond the direct resource saving?' — requiring reasoning about real portfolio management trade-offs.
Engineering Management Case Study
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Produce an integrated case study analysis of a real engineering management decision — a major technical project that encountered significant challenges, a make-vs-buy decision, a technology selection under uncertainty, a post-mortem of a engineering failure, or a restructuring of an engineering organisation. The case study must: identify and frame the management decision clearly (what decision was made, by whom, with what information, and under what constraints), analyse the decision against at least 2 alternative courses of action (documenting what information was available at the time, not in hindsight), evaluate the outcome against the original objectives (using documented evidence of what actually happened), identify the 2 most important lessons for engineering management practice — grounded specifically in this case, not generic management advice, and propose what different decision process or criteria would have produced a better outcome. The case must be based on documented real events — published post-incident reports, case studies in engineering management literature, documented project post-mortems, or a real project you had direct access to. Proof artifacts: the decision analysis with alternatives comparison (analysis artifact) and the case study document with lessons and recommendations (documentation artifact). Note: the design artifact is the management decision framework itself — embedded in the analysis and documentation. Verification: an engineering manager challenges the lesson learned — 'you say the key lesson is X; name a different real engineering project where applying X would have prevented the problem you identified' — requiring you to generalise your analysis to a different real case.
Lesson Planning & Design
0 milestones · 4 weeks
Design a real lesson plan to a recognised format for a specific subject, year group, and learning objective. The plan must include: learning objectives aligned to curriculum standards, differentiation strategies for at least 3 learner profiles (higher attaining, typical, SEND), assessment criteria embedded in the lesson, and a timing breakdown. Reviewed and approved by a mentor teacher or university tutor BEFORE delivery — the pre-delivery review is the adversarial component; the mentor's written feedback and the student's documented revisions are both submitted as proof. Requires current DBS/background check clearance before this proof can be submitted (arranged through your placement institution — Powstik notes this requirement but does not verify it). All student identifying information anonymised.
Observed Teaching Practice
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Deliver a real supervised teaching session and receive formal written observation feedback. Proof requires: (a) the lesson plan used (linked to edu-lesson-plan-design or equivalent), (b) the mentor teacher's or university supervisor's written formative observation report using a structured observation framework, and (c) a written student reflection identifying one strength and one development target from the observation. A recording without observer feedback is not accepted — the observer's presence and written assessment are the verification layer. This proof documents the STUDENT'S teaching practice and professional development — not the pupils taught. Requires current DBS/background check clearance. All pupil identifying information anonymised.
Assessment Design & Marking
0 milestones · 5 weeks
Design a real formative or summative assessment for a specific learning objective, administer it to real students, and mark it with a documented marking scheme. Proof requires: (a) the assessment task and marking scheme, (b) a sample of 3 marked student responses with full anonymisation (no student names, dates of birth, or identifying details), and (c) a written reflection on what the assessment revealed about student learning and what would be taught differently as a result. Reviewed by a mentor teacher. This proof documents the STUDENT TEACHER'S assessment design and marking rationale — not identifiable information about pupils. Requires current DBS/background check clearance. No pupil names or identifying information in submission.
Behaviour Management & Classroom Environment
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Document real behaviour management strategies used across at least 3 supervised teaching sessions. Proof requires: (a) a written account of at least 2 specific behaviour management strategies applied in real classroom situations (not hypothetical scenarios), describing the situation, the strategy chosen, and the observed effect, (b) documented immediate post-lesson reflections on what worked and what would be changed, and (c) a mentor teacher's written attestation of the student teacher's classroom management competency development across the placement. This proof documents the STUDENT TEACHER'S skill development — not identifiable information about pupils. Requires current DBS/background check clearance. No pupil identifying information in submission.
Teaching Portfolio & Critical Reflection
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Build a structured reflective teaching portfolio covering at least 5 real supervised teaching sessions. Each entry must follow a recognised reflective framework (Gibbs Reflective Cycle, Kolb's Experiential Learning Cycle, or equivalent) and must: identify a teaching or learning theory applied in that session (Constructivism, Differentiated Instruction, Bloom's Taxonomy, Zone of Proximal Development, or equivalent), describe the observed effect on student engagement or attainment with specific evidence, and name one concrete change made as a result of the reflection. Final portfolio reviewed and signed off by the mentor teacher or university tutor with a written assessment of professional growth. This proof documents the STUDENT TEACHER'S reflective practice development — all entries anonymised. Requires current DBS/background check clearance.
Curriculum Mapping & Design
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Design a real curriculum map for a module or programme covering a minimum of 6 weeks of learning. The map must include: learning outcomes with Bloom's taxonomy levels specified for each, content sequence with documented rationale for the sequencing decisions, assessment points aligned to learning outcomes, and a constructive alignment check confirming that teaching activities, assessments, and learning outcomes are coherently aligned. Reviewed by a curriculum specialist or academic with curriculum design experience who provides written feedback on alignment quality and coherence — the reviewer must challenge at least one sequencing or alignment decision and the student's written response to the challenge is part of the proof. Not a template completion — the alignment rationale and response to challenge are the proof of understanding.
Learning Outcomes & Assessment Alignment
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Redesign an existing real module or unit to improve constructive alignment between learning outcomes, teaching activities, and assessments. Proof requires: (a) the original module documentation showing the current state, (b) a documented alignment analysis identifying specific misalignments between learning outcomes, assessments, and teaching activities — each misalignment named with evidence, (c) the redesigned module with explicit rationale for each change referencing the specific misalignment it addresses, and (d) written review from an academic or curriculum designer who confirms the redesign improves alignment and challenges at least one of your design choices — your written response is part of the proof. The analysis of misalignment is the proof of understanding — the redesign alone is not sufficient.
EdTech Evaluation & Implementation
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Evaluate a real educational technology tool by implementing it with real learners in a real educational context. Proof requires: (a) a pre-implementation evaluation framework specifying what will be measured, how, and what would count as evidence of effectiveness or ineffectiveness, (b) documented implementation records covering at least 3 sessions — what was done, what happened, and what was observed, (c) anonymised learner feedback data or measurable learning outcome data collected using the framework in (a), and (d) a written evaluation report with a recommendation for or against continued use with documented evidence. A product review or literature survey without real learner data is not accepted — the implementation with measurement is the proof. If the implementation involves learners under 18, current DBS/background check clearance is required and all learner identifying information must be anonymised.
Inclusive Design for Diverse Learners
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Redesign a real curriculum resource or teaching sequence applying Universal Design for Learning (UDL) principles. Proof requires: (a) the original resource or sequence, (b) a documented UDL barrier analysis identifying specific barriers for at least 2 named learner groups (e.g. students with dyslexia, EAL learners, students with sensory impairments, students with ADHD), (c) the redesigned version with explicit references to UDL principles (Engagement, Representation, Action and Expression) for each design change made, and (d) peer or supervisor review from someone with inclusive education expertise who confirms the redesign addresses the identified barriers and challenges at least one design decision — the student's written response is part of the proof.
Educational Needs Assessment
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Conduct a real needs assessment for a student with additional learning needs using a recognised assessment framework (EHCP process in the UK, IEP eligibility assessment in the US, SSA in Australia, or equivalent nationally recognised framework). Proof requires: (a) a completed anonymised assessment report following the chosen framework (no student names, dates of birth, school identifiers, or any other identifying details — use a reference code), (b) documented evidence of the assessment tools used, why they were chosen, and how the results were interpreted, and (c) a SENCO's or special education coordinator's written sign-off confirming the assessment was conducted correctly under their supervision. This proof documents the STUDENT PRACTITIONER'S assessment skills — not the assessed student's personal profile. Requires current DBS/background check clearance. All identifying information anonymised.
Individual Education Plan Design
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Design a real IEP or equivalent individual support plan (EHCP support plan, learning support plan, or nationally equivalent document) for a specific anonymised student with additional needs. The plan must include: specific, measurable learning targets with a clear timeframe, support strategies with documented rationale for each, resource and staffing requirements, progress monitoring criteria and review date. Reviewed and signed off by a SENCO or special education coordinator who confirms the targets are appropriate and achievable for the identified student. This proof documents the STUDENT PRACTITIONER'S planning skills — not the student's personal details. Requires current DBS/background check clearance. Fully anonymised — no student or family identifying information.
Assistive Technology Evaluation
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Evaluate a real assistive technology tool for a specific identified learning need. Proof requires: (a) documentation of the learning need and the rationale for choosing this tool over alternatives, (b) a real trial with the student (supervised and anonymised) with documented observations across at least 3 sessions covering what the student was able to do with the tool, what challenges remained, and what was adapted between sessions, (c) anonymised student feedback where the student can express it, and (d) a written evaluation report with a recommendation for or against continued use. Supervised by and signed off by a SENCO, specialist teacher, or qualified AT specialist. This proof documents the STUDENT PRACTITIONER'S evaluation process — not the student's personal profile. Requires current DBS/background check clearance.
Inclusive Classroom Observation & Adaptation
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Observe a real inclusive classroom across at least 3 sessions and document specific adaptations made for different learner needs. Proof requires: (a) a structured observation log for each session noting what adaptations were made, for which learner profile (not named — use descriptors such as 'student with dyslexia' or 'EAL student'), and the observed effect, (b) documentation of at least one adaptation you implemented yourself (not just observed) with the mentor teacher's written feedback on its effectiveness, and (c) a reflective analysis connecting the observed adaptations to a named inclusive education theory or framework. Mentor teacher or SENCO sign-off required. This proof documents the STUDENT PRACTITIONER'S observational and adaptive practice skills. Requires current DBS/background check clearance. All student identifying information anonymised.
Multi-Agency Collaboration in Education
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Document real participation in a multi-agency case involving education, health, and/or social care coordination for a student with complex needs. Proof requires: (a) an anonymised case summary describing the agencies involved and the nature of the student's needs — no student name, date of birth, address, school, or any identifying details; (b) documentation of your professional contribution to the multi-agency discussion, planning, or review process, and (c) a SENCO's or case coordinator's written confirmation of your participation and professional conduct. This is a highly sensitive proof requiring rigorous anonymisation — a case record containing identifying information is a serious data protection breach. This proof documents the STUDENT PRACTITIONER'S multi-agency collaboration skills. Requires current DBS/background check clearance.
Child Development Observation
0 milestones · 4 weeks
Conduct a real structured observation of a young child's development using a recognised framework (Leuven Scales of Well-being and Involvement, EYFS Development Matters, HighScope COR Advantage, or equivalent nationally recognised observation tool). Proof requires: (a) a completed observation record using the chosen framework (child identified by reference code only — no name, date of birth, or identifying details), (b) a documented developmental analysis linking the specific observations to expected developmental milestones with evidence-based rationale, and (c) a qualified early years practitioner's or setting supervisor's written confirmation that the observation was conducted appropriately and that the developmental analysis is a fair assessment. This proof documents the STUDENT PRACTITIONER'S observational skills and developmental knowledge — not the child's personal profile. Requires current DBS/background check clearance.
Play-Based Learning Planning & Delivery
0 milestones · 5 weeks
Plan and deliver a real play-based learning activity for a small group of young children (3–8 children) based on their observed interests and developmental stage. Proof requires: (a) a written activity plan including: the observations that informed it, specific learning intentions for the group, resource list, adult role description, and anticipated play scenarios, (b) a brief post-activity reflection (minimum 300 words) on what happened versus what was planned, one specific moment of child-led learning that emerged, and what would be done differently next time, and (c) setting supervisor or lead practitioner written feedback on the activity and the student's facilitation. This proof documents the STUDENT PRACTITIONER'S planning and facilitation skills. Requires current DBS/background check clearance. No child identifying information in submission.
Early Years Environment Assessment
0 milestones · 5 weeks
Conduct a real assessment of an early years environment against a recognised quality framework (EYFS in the UK, NAEYC Accreditation Criteria in the US, National Quality Standard in Australia, or equivalent national framework). Proof requires: (a) a completed environmental assessment tool against the chosen framework, documenting specific observational evidence for each criterion assessed, (b) a written analysis identifying 3 environmental strengths and 3 areas for development — each supported by specific evidence from the assessment, and (c) the setting manager's or lead practitioner's written confirmation that the assessment was conducted with their knowledge and consent and that it is a fair representation of the environment. If any observation of children occurred during the assessment, current DBS/background check clearance is required.
Parent & Family Engagement
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Design and implement a real parent or family engagement strategy in an early years setting. Proof requires: (a) a written engagement plan with rationale, intended outcomes, and method of measuring whether engagement occurred, (b) documented evidence of the strategy implemented — a newsletter, a stay-and-play session plan with attendance record, a family meeting agenda with notes, or an equivalent real engagement artifact, (c) anonymised documentation of family response or participation (number of families engaged, not identifiable individuals), and (d) setting manager or lead practitioner written attestation that the engagement strategy was genuinely implemented and describing the student's role in planning and delivery. No family names or identifying information in submission. Requires current DBS/background check clearance.
Early Years Professional Portfolio
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Build a structured professional portfolio covering at least 4 documented early years practice experiences in a real setting. Each entry must include: a brief description of the practice experience (anonymised — no child or family names), the child-led learning moment identified and how it was supported by the student practitioner, the practitioner's response and its rationale linked to early years pedagogy or theory (e.g. Vygotsky, Froebel, Reggio Emilia, Montessori principles), and one professional development area identified as a result. Final portfolio reviewed and signed off by the placement supervisor or setting lead with a written assessment of the student's professional growth. Requires current DBS/background check clearance. All entries fully anonymised — no child or family names.
Social Work Assessment
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Conduct a real or supervised anonymised social care assessment using a recognised assessment framework (Signs of Safety, the Assessment Triangle / Framework for the Assessment of Children in Need and their Families, the Care Act assessment framework for adults, or an equivalent nationally recognised statutory model). Proof requires: (a) the completed assessment document — fully anonymised (no service user names, addresses, dates of birth, or any identifying details; use a reference code only), (b) documentation of the information sources used, how each was weighted in the assessment, and the rationale for the conclusions reached, and (c) a qualified social worker's or practice educator's written sign-off confirming the assessment was conducted under qualified supervision and meets professional standards for the student's stage of training. This proof documents the STUDENT PRACTITIONER'S assessment reasoning and skills — not the service user's personal profile. Peer verification is NOT accepted for this outcome — qualified practice educator or registered social worker attestation is required. Requires current DBS/background check clearance and completion of a recognised safeguarding training module before this proof can be submitted.
Direct Work with Service Users
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Conduct a supervised direct work session with a real service user and document it in a professional case record format. Proof requires: (a) an anonymised case record for the session — identified by reference code only, no name, date of birth, address, or any identifying details — documenting: the purpose and context of the session, the social work approach or method used and its rationale, what was communicated and how, what was agreed or planned, and any risk factors noted, (b) a practice educator's written attestation covering: professional conduct demonstrated during the session, specific skills observed, one area for development identified, and confirmation that the session was conducted under qualified supervision. This proof documents the STUDENT PRACTITIONER'S direct practice skills and professional conduct — not the service user's personal situation. Peer verification is NOT accepted for this outcome — qualified practice educator attestation is required. Requires current DBS/background check clearance and safeguarding training completion.
Risk Assessment & Safeguarding
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Conduct a real or supervised safeguarding risk assessment using a recognised statutory risk assessment tool (Signs of Safety wellbeing and safety mapping, DASH Domestic Abuse Risk Assessment, MARAC referral criteria, or equivalent statutory safeguarding tool in your jurisdiction). Proof requires: (a) a completed anonymised risk assessment document — reference code only, no identifying information — including risk ratings, protective factors identified, and proposed safeguarding actions with rationale, (b) documented reasoning for each risk and protective factor decision, and (c) a qualified social worker's or practice educator's written attestation that this was conducted under qualified supervision and meets professional safeguarding standards. Note: this outcome specifically covers statutory social work safeguarding risk assessment using statutory frameworks — it is distinct from the mental health ethics and safeguarding analysis in health-ethics-safeguarding-case (UGPG-03C), which addresses therapeutic clinical ethics. These are different professions with different statutory authorities and proof standards. Peer verification is NOT accepted for this outcome — qualified practice educator or registered social worker attestation is required. Requires current DBS/background check clearance and completion of a recognised safeguarding training module.
Multi-Agency Working in Social Work
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Document real participation as a social work student in a multi-agency meeting, case conference, or professional network meeting. Proof requires: (a) an anonymised case summary describing the agencies involved, the nature of the multi-agency work, and the student's role — no service user identifying information whatsoever, (b) a written account of your professional contribution to the discussion or decision-making process — what perspective you brought, what you contributed, and what you learned from the multi-agency interaction, and (c) a practice educator's or supervising social worker's written confirmation of your participation and professional conduct. A multi-agency meeting record containing identifying information is a serious data protection breach — rigorously anonymise all documentation before submission. Peer verification is NOT accepted for this outcome — qualified practice educator or registered social worker confirmation is required. Requires current DBS/background check clearance and safeguarding training completion.
Social Work Reflective Practice Portfolio
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Build a structured reflective practice portfolio covering at least 4 supervised social work practice experiences. Each entry must: describe the practice experience in fully anonymised terms (no service user identifying information — reference codes only), identify a social work theory or practice model applied and its observed effect on the work (attachment theory, systems theory, strengths-based practice, task-centred practice, anti-oppressive practice, or equivalent), describe a professional value or ethical tension encountered — with documented reasoning about how it was or would be navigated, and name a professional development need identified and the action taken to address it. Final portfolio reviewed and signed off by the practice educator with a written assessment of the student's professional learning and development. Requires current DBS/background check clearance. All entries fully anonymised.
Visual Identity System
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Design a complete visual identity system responding to a real or set brief. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (brief response document and moodboard documenting the strategic rationale — why this mark, this palette, this typeface for this brief), technical execution artifact (production-ready logo system: primary mark, secondary variants, colour palette in HEX/CMYK/Pantone, and typographic pairings in vector format), critique/documentation artifact (brand guidelines document with usage rules, misuse examples, and written design rationale). AI-fakeability countermeasure: live studio critique where a working graphic designer challenges the strategic and aesthetic decisions — the critique response document showing what was challenged, what changed, and why is submitted as proof. Proof: brief document, production files (SVG/AI/PDF), brand guidelines PDF, critique notes. Verifier: practising graphic designer or graphic design tutor — no peer-only verification.
Editorial Layout Design
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Design and lay out a multi-page publication, report, or magazine to print-ready standard. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (layout concept document specifying the grid system chosen and the hierarchy rationale — why this grid, what it does for the content), technical execution artifact (InDesign, Affinity Publisher, Scribus, or equivalent file at print-ready specification: correct bleed, colour mode, and minimum 8 pages of resolved layout), critique/documentation artifact (design decisions document: column grid, baseline grid, typographic hierarchy, and image treatment decisions all justified). Proof Accessibility Rule applies: Scribus is a free open-source desktop publishing alternative; Canva Pro is available at student pricing. Studio critique: art director or graphic design tutor reviews layout decisions, hierarchy, and print specification at a documented session. Proof: layout concept document, production file (exported PDF), design decisions document, critique notes. Verifier: graphic designer or art director — no peer-only verification.
Typography Application Project
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Typographic design project demonstrating command of type hierarchy, spacing, scale, and legibility applied to a real brief. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (type selection rationale: why these typefaces for this brief, what alternatives were considered and why they were rejected — a rationale that could only be written after genuine evaluation), technical execution artifact (typographic system applied to a real brief — display, body, and caption hierarchy resolved — delivered in print or digital specification), critique/documentation artifact (type specimen with complete usage rules for the chosen system: size scales, leading values, tracking decisions, and pairing logic). Studio critique: typographer or graphic designer challenges type choices in real time and asks for justification of each decision — the documented critique exchange is submitted as proof. Proof: type rationale document, type specimen PDF, applied design deliverable, critique notes. Verifier: typographer, type designer, or graphic design tutor.
Digital Graphic Design Campaign
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Graphic design campaign responding to a brief across multiple digital and print formats. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (campaign concept document: target audience rationale, visual language decisions, colour and type strategy, brief interpretation — demonstrating that the creative direction is brief-driven, not arbitrary), technical execution artifact (production-ready campaign files delivered across minimum 3 formats — social media post, web banner, and print collateral — all correctly sized and specified for their platforms), critique/documentation artifact (brief response document: annotated mapping of each design decision to a brief objective, showing how the visual language serves the communication goals). Studio critique: creative director or senior graphic designer reviews the campaign against the brief objectives at a documented crit session — the crit explores whether the design communicates the right message to the right audience, not just whether it looks considered. Proof: brief, campaign files (all formats), brief response document, critique notes. Verifier: creative director or senior graphic designer.
Graphic Design Portfolio Review
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Curated professional portfolio of minimum 6 graphic design brief responses presented for formal critical review. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (curatorial rationale: why these pieces were selected, what range they demonstrate, what the portfolio communicates about the designer's identity and approach), technical execution artifact (each project represented with final design deliverables — not work-in-progress; all files at production quality), critique/documentation artifact (written case study for each project: brief received, design approach, key decisions made, and outcome — minimum 150 words per case study). Studio critique: formal or informal portfolio review by a working graphic designer (minimum 3 years professional practice) with documented written feedback on professional readiness, craft level, and areas for development. Proof: portfolio (URL or PDF), case studies, documented critique feedback. Verifier: working graphic designer (minimum 3 years professional practice) or graphic design tutor.
Fashion Research & Concept Development
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Concept development for a mini fashion collection through structured trend research. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (trend research presentation: minimum 3 trend directions researched, 1 selected and developed with full moodboard, silhouette research, and material direction), documentation/critique artifact (written rationale connecting trend research to design concept: why this direction, who is the customer, what is the aesthetic territory — demonstrating that the concept follows from research, not that the research was assembled to justify a pre-existing idea). AI-fakeability countermeasure: studio critique where a fashion tutor or industry professional challenges the research-to-concept connection — a moodboard with no documented rationale does not pass. Proof: trend research document, moodboard, written rationale, critique notes. Verifier: fashion design tutor or fashion industry professional — no peer-only verification.
Fashion Technical Flat Drawings
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Industry-standard technical flat drawings for minimum 3 garments showing front and back views with all construction detail. Triad: technical execution artifact (flat drawings with all seam lines, topstitching, fastenings, gathering, and construction details clearly indicated — at a standard that could be used by a garment factory to produce the garment), documentation/critique artifact (fabric specification sheet for each garment: fibre composition, weight, colourway, finish, and initial sourcing notes — this is the technical brief a manufacturer would receive alongside the drawings). Proof Accessibility Rule applies: drawings may be created in Adobe Illustrator (student licence), CLO3D flat drawing tools, or hand-drawn to scale with accurate measurements — a ruler and accurate proportion are required regardless of medium. Studio critique: fashion design tutor or garment technologist reviews drawings for compliance with industry specification standards — decorative or inaccurate illustrations do not satisfy this standard. Proof: complete flat drawing set, specification sheets, critique notes. Verifier: fashion design tutor or garment technologist.
Garment Pattern & Sampling
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Pattern construction and physical or digital garment sampling for at least one garment design. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (annotated pattern with construction notes: seam allowances, grainlines, notches, and construction sequence — not just the pattern pieces but the logic for using them), technical execution artifact (physical calico toile showing fit, construction, and proportion on a body or dress stand, or a digital simulation in CLO3D, Marvelette, or Browzwear showing equivalent garment construction and fit), documentation/critique artifact (fit development record: photographs of the toile or digital simulation at each development stage, fit issues identified, adjustments made with rationale, and final resolution). Proof Accessibility Rule applies: CLO3D free education licence, Valentina free open-source pattern software, or Marvelette trial are accessible digital alternatives to physical toile — both produce real artifacts of equivalent rigor. Studio critique: fashion design tutor reviews the sample against specification and challenges construction decisions. Proof: annotated pattern, toile photographs or digital simulation screenshots, fit development record, critique notes. Verifier: fashion design tutor or garment technologist — no peer-only verification.
Textile & Material Research
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Material research project exploring textile properties for a specific design context. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (material research brief: design context, performance requirements, aesthetic direction, and sustainability constraints — written before sampling begins), technical execution artifact (swatch development or documented surface exploration: minimum 5 fabric samples or material options tested or evaluated against the brief requirements, with each sample's properties documented — weight, handle, stretch recovery, care requirements), documentation/critique artifact (written supply chain and sustainability research: fibre sourcing, certifications claimed and verified, country of manufacture, environmental impact rating, and a justified material selection decision with rationale). Studio critique: textiles specialist or fashion professional reviews the material research against the design context and sustainability criteria — generic material research with no connection to a brief does not satisfy this standard. Proof: material research brief, sample documentation or swatch records, supply chain research document, critique notes. Verifier: textiles specialist, fashion design tutor, or fashion industry professional with materials expertise.
Fashion Portfolio Review
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Fashion portfolio presenting at least one complete project from brief to final design outcome, reviewed by an industry professional. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (collection concept, trend research, and moodboard for the featured project), technical execution artifact (technical drawings, sample or prototype documentation, and final garment photography or high-quality digital renders), documentation/critique artifact (portfolio write-up showing the full design process: brief to research, concept to technical development, sampling to final outcome — the process, not just the result, is the proof). Studio critique: fashion industry professional or senior fashion design tutor conducts a formal or informal portfolio review with documented written feedback on commercial readiness, technical quality, and design voice. Proof: portfolio document (digital or physical), project write-up, documented critique feedback. Verifier: fashion industry professional (minimum 3 years professional practice in fashion design, buying, or production) — no peer-only verification.
Architectural Drawing Set
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Set of architectural drawings responding to a design brief, produced to professional drawing conventions. Triad: technical execution artifact (minimum 4 drawings at appropriate scale: site plan, floor plan, section, and elevation — produced to architectural drawing conventions with scale bar, north point, room labels, and title block), documentation/critique artifact (drawing register and specification notes: what each drawing shows, drawing conventions applied, and design decisions embedded in the drawings — the register is what a contractor or planning authority would use to navigate the set). Proof Accessibility Rule applies: FreeCAD, LibreCAD, SketchUp (free tier with educational access), and AutoCAD student licence are all valid free-tier alternatives to paid CAD software — hand drawing to scale with a scale ruler is also acceptable proof. Studio critique: registered architect or architecture school tutor reviews drawings for standards compliance and design resolution — drawings that do not follow architectural convention do not satisfy this standard. Proof: complete drawing set (PDF), drawing register, critique notes. Verifier: ARB/RIBA-registered architect or architecture school tutor — no peer-only verification.
Architectural Design Concept
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Architectural design concept for a spatial intervention responding to a set or real brief, developed through an iterative design process. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (site analysis, spatial narrative, and design concept drawings — including process sketches showing design development at multiple stages, not just the resolved final scheme), documentation/critique artifact (written design rationale: how the concept responds to the brief, the site conditions, the programme requirements, and any planning or structural constraints — demonstrating that the design follows from the analysis). Studio critique: live design crit (pin-up or desk crit) with an architect or architecture school tutor — the crit is formally or informally documented (who reviewed the work, what design decisions were challenged, what changed or was reconsidered after). Proof: concept drawings (minimum 8 sketches or studies at different scales showing development), site analysis document, written rationale, documented crit notes. Verifier: ARB/RIBA-registered architect or architecture school tutor.
Architectural Spatial Model
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Physical or digital spatial model for an architectural design project at a specified working scale. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (model intent statement: what this model is testing or communicating — massing and proportion, spatial sequence, structural logic, or light quality — and why a model at this scale is the right tool for that question), technical execution artifact (physical card or foam model at scale 1:100, 1:200, or equivalent; or a digital 3D model demonstrating spatial quality through a walkthrough video or set of rendered views), documentation/critique artifact (process documentation: photographs or screenshots at each model development stage, showing what was tested, what was changed, and why — the process log, not just the finished model). Proof Accessibility Rule applies: SketchUp (free tier), Blender (free), Rhino (educational licence), or ArchiCAD student free tier are all valid digital alternatives to physical model-making. Studio critique: architecture tutor reviews the model against the design intent and challenges spatial decisions. Proof: finished model (photographs or walkthrough video), intent statement, process documentation, critique notes. Verifier: ARB/RIBA-registered architect or architecture school tutor.
Urban Site Analysis
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Structured site analysis for an urban design or architecture project using real site data and publicly available mapping resources. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (analysis framework document: what aspects of the site are being analysed — movement flows, land use, microclimate, heritage assets, planning constraints, demographic context — and why each is relevant to the design brief), technical execution artifact (minimum 3 annotated maps or diagrams using real data: movement flow diagram, land use map, sun-path or shadow analysis, planning constraint overlay, or equivalent — each map interpreted, not just reproduced), documentation/critique artifact (site analysis report: what the analysis reveals about the site's opportunities and constraints, and what implications this has for the design project — a paragraph per mapped analysis minimum). Proof Accessibility Rule applies: OpenStreetMap, OS Open Data, local planning authority public portals, Google Maps, and Copernicus Climate Data Store are all freely accessible data sources — no paid GIS software required. Studio critique: urban designer or architect challenges the analysis framework and the quality of the design implications drawn. Proof: analysis framework, annotated maps (minimum 3), site analysis report, critique notes. Verifier: urban designer, ARB/RIBA-registered architect, or town planner.
Architecture Studio Portfolio Review
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Studio portfolio for an architecture year-end or interim assessment presenting minimum 3 design projects for formal critical review. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (design concept documentation for each project: the initial brief, site analysis, and concept sketches showing how the design thinking developed), technical execution artifact (resolved drawings, model documentation, and final design proposals for each project — at a level appropriate to studio-year assessment), documentation/critique artifact (written design statement for each project: brief summary, design concept, key decisions made during development, and critical self-assessment of what was achieved and what remained unresolved). Studio critique: formal portfolio review or pin-up crit with qualified architectural tutors — a portfolio submitted without evidence of a crit session does not satisfy this proof standard. Proof: portfolio (PDF or digital link), design statements, documented crit feedback or assessment panel notes. Verifier: ARB/RIBA-registered architect or architecture school tutor — no peer-only verification.
Storyboard & Animatic
0 milestones · 6 weeks
Storyboard and assembled animatic for an animation, film, or motion design project. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (treatment document: narrative or motion concept, visual tone, intended audience, and directorial intention — the rationale that explains every visual decision that follows), technical execution artifact (storyboard panels — minimum 12 panels showing scene composition, camera angle, and movement direction — assembled into an animatic with approximate timing and rough audio or sound notes), documentation/critique artifact (brief response rationale: how the storyboard addresses the creative brief, why key visual, pacing, and compositional decisions were made — demonstrating that the storyboard serves the story, not just that it covers the scenes). Proof Accessibility Rule applies: free storyboarding tools include Storyboarder (open source), hand-drawn panels (photographed and sequenced), and Canva for basic frame composition; animatics can be assembled in DaVinci Resolve (free) or CapCut. Studio critique: animator or motion designer reviews pacing, coverage, and visual storytelling. Proof: treatment document, storyboard panels, animatic video link, brief response rationale, critique notes. Verifier: professional animator, motion designer, or animation tutor.
Character & Environment Design
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Character or environment design for an animation project, developed from brief to finished design sheet. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (brief response: initial concept thumbnails — minimum 6 — showing different design directions explored, plus reference moodboard and the visual language rationale: what aesthetic territory was chosen and why), technical execution artifact (finalised design sheet: for characters, a front/side/back turnaround with expression sheet and proportion chart; for environments, an establishing shot concept with key asset callouts and lighting/atmosphere notes), documentation/critique artifact (design rationale document: how each design decision — silhouette, colour palette, line quality, costume or surface detail — serves the project's narrative tone, target audience, or animation style). Studio critique: professional animator, art director, or character designer challenges the coherence of design decisions with the project's creative direction. Proof: concept thumbnails, moodboard, final design sheet, design rationale, critique notes. Verifier: professional animator, character designer, or art director.
Animation Production Sequence
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Completed animation sequence demonstrating technical control of animation principles and production workflow. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (pre-production package: visual style guide for the sequence, technical specification — software, frame rate, resolution, output format — and a brief production workflow document showing how the sequence will be made from rough to final), technical execution artifact (finished animation sequence — minimum 15 seconds of completed, polished animation demonstrating at least 3 animation principles from the 12 classic principles, not rough blocking or playblast), documentation/critique artifact (production journal: technical decisions made during production, specific problems encountered and how they were solved, what the student would do differently — demonstrates real production experience). Proof Accessibility Rule applies: Blender (3D, free), OpenToonz (2D, free), Pencil2D (2D, free), and Krita (2D animation mode, free) are all valid production environments — no paid software required. Studio critique: professional animator or animation tutor reviews the sequence for technical quality, principle application, and production decisions. Proof: pre-production package, finished animation (public or private video link), production journal, critique notes. Verifier: professional animator or animation tutor.
Motion Graphics Package
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Motion graphics package for a real or set brief — title sequences, branded animation, explainer content, or social media motion. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (motion brief response: visual style rationale, animation approach and tone, typeface and colour palette decisions, and how the motion language serves the communication objectives), technical execution artifact (finished motion graphics package rendered to brief specification — minimum 30 seconds — delivered at the correct frame rate, codec, and output format for the intended platform), documentation/critique artifact (design rationale and technical breakdown: how specific motion choices — easing curves, transition approach, text animation style, sound synchronisation — serve the brief objectives; this is the document that explains the decisions, not describes the output). Proof Accessibility Rule applies: DaVinci Resolve free tier covers full compositing, motion graphics, and colour grading; Blender (free) covers 3D motion; Adobe After Effects student licence and Final Cut Pro Motion are paid alternatives. Studio critique: motion designer or creative director reviews timing, easing, compositional hierarchy, and brief alignment. Proof: motion brief response, finished motion graphics (video link), design rationale, critique notes. Verifier: motion designer or creative director.
Animation Portfolio Review
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Assembled animation showreel or portfolio demonstrating technical range and creative voice, reviewed by an industry professional. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (curatorial rationale: why these pieces were selected, what techniques they demonstrate, and what the portfolio communicates about the animator's range and creative direction), technical execution artifact (showreel or portfolio of completed work — minimum 90 seconds of finished, polished animation demonstrating at least 2 distinct animation techniques — not rough animations or work-in-progress), documentation/critique artifact (technique breakdown document: what animation method was used for each piece, what software and workflow, and what each piece demonstrates about the student's technical and creative range). Studio critique: formal or informal reel review by a professional animator or motion designer with documented written feedback on commercial readiness, technical craft, and how the reel positions the animator in the industry. Proof: showreel or portfolio URL, technique breakdown, documented critique feedback. Verifier: professional animator or motion designer (minimum 3 years professional practice).
Studio Practice Development
0 milestones · 16 weeks
Documented studio practice over a minimum 12-week period developing a coherent body of work. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (artist statement and practice rationale: what artistic questions or aesthetic territories are being explored — this must make a genuine intellectual argument, not describe the work; must reference at least 3 practitioners whose work is relevant and explain why), technical execution artifact (developed body of work — minimum 5 resolved pieces in a coherent series or development sequence — documented through high-quality photographs of the finished works), documentation/critique artifact (process portfolio: material experimentation notes, iteration records, photographs of resolved and unresolved work dated across the production period — demonstrating real studio time, not a single production run). AI-fakeability countermeasure: studio crit where a fine art tutor or professional artist challenges conceptual and formal decisions in real time — an AI can produce a plausible artist statement and digitally generated images, but it cannot participate in a documented crit where specific decisions about a specific body of physical or digital work are challenged. Proof: artist statement (with referenced practitioners), 20+ dated process images, final work documentation, crit notes. Verifier: fine art tutor or professional artist — no peer-only verification.
Critical Art Research Essay
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Extended critical essay situating the student's own practice within art theory, art history, or contemporary critical discourse. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (research question and argument framework: what specific critical question this essay addresses — a genuine argument, not a survey; the question must connect directly to the student's own practice), documentation/critique artifact (critical essay of 2,000–4,000 words engaging with primary sources — artist statements, critical theory texts, exhibition catalogues, peer-reviewed art criticism — making an original argument that connects specific aspects of the student's practice to a wider critical discourse; minimum 6 primary sources cited and substantively engaged, not merely referenced in passing). AI-fakeability countermeasure: the essay must argue for a specific position about the student's own practice — an AI could produce a generic art theory essay, but an argument that connects specific claims to specific works the student has actually made requires knowledge of that practice; the studio crit where the essay's argument is challenged tests this. Studio critique: art history academic or fine art tutor conducts a documented verbal challenge to the essay's central argument. Proof: essay document, challenge-and-response notes. Verifier: art history academic or fine art tutor with postgraduate qualification in art history or critical theory.
Exhibition & Installation Proposal
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Exhibition or degree show proposal for presenting the student's body of work in a spatial context. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (curatorial rationale and concept statement: what the exhibition communicates as a whole beyond the individual works, what spatial and experiential quality the show is intended to produce for the viewer), technical execution artifact (spatial installation design: floor plan at scale showing work placement, elevations where relevant, lighting brief, technical requirements for each work — dimensions, power, mounting, AV), documentation/critique artifact (exhibition proposal document: contextual statement, intended audience rationale, production timeline with realistic dates, and installation specifications for each work). Studio critique: curator, gallery director, or fine art degree show coordinator reviews the spatial and curatorial decisions — the proposal must demonstrate real spatial thinking, not a simple list of works in a room. Proof: curatorial statement, floor plan and elevations, installation specifications, full proposal document, critique notes. Verifier: curator, gallery coordinator, or fine art degree show panel member.
Fine Art Portfolio Review
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Resolved body of work presented with artist statement for formal critical review by a qualified artist or academic. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (artist statement making an intellectual argument about the practice — what the work is doing and why, situating it in relation to relevant critical or art historical territory; not a description of what the work looks like), technical execution artifact (resolved body of work — minimum 5 pieces — documented to professional quality: correct lighting, clean backgrounds, accurate colour rendition), documentation/critique artifact (piece-by-piece documentation: for each work, materials used, dimensions, date, the question or territory it was exploring, and what was resolved or unresolved). Studio critique: formal crit with a professional artist or fine art academic — the crit requires the student to defend all formal and conceptual decisions verbally; crit notes documenting what was challenged and how the student responded are submitted as proof. Proof: artist statement, work documentation (with piece-by-piece notes), documented crit notes. Verifier: professional artist or fine art academic — no peer-only verification for this outcome.
User Research & Synthesis
0 milestones · 10 weeks
User research study conducted with minimum 6 participants and synthesised to professional standard. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (research plan submitted before data collection begins: research questions, methodology rationale — why interviews vs surveys vs observation, participant recruitment criteria and screening questions, discussion guide or observation protocol), technical execution artifact (research data collected from real participants: signed consent forms, session notes or recordings, and completed data set — the participant evidence is the unfakeable layer), documentation/critique artifact (synthesis report with documented thematic analysis: how raw data was coded, what themes emerged, how themes were prioritised, and what the design implications are — minimum 1,500 words of analysis). AI-fakeability countermeasure: participant consent forms and session records cannot be fabricated without real people; the synthesis process — specific themes emerging from specific quotes from specific participants — traces back to real sessions in a way that AI-generated data cannot. Studio critique: UX researcher or HCI practitioner challenges the synthesis methodology and the validity of the design implications drawn. Proof: research plan, consent forms, session records, synthesis report, critique notes. Verifier: UX researcher, HCI researcher, or senior UX practitioner with research methodology experience — no peer-only verification.
Interaction Design Prototype
0 milestones · 10 weeks
High-fidelity interactive prototype addressing a problem identified through real user research. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (design rationale document: how each key interaction decision — navigation structure, primary actions, information hierarchy, affordances — traces back to a specific research finding or insight; this is a research-grounded design argument, not a visual style rationale), technical execution artifact (high-fidelity interactive prototype — minimum 10 linked screens or states demonstrating the core user journey — with documented minimum 3 iteration rounds), documentation/critique artifact (iteration record: for each round, what the starting state was, what usability test finding or design critique prompted the change, and what changed — with before/after screenshots or Figma version history). Proof Accessibility Rule applies: Figma (free tier), Penpot (open source and free), and Adobe XD (free starter plan) are all valid free-tier prototyping tools. Studio critique: UX practitioner with design research experience reviews interaction design decisions and challenges the research-to-design traceability — 'this looks good' is not a valid critique response for a UX MSc standard. Proof: design rationale document, prototype link, iteration documentation, critique notes. Verifier: UX practitioner (minimum 3 years), product designer with UX research background, or design research academic.
Usability Evaluation
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Usability evaluation of an interactive system with minimum 5 real participants, conducted and reported to professional research standard. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (evaluation plan: usability methodology selected — cognitive walkthrough, think-aloud testing, heuristic evaluation, remote unmoderated testing, or mixed — with written rationale for the method choice and test scenario or task design), technical execution artifact (usability evaluation conducted with minimum 5 real participants: for moderated testing, recordings or timestamped observation notes from each session; for unmoderated, platform export with session recordings or heatmaps), documentation/critique artifact (findings report: severity-rated usability issues using a recognised scale — Nielsen's 1–5 or equivalent — frequency of occurrence for each issue, prioritised redesign recommendations with rationale, and a summary of implications for the next design iteration — minimum 1,200 words). AI-fakeability countermeasure: participant session records — consent forms, video recordings, or timestamped observation notes — are the unfakeable layer. Studio critique: UX lead or senior researcher challenges methodology choices and recommendation prioritisation at a documented session. Proof: evaluation plan, participant records (consent + session evidence), findings report, critique notes. Verifier: UX lead, senior UX researcher, or HCI academic.
UX Design Case Study
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Complete UX project documented from research to final design as a professional portfolio case study. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (problem framing and research plan: the problem statement, who it affects, what is currently known, and the research approach), technical execution artifact (complete UX artefacts across the project: research data and synthesis, design iterations showing development, final prototype, and usability test results after final design), documentation/critique artifact (case study document covering the full process with critical reflection: what was learned at each stage, what design decisions were driven by what evidence, what measured outcomes were achieved or what would be measured — minimum 2,500 words across all case study sections). Studio critique: portfolio review by a senior UX designer or UX design director with documented written feedback on the research-to-design chain, quality of synthesis, and professional readiness of the case study as a portfolio piece. Proof: case study document or portfolio entry, supporting research and design artefacts, documented critique feedback. Verifier: senior UX designer (minimum 5 years experience) or design director.
Photography Brief Response
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Photography commission or brief response demonstrating professional pre-production planning and delivery. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (brief response pre-production document: shot list, lighting plan, location assessment or studio layout, and technical specification for the shoot — camera format, lens choices, capture settings rationale), technical execution artifact (delivered final images meeting brief specification — minimum 10 edited, colour-graded, and retouched images delivered in the required format, colour space, and resolution), documentation/critique artifact (post-shoot reflection: what the plan stated vs. what was captured, what technical and creative decisions were adapted during the shoot and why, what would be approached differently). Studio critique: working photographer or photography tutor reviews the brief response against the brief objectives — pre-production quality and final delivery quality are both assessed. Proof: pre-production document, delivered image set (minimum 10), post-shoot reflection, critique notes. Verifier: working photographer or photography tutor — no peer-only verification.
Photographic Technical Mastery
0 milestones · 8 weeks
Technical photography exercises demonstrating deliberate control of exposure, depth of field, and lighting. Triad: technical execution artifact (minimum 15 images across 5 technical exercises: manual exposure, controlled depth of field, available-light, continuous-light, and flash or strobe — each image accompanied by EXIF data screenshot showing the actual settings used), documentation/critique artifact (written technical rationale for each exercise: what technical objective was being pursued, what camera settings were selected and why, what the resulting image demonstrates, and what would be adjusted in a reshoots). Proof Accessibility Rule applies: chemical darkroom printing is the preferred proof for tonal control; digital tonal control workflows documented in Lightroom (subscription), Capture One (trial), or Darktable (free, open source) are valid accessible alternatives where darkroom access is unavailable. Studio critique: photography professional reviews technical decisions and proposes a novel scenario requiring real-time technical problem-solving — the response to this scenario is documented as part of the proof. Proof: exercise image sets with EXIF screenshots, technical rationale document, crit notes including the novel scenario response. Verifier: professional photographer or photography tutor.
Photographic Series Development
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Documentary or conceptual photographic series developed from initial concept through to final edited sequence. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (project concept and artist statement: what photographic question, subject territory, or documentary subject is being explored, with reference to at least 2 photographers whose work is relevant to this project and an explanation of how this series relates to and differs from their approach), technical execution artifact (final edited series of minimum 10 images in a deliberate sequence — the sequence is not a random selection of good images but a considered editorial decision about ordering, pacing, and the arc of the series), documentation/critique artifact (written project rationale: how the final edit was determined from the contact sheet, what sequencing decisions were made and why, what the series communicates as a whole beyond the individual images). Studio critique: photographer or photography tutor challenges the concept, the edit, and the sequencing decisions at a documented portfolio review — presenting 50+ raw images from which the 10 were selected is expected as part of the crit. Proof: concept statement, contact sheet or raw image selection document, final edited series, written rationale, crit notes. Verifier: professional photographer or photography tutor.
Photography Portfolio Review
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Professional photography portfolio presenting minimum 20 images across at least 2 distinct photographic genres or projects, reviewed by a working professional. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (curatorial rationale: why these images in this sequence, what the portfolio communicates about the photographer's identity, visual voice, and professional positioning), technical execution artifact (portfolio of minimum 20 images at print-ready or web-optimised quality — technically clean, correctly exposed, and professionally retouched or edited), documentation/critique artifact (written project notes for each series or project in the portfolio: intent or brief, technical approach, editorial decisions, and what each project demonstrates about the photographer's range and capabilities). Studio critique: working professional photographer (minimum 3 years commercial practice) conducts a documented portfolio review with written feedback on technical quality, creative voice, commercial readiness, and professional positioning — the written feedback is submitted as proof. Proof: portfolio (print PDF or web portfolio link), project notes, documented critique feedback. Verifier: working professional photographer (minimum 3 years commercial practice) — no peer-only verification.
Film Pre-Production Package
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Professional pre-production package for a short film or motion project demonstrating production planning to industry standard. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (treatment document: project concept, tone and genre, visual style reference, target audience, and intended distribution — the document that pitches the film before a frame is shot), technical execution artifact (full pre-production package: shooting script or detailed shot list with scene descriptions and technical notes, storyboard for minimum 5 key sequences, production schedule showing all shoot days and call times, and location breakdown or production design reference document), documentation/critique artifact (production rationale: written justification of key pre-production decisions — why this location, what the visual language references, how the schedule reflects real production constraints and contingency planning). Studio critique: professional film director, producer, or film school tutor reviews the pre-production package for production viability and creative coherence. Proof: treatment, shooting script or shot list, storyboard, production schedule, rationale document, critique notes. Verifier: professional film director, producer, or film school tutor — no peer-only verification.
Film Production Shoot
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Short film or motion project shot to professional production standard with documented technical and creative decisions. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (directorial vision document: how the visual language — camera movement, composition approach, lighting aesthetic, performance direction style — serves the narrative or conceptual intention), technical execution artifact (footage shot to production standard demonstrating a consistent visual approach — minimum 3 minutes of edited material or equivalent in raw rushes from a completed shoot day — with evidence that planned coverage was achieved), documentation/critique artifact (production log: camera settings and rationale for each setup, lighting decisions and their intended effect, sound acquisition decisions, what was achieved vs. what was planned, and what adaptation was required during the shoot). Studio critique: director of photography, film director, or film school tutor reviews footage and production log, challenging creative and technical decisions — 'it was what we planned' is not a sufficient explanation for any decision. Proof: directorial vision document, footage (private Vimeo or equivalent link), production log, critique notes. Verifier: professional filmmaker (director or DoP with screen credits) or film school tutor.
Film Post-Production
0 milestones · 10 weeks
Completed edited film sequence with colour grade and sound mix delivered to broadcast or festival standard. Triad: technical execution artifact (finished cut — minimum 2 minutes — with colour grade applied and sound mixed: dialogue clearly audible and balanced, music bed at appropriate level for dialogue, sound effects present where relevant, and overall mix appropriate for the intended output medium — cinema, web, or broadcast), documentation/critique artifact (post-production decisions log: edit structure rationale — what was cut, what was kept, and the pacing decisions; colour grade intent with reference images — what look is being achieved and why; sound design choices and their narrative or emotional purpose), concept/ideation artifact (post-production brief: the tonal, emotional, and pacing objectives the post-production process was designed to achieve — the document that guided all editorial decisions). Proof Accessibility Rule applies: DaVinci Resolve free tier provides professional-grade editing, colour grading, and audio mixing in one application — no paid software required for this outcome. Studio critique: professional film editor, colourist, or film school tutor reviews the finished cut and post-production decisions. Proof: post-production brief, finished cut (video link), post-production decisions log, critique notes. Verifier: professional film editor or colourist, or film school tutor.
Film Portfolio & Screening
0 milestones · 12 weeks
Completed short film or filmmaker showreel screened at a formal or informal context and reviewed by a working professional. Triad: concept/ideation artifact (director's statement: what the film or showreel is trying to achieve, what the filmmaker's creative voice and approach is, how this project demonstrates their filmmaking abilities and positions them as a filmmaker), technical execution artifact (finished short film — minimum 3 minutes — or filmmaker showreel — minimum 90 seconds demonstrating multiple roles or production strengths), documentation/critique artifact (production write-up: from initial concept through pre-production, shoot, and post-production — what was learned at each stage, what went wrong and how it was resolved, what would be done differently — this is the reflective document that demonstrates filmmaking maturity, not just completion). Studio critique: working filmmaker or film school tutor provides documented written feedback at a formal or informal screening or reel review — the written critique is submitted as proof. Proof: director's statement, finished film or showreel (video link), production write-up, documented critique feedback. Verifier: working filmmaker (minimum 3 screen credits or equivalent production experience) or film school tutor with professional credits — no peer-only verification.
Coached programs
Expert-ledBecome an AI Engineer in 12 Weeks
3 milestones · 12w
A structured 12-week program for software engineers who want to transition into AI. You will build 3 portfolio projects (RAG pipeline, fine-tuned model, AI agent), get weekly code reviews, and leave with a proof-backed Outcome Card. Prerequisite: comfort with Python and basic ML intuition.