HomeProfile Score
Profile score

One number. Five things behind it.

Built entirely from work that was marked against a published rubric, weighted the same way for everyone at your stage, and visible to you component by component.

The formula

What the score is made of

Five components, fixed weights, published here rather than kept behind a support article. Sample values shown.

78.6Composite Profile Score
Component breakdown
Reasoning quality — 30%84%
Evidence and rigour — 25%76%
Discussion contribution — 20%81%
Submission craft — 15%72%
Consistency over time — 10%68%

Weights are identical for every learner at a stage. What differs between two people at the same score is which components carried it — which is exactly what the breakdown is for.

What moves it

Five levers, in order of size

Nothing here is a trick. The fastest way to move the score is to do the work better, which is the only design we would defend.

01

Argue a case well

A position with a clear claim, real evidence and a stated falsifier moves reasoning and rigour together. This is the biggest single lever.

02

Change your mind out loud

Revising a position in discussion, with reasons, scores higher than defending one that was already wrong. Deliberately.

03

Hand in finished work

Submission craft rewards work that meets the rubric it was given — not length, not polish for its own sake.

04

Keep turning up

Consistency is only a tenth of the score, but it is the tenth that separates two people with identical peaks.

05

Work your weakest component

The recommender points at the component costing you most. Following it is the fastest path, and you can ignore it.

What it ignores

Three things that earn you nothing

Every one of these was proposed at some point and declined for the same reason: it would make the number easier to move without making anyone better.

Not hours spent

Time on the platform contributes nothing. Somebody who does one case brilliantly outscores somebody who watches forty hours of content.

Not popularity

Followers, likes and profile views are invisible to the score. The community is worth having; it is not worth scoring.

Not speed

Finishing quickly earns nothing. Several components actively reward taking the time to check your own argument.

In practice

What the numbers tend to look like

Typical ranges across the platform, so a first score has something to sit against.

40–55
Typical first score
+12
Median gain over a track
75+
Top quartile at a stage
Live
Recalculated as work lands
Questions

About the score

Yes. It is a weighted view of recent work, so a run of thin submissions will pull it down. A score that only ever rises is a participation trophy with extra steps.
Within a stage, broadly yes — the rubrics are the same. Across stages it is not, and we do not display it that way, because a professional case and a school case are not the same test.
You always. Everyone else only if you publish it — the score follows the same per-section visibility as the rest of your profile.
Some look at it; the component breakdown is what they actually read, because "reasoning 84, evidence 76" is far more useful to them than one number.
Request a second read within seven days. A different assessor re-marks it blind and the score recomputes from whatever the re-mark lands on.
Every time a piece of marked work lands — a submission, a discussion, a case position. There is no weekly batch and no waiting.
Baseline takes 15 minutes

Find out where
you start.

The diagnostic is free and it is the only way to get a first number. Everything after that is work.