Practice scores
Practice mode is designed for learning a method. A module may report accuracy, completed items, response speed, control error or a composite measure depending on the task. Settings can change between runs, so two practice percentages are not automatically equivalent.
Use a practice result to answer a local question: did accuracy improve at the same difficulty, did tracking become steadier, or did a specific error happen less often?
Assessment scores
Assessment mode uses a more fixed workload so results are more suitable for comparison over time. The displayed percentage is calculated from the Academy module’s own scoring rules. Depending on the task, those rules can combine correct decisions with missed targets, false responses, timing or control precision.
An assessment score describes performance in CBAT Academy. It is not an official RAF or CAF test score and it is not converted using an official proprietary algorithm.
Estimated stanines
Where the interface shows a stanine-style value, CBAT Academy normalises its own practice result onto a nine-band training scale. This makes different modules easier to compare at a glance, but it does not mean the value was produced by an official assessment’s norm group.
The useful interpretation is relative: lower bands suggest a module should return to focused practice, while higher bands suggest the current Academy workload is becoming more reliable.
How modules map to cognitive domains
Each training module is assigned to one or more cognitive domains such as spatial reasoning, symbolic reasoning, task management, perception, attention or psychomotor performance. These mappings are independently developed and group module results into broader skill areas.
Role requirement comparisons
Where public material describes a role, domain structure or historical requirement, the interface can place Academy estimates beside that reference. Public information is used only as context. Gaps are not silently filled with official-looking claims: module mappings, trainer weights and readiness calculations remain Academy methodology.
A comparison can help identify which domain deserves more practice. It cannot determine eligibility, predict a selection outcome or replace current advice from a recruiter.
How score history is used
History keeps individual module attempts so you can compare like with like, see whether a change persists and avoid overreacting to one unusually strong or weak run. Broader averages use eligible assessment attempts rather than treating every adjustable practice run as equal evidence.
Trend direction, workload and recurring error type are usually more useful than a single best percentage.
Why every estimate is unofficial
- Official scoring algorithms, current norm groups and complete role thresholds are not public.
- Academy exercises differ in wording, timing, controls, display design and workload.
- Browser performance, screen size, input hardware, fatigue and chosen settings affect results.
- Historical candidate material can become outdated and is labelled separately from official sources.
- Selection includes factors beyond aptitude testing.
Review and correction process
Scoring documentation is reviewed when a module’s rules, result format or domain mapping changes. Public-source claims are checked separately from Academy calculations. If a source does not establish a claim, the wording is narrowed or the material is labelled as historical, candidate-reported or independently inferred.