Merit list MVP Iteration 3.0 DRAFT

[nickaddy]

Background

Some helpful feedback came out of Nick's demo to Rob, Meena and Matt on 3 October. We have time to further iterate and incorporate these improvements ahead of the live exercise pilots in November.

Feature(s) Description

• [x] Leadership (although not used frequently) should appear as an option - unticked by default - under Competencies > Selection Criteria
• [x] Working effectively should appear as an option - ticked by default - under Skills & Abilities > Selection Criteria
• [ ] In the panel set-up task, the Judicial assessor needs to be added manually as they vary from one exercise to another and will not be included in the panellist database - that is lay panellists only - i.e. we need to have an email address free text field next to Judicial assessor
• [ ] The previously mentioned email address box should be validated to confirm an @judicialappointments.digital email address has been input
• [ ] We need to ensure there are applications for the Task, particularly at the Panel set-up stage. As when there are 0 applications the user is able to proceed without setting up any panels!
• [x] On non-legal exercises, chosen competencies may be split and only tested once at interview and situational questions, e.g. EJ & PBK tested at interview, ACI, WCO & MWE tested at situational questions. At the step where Admins are prompted to confirm/remove columns, we need to find a way to facilitate this set-up
• [ ] It is possible that a candidate could withdraw after the sift has been set up (the same applied to selection day) and we need to provide a solution for that scenario - one possible solution is for all cells to include a Withdrew option in the dropdown, otherwise grading sheet will be incomplete and panellist will be unable to submit
• [ ] Candidate full name should be displayed on Admin rather than reference number (In panel packs and on panel portal, candidate reference number should be used
• [ ] Merit list download should be a carbon copy of what is onscreen, i.e. include all the grade etc columns from the grading sheet
• [ ] Once panel chair has submitted grades, users on Admin should have an opportunity to edit the grades with a reason box alongside containing the following options: Moderation, human error, changed by SCC, other
• [ ] Replace true/false with yes/no in merit list download

Acceptance Criteria

Definition of Done

• [ ] User stories/acceptance criteria met
• [ ] Internal reviews passed (feedback actioned)
• [ ] User testing passed
• [ ] Relevant technical documentation updated
• [ ] User guidance updated
• [ ] Deployed and merged without errors

User Testing Steps

Specify for users what is being tested (but not how to test it.)

[nickaddy]

Please add your planning poker estimate with Zenhub @warrensearle

[warrensearle]

Hey @nickaddy with regards:

On non-legal exercises, chosen competencies may be split and only tested once at interview and situational questions, e.g. EJ & PBK tested at interview, ACI, WCO & MWE tested at situational questions. At the step where Admins are prompted to confirm/remove columns, we need to find a way to facilitate this set-up

This is how the page currently looks:

This enables the user to remove columns from each of the selected tools, which I think already achieves what you're looking for.

Please could you check the requirements for 'Overall' grades as I'm not sure I've got it right at the moment. As in currently for Selection Day there will be an 'Overall' grade within each of the chosen Tools plus there will be an additional 'Overall' group containing all of the chosen capabilities plus another 'Overall' grade. That's a lot of 'Overalls'!