Published runs
We ran Preflight against courses we didn’t build. Here’s what we found.
Each one includes the complete Learning Readiness Report™ a client would receive: findings, evidence, verdict and ranked fixes. Client work stays private, so what you see here are courses nobody paid us to review.
Three runs, three different layers. Training does not fail in one place, so a preflight does not look in one place.
Case A Instruction + assessmentNot Ready for Deployment
The answer key was in the page source. All fifteen of them.
A legally mandated compliance course where completion means a browser reached the last page.
Case B Packaging + reportingNot Ready for Deployment
A well-made course whose assessment was switched off in the packaging.
Good instruction, a real quiz, an 80% pass mark, and an export that reports completion only.
Case C Experience + deliveryNot Ready for Deployment
Forty-six seconds, one question, and nothing for a phone.
A fixed 1024-pixel canvas teaching a task its audience performs on a phone, with a view-based success criterion.
Wonder what we’d find in yours?
One course. Seven instructional checks. Eighteen synthetic learner runs. Every finding traced back to the instruction, objective, practice or assessment that caused it.
Ten business days. Retest included. No critical issue found, no invoice.
Why we anonymize the publishers
We publish findings, not publishers. None of these organizations asked to be an example, none has been contacted, and naming them would attach a defect report to an institution over work it has had no chance to answer for. The mechanism is what makes these worth reading; the name adds nothing except cost to somebody else.
The tradeoff: because we don’t identify the publishers or packages publicly, you cannot download the same files and reproduce these runs from this page. We retain the identity, filename and hash of each package, and will provide them to that publisher on request.
What these runs prove, and what they don’t
They show what Preflight found in these specific course packages. They do not prove how real learners would perform, and they do not establish the accuracy of Preflight itself. We have not completed a validation study comparing our findings to human reviewers or to learner outcomes, so we make no accuracy claim about the score.
Each run tests the course package itself. An LMS can apply its own completion or mastery rules that are not contained in the package.