Ensure technical assessments are anonymous by removing personal info and file metadata, standardizing submissions, using candidate IDs, double-blind reviews, automated grading, and randomizing order. Centralize communication and train evaluators on bias. Collect demographics post-assessment.
What Are Effective Strategies for Anonymizing Technical Assessments?
AdminEnsure technical assessments are anonymous by removing personal info and file metadata, standardizing submissions, using candidate IDs, double-blind reviews, automated grading, and randomizing order. Centralize communication and train evaluators on bias. Collect demographics post-assessment.
Empowered by Artificial Intelligence and the women in tech community.
Like this article?
How to Screen for Technical Ability Without Bias
Interested in sharing your knowledge ?
Learn more about how to contribute.
Sponsor this category.
Remove Personal Identifiers from Submissions
Before reviewing technical assessments, ensure all personal information (like names, email addresses, or student IDs) is stripped from resumes, cover sheets, and code submissions. Use automated scripts or manual checks to redact metadata that could identify candidates.
Implement a Double-Blind Review Process
Adopt a double-blind system where both the evaluator and the candidate remain anonymous to each other. Assign candidate numbers instead of names and restrict communication to anonymized platforms during assessment and feedback.
Standardize Submission Formats
Mandate a uniform file naming convention (e.g., `submission123.pdf`) and template for all assessment tasks. This minimizes the risk of evaluators deducing the sender’s identity from file names or document formatting quirks.
Use Automated Grading Tools
Leverage automated grading solutions for code or essay assessments. These tools assess submissions based on pre-set criteria, eliminating the possibility of human bias connected to candidate identity.
Train Reviewers on Unconscious Bias
Offer training sessions to evaluators, emphasizing the importance of remaining impartial and avoiding assumptions based on writing style, code commenting patterns, or other indirect identifiers.
Randomize Submission Order
Present assessments to reviewers in a randomized sequence, preventing any sequential bias or linking submissions to application order, which sometimes correlates with acceptance announcements or time stamps.
Avoid Collection of Demographic Data Until Post-Assessment
Refrain from asking for demographic data (like gender, ethnicity, or photos) until after assessments are scored, ensuring evaluators cannot connect responses with candidates’ backgrounds.
Utilize Unique Candidate IDs
Assign random unique identifiers to each assessment that are only meaningful within the evaluation system. This helps reviewers refer to submissions without any risk of cross-identification.
Remove Embedded Metadata from Files
Ensure all digital files (e.g., Word documents, PDFs, code files) are scrubbed of metadata, such as author name, editing history, and geotags, before being distributed to evaluators.
Centralize Communication and Feedback
Route all questions, clarifications, and feedback through a centralized, anonymized system or administrator, preventing evaluators from recognizing candidates through communication styles, signatures, or email addresses.
What else to take into account
This section is for sharing any additional examples, stories, or insights that do not fit into previous sections. Is there anything else you'd like to add?