The candidates section asks for three things after an exam. A result released on a stated date, in a stated form. Feedback that reaches every candidate, with a record of what each one got. And a document at the end for those who passed. StudyDrome Exam Manager covers all three. The part worth understanding is that the release runs on two separate settings, and they do different jobs.
The product overview is on OSCE exams in StudyDrome. The reports behind the numbers are on which report answers your question.
Two controls, one release
The first control is fixed when the exam is published. The second can be changed at any time afterward. Keeping them apart is what makes a staged release possible.
Post-completion results mode decides whether a candidate sees anything at all once they finish. It is captured in the published snapshot. Its three settings are do not show, summary, and detailed. Living in the snapshot, it describes the policy in force for that sitting. It cannot be changed afterward.
Result visibility level determines how much detail is shown, and it lives on the test rather than the snapshot. Its four levels run from hidden, through summary, through per-question detail, to full review. Changes take effect immediately, with no republish, and they can be applied across many tests at once.
That second control is the one an exam office uses week to week:
- Publish with results hidden, so nothing leaks while marking is open.
- Open the summary once the board has ratified, which matches the release date in the handbook.
- Open the details during the appeal window so a candidate can see what their result is based on.
- Open full review only if and when the stations can safely be seen.
Two limits belong in the same breath. There is no scheduled automatic release: the change is made by a person when the board has signed. And the results route is reached from the post-submit redirect or a direct link. Do not promise candidates a browsable history of past results.
What the guide's release plan looks like here
The ratification page asks for three things. Nothing released before the board signs. One cohort released together. And a result that carries the evidence behind it. The first two are the hidden-then-summary sequence above.
The third is a division of labor. The summary level carries the outcome and the score. The station-level detail for an OSCE comes from the candidate scorecard. That is produced on the manager side and sent, not browsed by the candidate. The analytics page covers how that scorecard is built and exported.
Feedback sends, with a log
Two email pipelines run off a test. Instructions go out before the sitting, which is the practical half of briefing candidates. Feedback goes out after it.
The feedback send builds a personal message from a template with variable substitution. It identifies the eligible candidates across all publications of the test. It sends in batches of up to a thousand recipients. The office picks the template, writes the subject and body, inserts variables from a list, then chooses recipients and sends.
What makes it usable as evidence is the history. Every send keeps a log, and each log has a detail view. For feedback, you can retrieve the exact content a given recipient received. When a candidate says they were never told something, that is the record which answers it.
One boundary, stated plainly: a human presses Send. There is no automatic release triggered by marking completion. That is the same decision as the manual visibility change above. The board signs, then someone sends.
Certificates
For candidates who passed, a certificate template defines the page geometry, the type, the default language, and optionally the course. Per-language versions allow a single design to serve a bilingual school. Templates can be duplicated, previewed, activated and deactivated, and scoped to a sub-account.
Verification is by a code and a signed lookup. That proves the certificate came from your account. It is not a distributed-ledger credential and should not be sold as one.
What stays with the school
The software moves the result; the school decides what the result says. The letter's wording, the rule that determined a borderline outcome, who met with a candidate who failed, and what remediation is offered: all of that sits on the results letters page. None of it is a setting.
The same is true of timing. The system will release whenever you tell it to, including too early. The date in the handbook and the board's signature are what make the release defensible.