Interview scorecard template

Digital Detox Specialist interview scorecard

Pre-screening scorecard for Digital Detox Specialist candidates.

See AI scoring
education coachingbehaviour changedigital wellbeingretreat facilitationscreen time coaching
Complete evaluation framework

What to assess and how to score it

Review the evidence signals before interviewing. Then use the anchored descriptions—not instinct alone—to choose the score that best matches each answer.

01
Evaluation factor

Subject and technical command

30% weight

Check their grounding in behavioural science: CBT-informed habit change, dopamine and variable reward mechanics, screen time data from Apple Screen Time or RescueTime, and problematic use screeners like the IAT or SAS-SV.

Evidence to listen for

  • Knows the material or discipline well beyond the level they teach
  • Holds the qualifications, licences, or certifications required, and they are current
  • Can answer an unexpected question honestly rather than bluffing
  • Keeps learning in their own field

Five-point scoring guide

1
Poor

Knowledge barely ahead of the learners; bluffs when asked something unexpected.

2
Needs Improvement

Adequate on the syllabus only; gaps show under questioning.

3
Satisfactory

Solid command of the material for the level taught.

4
Very Good

Depth well beyond the taught level; comfortable being asked anything.

5
Excellent

Cites specific frameworks and screeners, distinguishes compulsive use from clinical addiction, and knows when to refer to a licensed clinician.

02
Evaluation factor

How they actually teach

30% weight

Probe how they run an actual detox: onboarding audits, phased reduction plans versus cold turkey retreats, replacement activities, relapse protocols, and what they do when a client's job requires Slack.

Evidence to listen for

  • Describes how they teach a specific thing, not their philosophy of teaching
  • Adapts when the first explanation does not land
  • Checks understanding rather than assuming it
  • Differentiates for varying ability within one group

Five-point scoring guide

1
Poor

Only philosophy, no method; one explanation and no plan B.

2
Needs Improvement

Delivers content but cannot adapt when learners are lost.

3
Satisfactory

Sound instruction; differentiation is limited.

4
Very Good

Multiple routes to the same concept, with real checks for understanding.

5
Excellent

Describes a staged programme with named tactics, adapts for remote workers and parents, and explains why they avoid shame-based framing.

03
Evaluation factor

Group management and safeguarding

25% weight

Assess handling of groups on retreats or workshops: device surrender logistics, withdrawal irritability, teen and family cohorts, safeguarding policy, DBS or equivalent checks, and consent for minors.

Evidence to listen for

  • Has a concrete approach to a disruptive individual and a whole group losing focus
  • Knows the safeguarding or duty-of-care obligations for this age group and setting
  • Escalates a concern through the right channel
  • Sets boundaries without becoming punitive

Five-point scoring guide

1
Poor

No behaviour strategy; unaware of safeguarding obligations.

2
Needs Improvement

Struggles with disruption; vague on duty of care.

3
Satisfactory

Manages a normal group; less confident with serious disruption.

4
Very Good

Confident group management with clear safeguarding awareness.

5
Excellent

Names a written safeguarding policy, has managed a distressed participant mid-retreat, and sets device boundaries without confiscation conflict.

04
Evaluation factor

Progress and communication

15% weight

Look for how they measure change: baseline pickup counts, weekly screen time deltas, sleep or focus self-reports, and how they report progress to clients or corporate wellbeing sponsors.

Evidence to listen for

  • Measures whether learners actually improved, not just attended
  • Gives feedback that changes what someone does next
  • Communicates with parents, clients, or managers about difficult progress honestly
  • Records progress usefully

Five-point scoring guide

1
Poor

No sense of whether anyone improved.

2
Needs Improvement

Tracks attendance rather than progress; avoids hard conversations.

3
Satisfactory

Monitors progress; feedback is general.

4
Very Good

Measures progress concretely and handles difficult conversations well.

5
Excellent

Quotes real before and after metrics across a client cohort, tracks retention past 90 days, and reports honestly on regressions.

Put this rubric to work

Score every candidate against the same standard

Add these weighted factors to Hirevire and let AI evaluate recorded answers against your rubric.

Explore AI Scorecards