The screening interview by phone was rather straightforward and handled by a team member and the recruiter. This was a rather pleasant experience owing to the exuberance of the recruiter over finding a person that had had worked in an Agile environment (me). The "NAT" test given by email, however, was shabbily constructed, perhaps intentionally. The test consisted of a PSD file mockup (sloppy, perhaps intended to be that way) and a single paragraph of instructions. I think I can say that the project requirement specifically listed compatibility across non-current and older browsers, plus 508 validation. The email also included an email address of a team developer to answer questions. I attempted to contact the developer by email regarding the legacy browser requirements but never received a response. I assumed part of the test was how quickly it needed to be achieved and set to work immediately on the test, which took about a day or so to complete, also minding good practice and requirements as best as I know how. It is important to note that no current browser coding, such as HTML5, was requested. I therefore angled the requirements to incorporate old school coding for minimum fuss, no shims. I sent an untested version at first then submitted a final version realizing I did not run one of the required browser tests properly. My final version was accompanied by copious notation regarding testing methods, coding posture for this project, and commentary on two 508 issues solved via minor JS hacks. I provided commentary in the same vein as normally done within a communicative development environment in which you would expect intelligent discourse on methods used. I received an email after about a week and a half from the recruiter, saying I was not selected as a candidate. The review attached by the Senior Developer seemed arbitrary, and injected requests that were not written into the initial requirements. All issues presented by the SD were arguable based on the requirements of the test, save perhaps for one minor error seen in screen readers. I do not believe that the SD deeply read the requirements, just reviewed the project at face value. I provided a rebuttal for each point at issue by email. The response email from the recruiter was flat, with no further enlightenment, repeating there were no current openings for me. If Nerdery staff were more helpful, making this assessment of the interview would My takeaway from the Nerdery interviews: nothing. However, I think this is relevant advice: Do not proceed with any test presented by the Nerdery without briefly conferring first with the assigned developer on the NAT requirements and verify each requirement to your satisfaction. They will give you two weeks to complete the project, use it wisely and be a pest if need be to make sound decisions. In a real world situation, not every requirement is written. Presume nothing and expect deeper unstated rules.