Yes, typically in data like this, it wouldn't be listed as "degrees", but as "highest education level completed" because you typically wouldn't care if someone with a bachelor degree has a high school diploma or not (and people with a bachelors degree and not a high school diploma will be a very tiny minority of the population anyway).

addendum: this is especially confusing since a bachelor (defined as someone who obtained "the first or lowest academical degree conferred by universities and colleges; a bachelor's degree") most likely graduated from high school with a diploma as well. So I initially wondered whether they should be counted or not

the assertion messages are perfectible. Almost all SQL katas present the actual table, expected table and diff in an interactive table in the output panel, thanks to the compare_with function (instead of doing your own RSpec expect(actual).to eq(expected)

take a look at how it's done e.g. there

this is not how it works on Codewars. this will just result in downvotes, issues and complaints from users. You should read the kata authoring guidelines:

The description should clearly state all requirements the user is expected to fulfill to complete the kata. Unless the kata is a puzzle, users should not be given test cases that enforce requirements not mentioned in the description

This kata is not a puzzle. It is a standard SQL kata where we have one or more input tables and we have to write a query to produce an output table conforming to specific rules.

Having to scroll down to the sample tests to read the author's mind is not a good user experience.

Solve some of the 6 or 7 kyu SQL katas written by bornForThis so that you get a better idea of how to write a description for a standard SQL kata.

Well, part of the challenge is to let the contestant figure this out by himself through reading and analyzing the given tables.

voters who possess a high school diploma

how do we know whether they do ? this should be explained in the description

despite the name, the one you linked has nothing to do with the avg() aggregate function in SQL

it would be better to show actual, expected and diff tables for the better user experience. You could look at the other kata that povide such an info. e.g. this one

There are already SQL kata that ask for averages, like Calculating Batting Average and others. Is this one significantly different?

The required order of the results is unspecified, but some orders aren't accepted.

Looks good to me!

Thank you for the feedback! I tried addressing these issues. Hope the kata is better now.

A few issues with this:

• The original method needs to be static
• You're testing for valid/invalid input, but haven't specified what values count as valid
• You need to specify intermediate rounding that you're doing for each tenant as well as the overall rounding (also should specify half-up/down/even)
• Missing random tests
• The specifications of brackets could be more clear. The example table is good, but you still need to specify where those values came from.

I do not know. Did you make a point to check for one prior to submitting your kata to beta?

Yes, I got that part. But which one is it a duplicate of?