曝光臺(tái) 注意防騙 網(wǎng)曝天貓店富美金盛家居專營店坑蒙拐騙欺詐消費(fèi)者

5-7
Figure 5-4. Rubric for assessing flight training maneuvers.
Rubric for Assessing Flight Training Maneuvers
Steep Turns
Slow Flight
Stalls
Emergencies
Pilot can describe
physical characteristics/
cognitive elements of
the maneuver.
Pilot can explain the
maneuver’s underlying
concepts, principles,
and procedures.
Pilot can plan and
execute the
maneuvers, with
coaching and
assistance to correct
deviations and errors.
Pilot can plan and
execute the maneuver
to PTS standards
without assistance or
coaching. Pilot
identifies and corrects
errors and deviations.
Describe Explain Practice Perform
• Practice—the student is able to identify, understand,
and apply SRM principles to the actual flight situation.
Coaching, instruction, and/or assistance quickly
corrects minor deviations and errors identified by the
instructor. The student is an active decision maker.
• Manage-Decide—the student can correctly gather the
most important data available both inside and outside
the flight deck, identify possible courses of action,
evaluate the risk inherent in each course of action, and
make the appropriate decision. Instructor intervention
is not required for the safe completion of the flight.
In SRM, the student may be able to describe basic SRM
principles during the first flight. Later, he or she is able to
explain how SRM applies to different scenarios that are
presented on the ground and in the air. When the student
actually begins to make quality decisions based on good SRM
techniques, he or she earns a grade of manage-decide. The
advantage of this type of grading is that both flight instructor
and student know exactly where the student learning has
progressed.
Let’s look at how the rubric in Figure 5-4 might be used
in the flight training scenario at the beginning of this
chapter. During the postflight debriefing, CFI Linda asks
her student, Brian, to assess his performance for the day,
using the Replay – Reconstruct – Reflect – Redirect guided
discussions questions described in the Collaborative
Assessment subsection. Based on this assessment, she
and Brian discuss where Brian’s performance falls in the
rubrics for maneuvers/procedures and SRM. This part of
the assessment may be verbally discussed or, alternatively,
Brian and Linda separately create an assessment sheet for
each element of the flight.
When Brian studies the sheet, he finds “Describe, Explain,
Practice, and Perform.” He decides he was at the perform level
since he had not made any mistakes. The flight scenario had
been a two-leg Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) scenario to a
busy class B airport about 60 miles to the east. Brian felt he
had done well in keeping up with programming the GPS and
MFD until he reached the approach phase. He had attempted
to program the Instrument Landing System (ILS) for runway
7L and had actually flown part of the approach until air traffic
control (ATC) asked him to execute a missed approach.
When he compares the sheet he has completed to Linda’s
version, Brian discovers that most of their assessments appear
to match. An exception is the item labeled “programming the
approach.” Here, where he had rated the item as “Perform,”
Linda had rated it as “Explain.” During the ensuing discussion,
Brian realizes that he had selected the correct approach, but
he had not activated it. Before Linda could intervene, traffic
dictated a go-around. Her “explain” designation tells Brian
that he did not really understand how the GPS worked, and
he agrees.
This approach to assessment has several key advantages.
One is that it actively involves the student in the assessment
process, and establishes the habit of healthy reflection and
self-assessment that is critical to being a safe pilot. Another
is that these grades are not self-esteem related, since they
do not describe a recognized level of prestige (such as A+
or “Outstanding”), but rather a level of performance. The
student cannot flunk a lesson. Instead, he or she can only fail
to demonstrate a given level of flight and SRM skills.
Both instructors and students may initially be reluctant to use
this method of assessment. Instructors may think it requires
more time, when in fact it is merely a more structured,
effective, and collaborative version of a traditional postflight
　
中國航空網(wǎng) www.k6050.com
航空翻譯 www.aviation.cn
本文鏈接地址：Aviation Instructor's Handbook航空教員手冊(cè)(99)