AMC4 ORO.FC.231(d)(1) Evidence-based training
ED Decision 2022/014/R
RECOMMENDED
GRADING SYSTEM METHODOLOGY — VENN MODEL
(a) To grade a competency, the instructor
should assess the associated OBs of each competency against the following
dimensions by determining:
(1) what was the outcome of the threat
management, error management and undesired aircraft state management relating
specifically to the competency being assessed;
(2) how well the flight crew member
demonstrated the OB(s) when they were required. This includes:
(i) how many OBs the flight crew member
demonstrated over the EBT phase (e.g. EVAL, MT, SBT) when they were required;
and
(ii) how often the flight crew member
demonstrated the OB(s) when they were required;
|
Abbreviated word picture VENN model |
||||
|
|
TEM |
Observable behaviours |
||
|
Grading |
OUTCOME (1) |
HOW WELL (2) = |
HOW MANY (i)+ |
HOW OFTEN (ii) |
|
1 |
unsafe situation |
ineffectively |
few, hardly any |
rarely |
|
2 |
not an unsafe situation |
minimally acceptable |
some |
occasionally |
|
3 |
safe situation |
adequately |
many |
regularly |
|
4 |
safe situation |
effectively |
most |
regularly |
|
5 |
enhanced safety, effectiveness and
efficiency |
in an exemplary manner |
all, almost all |
always |
(b) Grades should be determined during each
EBT module as follows:
(1) EVAL — overall performance of the phase
for each competency at level 1 grading metrics.
(2) MT — overall performance of the phase at
level 0 grading metrics. When the phase is graded ‘not competent’, it requires
level 2 grading metrics.
Note: Only a limited number of
competencies may be observed and graded in this phase (e.g. PRO, FPA, FPM);
the others are ‘to be left in blank’.
(3) SBT — overall performance of the phase for
each competency at level 1 grading metrics. Unless just culture and the
necessary non-jeopardy environment during training may be compromised. In that
case, level 0 grading metrics.
Note:
In-seat instruction (ISI) should not be included in any assessment.
(c) Where any competency is graded below the
minimum acceptable level of performance (grade 1 on a 5-point scale), an outcome
of additional FSTD training is required.
(1) Additional level 2 grading metrics must be
recorded.
(2) The flight crew member should not be
released to unsupervised line operations until each competency is demonstrated
at or above the minimum acceptable level of performance.
(d) Where all competencies are determined at
or above the minimum acceptable level of performance (grade 2 on a 5-point
scale), the outcome should be COMPETENT. Consistent grading below the average
(2 on a 5-point scale) may indicate a need for training to elevate the
performance to the average (grade 3 on a 5-point scale). As a minimum, the
following conditions apply:
(1) Any competency graded with 2 requires
level 2 grading metrics.
(2) Any competency graded with 2 in any
simulator session of the 1st module followed by a grade 2 in the same
competency in the EVAL of the 2nd module requires individual tailored training
in the SBT of the 2nd module. (First example: 1st Module SBT graded with 2,
2nd Module EVAL graded with 2 in the same competency, thus the 2nd SBT should
be an individual tailored training on that competency. Second example: 1s
module EVAL graded 2, 2nd module EVAL graded 2 on the same competency, thus
the 2nd module SBT should be individual tailored training on that competency).
(3) Any competency graded with 2 in three
consecutive modules requires individual tailored training. If at the end of
the tailored training (3rd SBT) the competency continues being graded with 2,
additional FSTD training is required within the next 3 months. For instance,
following the example above, the SBT in the 2nd Module was an individual
tailored training. In the 3rd Module during the EVAL the same competency is
graded with 2 and individual tailored training is applied. The SBT is graded
with 2 again. The pilot may continue line operations but should receive
additional FSTD training within the next 3 months.
(4) The operator should not release a flight
crew member to unsupervised line operations when more than four competencies
(the majority of the competencies — five competencies or above) are graded
with 2 in any single simulator session of the module.
(5) Any EVAL graded with 2 in more than three
competencies requires individual tailored training in the SBT. If at the end
of the module more than three competencies continue being graded with 2, the
pilot may continue line operations but should receive additional FSTD training
within the next 3 months.
(e) ‘Individual tailored training’ refers to a
simulator session tailored to the pilot’s individual training needs, which may
require a different programme or syllabus. Normally, it may be done during the
SBT and normally there is not an increase of FSTD volume (no extra simulator
session). It may require an increased volume of training such as CBT,
additional briefings, etc. Any individual tailored training may be substituted
by additional FSTD training before the start of the next module.
(f) ‘Additional FSTD training’ refers to the fact that in addition to the requirements of tailored training, there is an increase of FSTD volume (extra simulator session). It normally happens after individual tailored training.
EASA aviation regulations mandate evidence-based training (EBT) using a structured grading system. Instructors assess threat, error, and aircraft state management, evaluating observable behaviors. Low competency grades require additional simulator training. Consistent low grades trigger tailored training and potential further simulator sessions before unsupervised operations.
* Summary by Aviation.Bot - Always consult the original document for the most accurate information.
Loading collections...