曝光臺 注意防騙 網曝天貓店富美金盛家居專營店坑蒙拐騙欺詐消費者

. Lower ratings on several items may point to areas where instructors do not have the same interpretation of an event set or standard.
Some early warnings about problems with one or more event sets can surface during instructor/evaluator training. Whether in large or small group assessment sessions, if one or two event sets show less agreement and follow up analysis shows lower consistency for those event sets compared with all or just the remaining event sets, then there is likely a problem with the items being rated. If there is no pattern of problems during the training phase but a pattern arises after the instructor/evaluators start to administer a number of LOFT/LOE sessions, then the problem may be caused by some element within the event set or by a limitation with the simulator. When analyzing the crew performance data, if crew performance is lower for just one or two event sets, look for problems in administering a particular item in the event set. For example, the event set may require simulating a certain malfunction, but the simulator fails to display or simulate all required cues. These types of problems should surface early in the new LOFT/LOE cycle and are some of the easier to solve. Once the cause has been isolated within a specific element of an event set, the solution is usually a minor change to the scenario, script, or gradesheet. If that does not solve the problem, then the data could be pointing to crew performance difficulties.
Identifying Individualand Group Instructor/Evaluator Problems
One point of this causal analysis is that lower ratings do not automatically mean poor crew performance. Once an airline has established and maintains a standard assessment, they can use the resulting data to more quickly and accurately pinpoint the problems. In addition to problems with the scenario and the gradesheet, there may be either individual or group problems with the instructor evaluators.
Under ACRM, a substantial amount of instructor/evaluator training is provided, but it is never possible to cover all items that are to be graded anticipating every possible crew behavior. Once instructor/evaluators start administering LOFT/LOE sessions, the data may show a pattern of lower ratings in certain areas and that some of the group IRR benchmarks are not being met. This could indicate a problem where the instructor/evaluators do not have the same interpretation of an event set or the standards of performance. This type of group problem can arise when what was thought to be a clear criterion or standard was actually ambiguous or did not account for the observed crew responses.
. Monitoring for group crew performance problems allows an airline to be proactive by addressing a minor problem before it turns into a set of incidents or an accident.
In such cases, instructor/evaluators cannot give a standard assessment and better LOE specification or additional group training is required.
In some cases, the IRR measures will show specific individual problems. For example, one or two instructors will not meet the individual level consistency benchmark, while the group measure does. In such a case, those individuals may also fail to meet the sensitivity benchmark, and it is likely that they are having a problem discriminating standard vs. non-standard performance. This problem may arise with rater bias or not using the group criteria when applying the rating scale. An airline may decide to work directly with those individuals, but should consider having the assessment team work as a group to resolve the problems. Any lack of standardization, whether group or individual, is a team problem, and members should feel comfortable turning to the team for help.
　
中國航空網 m.k6050.com
航空翻譯 www.aviation.cn
本文鏈接地址：Developing Advanced Crew Resource Management (ACRM) Training: A Training Manual(79)