The value of any evaluation depends on adherence to fundamental evaluation principles. These principles are described below.
Evaluators must be selected not only for their technical qualifications but also for their demonstrated performance, objectivity and ability to observe and to provide constructive comments. These evaluators are the SPs, IPs, IEs and MEs who assist the commander in administering the ATP.
The method used to conduct the evaluation must be based on uniform and standard objectives. In addition, it must be consistent with the unit's mission and must strictly adhere to the appropriate SOPs and regulations. The evaluator must insure a complete evaluation is given in all areas and refrain from making a personal “area of expertise” a dominant topic during the evaluation.
All participants must completely understand the purpose of the evaluation.
Cooperation by all participants is necessary to guarantee the accomplishment of the evaluation objectives. The emphasis is on all participants, not just on the examinee.
The evaluation must produce specific findings to identify training needs. The examinee needs to know what is being performed correctly or incorrectly, and how improvements can be made.
The evaluation will determine the examinee's ability to perform essential hands-on tasks to prescribed standards. Flight evaluations will also determine the examinee’s ability to exercise crew coordination in completing these tasks.
The guidelines for evaluating crew coordination are based on a subjective analysis of how effectively a crew performs together to accomplish a series of tasks. The evaluator must determine how effectively the examinee employs the air crew coordination basic qualities outlined in chapter 6. The evaluator should consider performing deviations to the standard to evaluate the examinees reaction and employment of effective crew coordination.
Example;two challenge rule, does the examinee take the flight controls if he hears no response from the evaluator after two challenges? Does he announce “drifting” if the evaluator drifts. Is the positive 3 way transfer of the flight controls always performed properly? Is he announcing his actions?
In all phases of evaluation, the evaluator is expected to perform as an effective crew member. However, at some point during the evaluation, circumstances may prevent the evaluator from performing as a crew member. In such cases, a realistic, meaningful, and planned method should be developed to pass this task back to the examinee effectively. In all other situations, the evaluator must perform as outlined in the task description or as directed by the examinee. The examinee must know that he is being supported by a fully functioning crew member.
Evaluations of crew tasks, to include 3000 series tasks are conducted for the entire crew. Evaluators will evaluate all crewmembers in the performance of station specific duties as well as the crew’s ability to coordinate and accomplish a task according to the task standards.
When occupying a crew station during evaluation of a 2000 or 3000 series task, the evaluator must perform duties specific to the occupied crew station to task standard.
For selected crew (2000 and 3000 series) tasks, evaluators can use the on board video recorder to perform the evaluation. The evaluator must evaluate both crewmembers simultaneously. Although hands on involvement may not be at the same level for both crewmembers, successful accomplishment of the task requires input from both crewmembers.
Academic Evaluation. The examinee must demonstrate a working knowledge and understanding of the appropriate subject areas in paragraph 3-4b.
Academic. Some tasks are identified in TRAINING AND EVALUATION CONSIDERATIONS as tasks which may be evaluated academically. For these tasks, the examinee must demonstrate a working knowledge of the task and appropriate standards. Evaluators may use CBI, mock-ups, or other approved devices to assist in determining the examinee’s knowledge of the task.
In the aircraft or in the simulator. Tasks which require evaluation under these conditions must be performed hands-on in the aircraft or the UH-60 simulator. Task standards are based on an ideal situation. Grading is based on meeting the minimum standards. The evaluator must consider deviations (high wind, turbulence, or poor visibility) from the ideal during the evaluation. If other than ideal conditions exist, the evaluator must make appropriate adjustments to the standards.
CREW MEMBER EVALUATION
Evaluations are conducted to determine the crew member's ability to perform the tasks on his CTL and check understanding of required academic subjects listed in the ATM. When the examinee is an evaluator/trainer, the recommended procedure is for the evaluator to reverse roles with the examinee. When the evaluator uses this technique, the examinee must understand how the role-reversal will be conducted and when it will be in effect.
PI. He must perform selected tasks to ATM standards, applying aircrew coordination principles. The PI must also demonstrate a working knowledge of the appropriate subjects in paragraph 3-4 b. In addition, he must be familiar with his IATF, and understand the requirements of his CTL.
PC/MP. The PC/MP must meet the requirements in a.(1). In addition, he must demonstrate sound judgment and maturity in the management of the mission, crew, and assets.
UT. The UT must meet the requirements in a. (1), (2). In addition, he must be able to instruct in the appropriate tasks and subjects, recognize errors in performance or understanding, make recommendations for improvement, train to standards, and document training.
IP/IE (If not IP Qualified). The IP/IE must meet the requirements in a.(2). In addition, he must be able to objectively train, evaluate, and document performance of the CE, MO, OR, VI, SI, FI, PI, PC, and UT, using role-reversal for IP, UT, SI, and FI, as appropriate. He must be able to develop and implement an individual training plan, and have a thorough understanding of the requirements and administration of the ATP.
SP/IE/ME. The SP/IE must meet the requirements in Paragraph a.(2) and (4). The ME must meet the requirements in a.(1) and (2). In addition, the SP/IE/ME must be able to train and evaluate IPs, SPs, IEs, MPs, MEs, UTs, PCs, PIs, SIs, and FIs as appropriate, using role-reversal. The SP must also be able to develop and implement a unit-training plan and administer the commander's ATP.
SP/IP/IE/ME and UTs will be evaluated on their ability to apply the learning and teaching process outlined in the Instructor's appendix of TC 1-200.
Dual seat designated crewmembers must be evaluated in both crew positions. All tasks are not required to be evaluated in both crew positions. Evaluators will select some tasks to be evaluated in each crew position. The evaluated task must be performable in the crew position at which the examinee is evaluated.
Academic Evaluation Criteria.
Proficiency evaluations. The commander or his representative will select a minimum of two topics from the subject areas in paragraph 3-4b to be evaluated.
APART/D/N/NVG. The SP/IP will evaluate a minimum of two topics from each subject area in paragraphs in 3-4b. that apply.
APART instrument. The IE will evaluate a minimum of two topics from the subject areas in paragraphs 3-4b(1), (2) and (4) relative to IMC flight and flight planning. If the evaluated crewmember is an IP/SP, the IE will evaluate the IP’s/SP’s ability to instruct instrument related tasks.
APART MP/ME evaluation. The ME will evaluate a minimum of two topics from the subject areas in paragraphs 3-4b(1) through (6) and (11) with specific emphasis on how they apply to maintenance test flights.