Developing Advanced Crew Resource Management (ACRM) Training: A Training Manual(76)

曝光台 注意防骗 网曝天猫店富美金盛家居专营店坑蒙拐骗欺诈消费者

Airlines should treat the development of the first set of procedures as a valuable learning process, and they should maintain key elements of that team to help with additional development. By utilizing the experience gained from the first
round, airlines can simplify the development process and work with a more efficient team. Therefore, one of the keys to the successful development of additional CRM procedures is planning for that need during the initial procedures development. At that point an airline should evaluate who the long-term players will be and take steps to ensure that those individuals can stay involved in the ongoing elements of the ACRM program.
Implementing ACRM for the Instructor/Evaluator
. Refinement of the LOFT/LOE gradesheet is one of the most important steps in maintaining a reliable and standard crew performance assessment team.
Refining Instructor/Evaluator Assessment Tools
The instructors should consider the refinement of the LOFT/LOE gradesheet as one of the most important steps in an organization’s drive to advance a reliable and standard crew performance assessment team. As discussed in Part 4, a number of guidelines should be considered in the design of the gradesheets, including organizing them around event sets using a standard rating scale and representing that scale on every page. Once the basic elements of the gradesheet are in place, the instructors should be encouraged to refine any of the elements that may be causing assessment problems.
Early indicators of problems with the gradesheet include finding that required fields are not being completed or are being completed with out-of-range values. These types of problems can easily be addressed at an instructor/evaluator meeting, and normally the refinement involves correcting a data field heading or adding more information or instructions. More subtle problems may emerge when lack of agreement or a large amount of variance is observed for specific items on the gradesheet. This lack of agreement often is associated with one or more observable behaviors that have not been well worded or require additional standards. One of the benefits of ACRM’s reliance on good data collection is that these problem items can be readily identified. Again, instructor/evaluator meetings can be used as a forum for refining the wording or further specifying the standard.
The rating scale is another area that may require refinement. When airlines start to use a more precise rating scale, as is required under ACRM, difficulties can arise in defining what is “Standard” and what is “Not Acceptable” in specific situations. One point of confusion can develop around the difference
. ACRM promotes the use of videotapes of crew performance in conjunction with the IRR process to establish evaluator reliability.
between “Standard” performance and “Average” performance. Some evaluators consider what they normally see on the line or in the simulator as “Standard” performance. Under ACRM, that is defined as “Average” performance; “Standard” performance is the behavior that meets specific criteria. Instructor/evaluators can benefit from the further specification of “Standard” and/or “Not Acceptable” criteria for specific items. Specification of these criteria can be time consuming, so evaluators must work to select those items causing the greatest amount of difficulty.
　
中国航空网 www.aero.cn
航空翻译 www.aviation.cn
本文链接地址：Developing Advanced Crew Resource Management (ACRM) Training: A Training Manual(76)