quote:

I argued that we set the standard based off of the criticality of the task, but there were some arguments.

Uh, yeah, "repair airplane correctly" should have a 100% requirement, not a 70% requirement, else please disclose what airline you work for so I can not fly them.

Whereas, "select clothing that meets the dress code policy" could have a 70% assessment pass rate and there is no critical impact.

Hi again,

I totally agree with Amy.

Your trarget audience is playing a vital role in aircraft maintanence. So, their technical capacities should be higher than other skills. Simulations are often used in aicraft maintanence for technicians in order to refresh their knowledge and skills in any emergency case. f.e. In simulations like flight simulations should be % 100 success. It is a must. There is no margin of error. Safety and human life first!

Well, you have to revise your training programme and evaluation tools to have % 100 requriment. Good luck!

Gokhan

haha, I knew as soon as I disclosed the industry, I opened a can of worms. Actually, in aviation we reserve 100% requirements for tasks such as emergency procedures. Believe it or not, there is a large margin of error in maintenance in a wide variety of areas. Never fear, though, we have a safety of flight standard that is religiously upheld. The only argument in this case was whether a task taught to a certain level had a corresponding standard associated with it. i.e. Knowledge = 70%, Analysis = 100%.

quote:

Originally posted by Mark Carroll:
haha, I knew as soon as I disclosed the industry, I opened a can of worms. Actually, in aviation we reserve 100% requirements for tasks such as emergency procedures. Believe it or not, there is a large margin of error in maintenance in a wide variety of areas. Never fear, though, we have a safety of flight standard that is religiously upheld. The only argument in this case was whether a task taught to a certain level had a corresponding standard associated with it. i.e. Knowledge = 70%, Analysis = 100%.

I was just joshin' with you on the maintenance thing...

But, I still think it's business case driven no matter the level.

At the knowledge level, it may be "list the 5 combo meals and what side choices the customer has". Well, if I am in line at KFC, I (a) want the guy at the counter to be able to list it with 100% accuracy and (b) do it quickly.

So, even though that's a knowledge recall task, I don't have confidence in the KFC employee who has to look at the menu, look on a job aid, etc, to tell me what combo meals come with what features...and by the way the customers are stacking up behind me and giving me the evil eye for asking the question! So, I want my answer tout de suite!

If I'm calling in to a customer service line, and asking about product features-- then they can read them off the job aid for all I care and probably don't need 100% recall of product features/product list, etc.

haha, No offense taken :-) We are of like minds on the subject...the task drives the standard. We have a developer that wants to tie a grading standard to the learning level and we are vehemently opposed to it. I think it is an attempt to "streamline" the process, but for those of us who actually do the work, we prefer the time tested approach of treating each objective as a separate entity worthy of analysis, no cookie cutters for us!