Posted by Captain J Ridgley (Commandant) in Discussion: Putting a meaning to the number (Graduate Evals)
Hello, one and all!

So this month will be one full of discussion and I am completely open to criticism and rebuke. This is to simply achieve a clear picture and betterment of the Academy process. With that said, in the background, I have been in discussion with how we grade the cadet Evals at the end of their term. As such I noticed a few differences between grading and recommendations for Cadets in regards to their role and their grade, subjective was the word that came to mind. So I have put together a very draft based idea of a ‘meaning to the number’ so that 1-We have a clear understanding of what a score means to the Cadet and 2 for me most importantly we are then able to go back to the Cadet with work on points and coach them into being a better writer.

This scoring system has been adapted from my own personal experience working in a military training establishment.

So here it is, (We already grade in the following subjects if you wasn’t aware and is typically out of 35.)

(Only a recommendation, this is by no means resolute.)
28-35 = DH
19-27 = Main
11-18 = Main (At-Risk could require a mentor)
0 - 10 = Improvement Required

AWOL Limits:
0 - Has Never Posted
1 - Has spent 75% time AWOL or for a duration of over two months.
2 - Has spent 50% time AWOL or for a duration greater than a month but less than two months.
3 - Has spent 25% time AWOL or for a duration greater than a week but less than a month.
4 - Has infrequently been AWOL or for a Duration less than a week.
5 - No AWOLS.

I would actually revise this, because if a person has never posted, they would not reach the point of doing a grad eval. To be perfectly honest, if someone was really AWOL over 50% of the time, they would probably be recommended for extended time in the Academy, because we wouldn’t have a good enough idea of if they’ve caught onto our style or not.

Writing Style:
0 - Writer shows no understanding of STF writing styles
1 - Writer shows an understanding of the basic STF writing styles and knows the difference between IC and OOC notes.
2 - Writer shows an understanding of the basic STF writing styles and knows the difference between IC and OOC posts, 1st and 3rd person views.
3 - Writer shows an understanding of the basic STF writing styles and knows the difference between IC and OOC posts, 1st and 3rd person views, Speech and Actions.
4 - Writer shows an understanding of the basic STF writing styles and knows the difference between IC and OOC posts, 1st and 3rd person views, Speech, actions and thoughts.
5 - Writer shows an understanding of the basic STF writing styles and knows the difference between IC and OOC posts, 1st and 3rd person views, Speech, actions, thoughts and descriptive writing.

Post Presentation:
0 - Writer is unable to clearly present their posts, due to combined missing use of paragraphs, grammar and spelling. (Can not read nor write)
1 - Writer shows understanding in the use of grammar.
2 - Writer shows understanding in the use of grammar, spelling.
3 - Writer shows understanding in the use of grammar, spelling, paragraphs.
4 - Writer shows understanding in the use of grammar, spelling, paragraphs, IC and OOC notes.
5 - Writer shows understanding in the use of grammar, spelling, paragraphs, IC and OOC notes and signs off posts.

I would actually move signs off posts by a lot. It’s one of the core tenants of our style that we constantly remind them off. I would actually change this to be many spelling and grammar errors, some errors, few errors, and basically no errors. (See Medical Course rubric here https://docs.google.com/document/d/151F9jjJ8JKBOJs2u3EML9osDYUVYv7rQ7UWAf0laUnE/edit?usp=sharing)

Sim Interaction:
0 - No Sim interaction.
1 - The writer infrequently participates in either the main or side Sim interaction.
2 - The writer infrequently participates in both main and side sim interaction.
3 - The writer frequently participates in either main or side Sim interaction.
4 - The writer frequently participates in both main and side sim interaction.
5 - The writer helps lead either the main sim or a side sim interaction.

Once again, I think if someone has no sim interaction, they are most likely not even going to make it to the grad eval state.

Timeline Management:
0 - No Timeline Management.
1 - The writer infrequently participates in one single timeline.
2 - The writer frequently participates in one single timeline.
3 - The writer infrequently participates in two or more timelines.
4 - The writer frequently participates in two or more timelines.
5 - The writer helps leads one timeline while participating in multiple timelines.

Character Limitations:
0 - Character has no limitations, has beaten the kobayashi maru without cheating. OR to many.
1 - Character shows very few limitations or far too many.
2 - Character shows very few limitations and the writer understands the importance of avoiding god complex.
3 - Character shows a healthy balance of limitations
4 - Character shows a healthy balance of limitations and the writer understand the importance of avoiding god complex.
5 - Character shows a healthy understanding of limitations as well as the understanding of avoiding god complex and has shown character development during their evaluation period.

Crew Interaction:
0 - No crew interaction.
1 - The writer infrequently interacts with at least 10% or less
2 - The writer frequently interacts with at least 10% or less
3 - The writer infrequently interacts with at least 50% of the crew.
4 - The writer frequently interacts with at least 50% of the crew.
5 - The Writer infrequently interacts with at least more than 50% of the crew and frequently with their department.

It is quite a large jump from 10-50%. I would go with under 10% as 0, 30-40% for 1 and 2, and then like 60% for 3 and 4.

That is my quick review of what you have here. I’m happy to go into more detail on the comments if anyone has some questions.

Steve