6-7  Figure 6-4.  Rubric for assessing flight training maneuvers.  In SRM, the learner may be able to describe basic SRM principles during the first flight. Later, he or she is able to explain how SRM  applies to different scenarios that are presented on the ground and in the air. When the learner actually begins to make quality  decisions based on good SRM techniques, he or she earns a grade of manage-decide. The advantage of this type of grading is that  both flight instructor and learner know exactly where the learning has progressed.  Let’s look at how the rubric in  Figure 6-4  might be used in a flight training scenario. During the postflight debriefing,  flight instructor Linda asks her learner, Brian, to assess his performance for the day using the Replay, Reconstruct, Reflect, and Redirect guided  discussion questions described in the Learner-Centered Assessment section presented earlier in this chapter. Based on this  assessment, she and Brian discuss where Brian’s performance falls in the rubrics for maneuvers/procedures and SRM. This part of the  assessment may be verbally discussed or, alternatively, Brian and Linda separately create an assessment sheet for each element of the  flight.  When Brian studies the performance levels, he decides he was at the “Perform” level since he had not made any mistakes. Where he  had rated the item as “Perform,” Linda had rated it as “Practice.” During the ensuing discussion, Brian understands where he needs  more practice before his performance is at the “Perform” level.$_{ }$ This approach to assessment has several key advantages. One is that it actively involves the learner in the assessment process and  establishes the habit of healthy reflection and self-assessment that is critical to being a safe pilot. Another is that these grades are not  self-esteem related, since they do not describe a recognized level of prestige (such as A+ or “Outstanding”), but rather a level of  performance. The learner cannot flunk a lesson. Instead, he or she demonstrates a particular level of flight and SRM skills.  Both instructors and learners may initially be reluctant to use this method of assessment. Instructors may think it requires more time,  when in fact it is merely a more structured, effective, and collaborative version of a traditional postflight critique. Also, instructors  who learned in the more traditional assessment structure must be careful not to equate or force the dimensions of the rubric into the  traditional grading mold of A through F. One way to avoid this temptation is to remember that evaluation should be progressive: the  learner may achieve a new level of learning during each lesson. For example, in flight one, a task might be a “describe” item. By  flight three, it is a “practice” item, and by flight five, it is a “manage-decide” item.$_{ }$ The learner may be reluctant to self-assess if he or she has not had the chance to participate in such a process before. Therefore, the  instructor may need to teach the learner how to become an active participant in the collaborative assessment.  When deciding how to assess learner progress, aviation instructors can follow a four-step process.  Choosing an Effective Assessment Method 