Show Posts
1
General Discussion / C3 Rating
« on: December 01, 2011, 08:06:07 PM »
[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]Charlie Rizzi! Yes sir, I did indeed think you had vaporized into the ether somewhere. Glad to 'see' you again, hope it's not a one-time thing.[/quote]
Be careful what you ask for.
If anybody wants to hear more of the history. I only put this here because I think I'm one of the very few left that lived through the whole thing (expect Bryan).
[blockquote]The ratings (S1, S2, S3, C1, C2, C3) originally came from SATCO. In the beginning of SATCO there were no controller ratings. Anybody could do anything. Guys would fight over positions, try to steal each other's traffic buy calling pilots out of their airspace, CTR controllers would refuse to hand off arrivals to anybody "below" them, etc. etc. it was chaos, often belligerent and almost unimaginable to anybody involved in VATSIM as it works now. "Service" to pilots was awful. SATCO implemented controller ratings but did not standardize how those ratings would be used because I think it would have been politically impossible for them to have done so at that time. This carried forward into VATSIM (which dropped the C2/S2). Remember that at that time nobody had ever done this and nobody really knew what would work and what would not. It was the age of great experimentation trying to see what would work the best to retain the most trainees. So before GRP we had a system where what a rating meant depended mostly on when and where you got it. You had S3s in sectors with strong training programs that had far more hours and know how than C3s for other areas. Not much of a rating system network wide. The EC tried to fix this with GRP1 and that's about where I decided after seven years as an instructor that I was going to get away from it. GRP1 first introduced the notion of also giving rating "credit" for things other than controlling skill. That had never been openly done before but I'm sure it probably had been done "under the table". Bryan's post from above tells the history from there.[/blockquote]
In the end it all comes down to the issue of how many "upgrades" between newbie and full performance CTR controller are necessary to adequately recognize, reward and retain students without becoming too silly or complex. Personally I always thought the more "attaboys/gold stars" I could hand out as an Instructor the better I could move students up and retain them. I'm well aware that others would disagree strongly with that point of view and apparently that discussion continues to this day. When GRP first was conceived I don't think anybody promoting it had any idea how hard it was going to be to get to a system that would both work for everyone and be accepted by everyone globally.
Best all,
CR
Be careful what you ask for.
If anybody wants to hear more of the history. I only put this here because I think I'm one of the very few left that lived through the whole thing (expect Bryan).
[blockquote]The ratings (S1, S2, S3, C1, C2, C3) originally came from SATCO. In the beginning of SATCO there were no controller ratings. Anybody could do anything. Guys would fight over positions, try to steal each other's traffic buy calling pilots out of their airspace, CTR controllers would refuse to hand off arrivals to anybody "below" them, etc. etc. it was chaos, often belligerent and almost unimaginable to anybody involved in VATSIM as it works now. "Service" to pilots was awful. SATCO implemented controller ratings but did not standardize how those ratings would be used because I think it would have been politically impossible for them to have done so at that time. This carried forward into VATSIM (which dropped the C2/S2). Remember that at that time nobody had ever done this and nobody really knew what would work and what would not. It was the age of great experimentation trying to see what would work the best to retain the most trainees. So before GRP we had a system where what a rating meant depended mostly on when and where you got it. You had S3s in sectors with strong training programs that had far more hours and know how than C3s for other areas. Not much of a rating system network wide. The EC tried to fix this with GRP1 and that's about where I decided after seven years as an instructor that I was going to get away from it. GRP1 first introduced the notion of also giving rating "credit" for things other than controlling skill. That had never been openly done before but I'm sure it probably had been done "under the table". Bryan's post from above tells the history from there.[/blockquote]
In the end it all comes down to the issue of how many "upgrades" between newbie and full performance CTR controller are necessary to adequately recognize, reward and retain students without becoming too silly or complex. Personally I always thought the more "attaboys/gold stars" I could hand out as an Instructor the better I could move students up and retain them. I'm well aware that others would disagree strongly with that point of view and apparently that discussion continues to this day. When GRP first was conceived I don't think anybody promoting it had any idea how hard it was going to be to get to a system that would both work for everyone and be accepted by everyone globally.
Best all,
CR