Primary on Monday

[kmac]

And just for the record, no squadron has any bearing on grades/NSS for another squadron. These are computed per squadron and not from the total number of students. In other words, grades don't change come selection time because one squadron was "easier" than another. The NSS depends only upon the scores of other, same-squadron previous students.

 

[Goofskater]

Everything is backed up right now. I have been ready for fam 0 for 5 weeks in VT-3. VT-6 is backed up too and the ones in VT-2 that are flying are getting one flight a week at best. No planes and bad weather are slowing things down a bit.

On the VT-3 topic it has its own set of advantages and disadvantages you will do should do well in VT-3 just feel like I am being baby sat some times.

 

[Gatordev]

And just for the record, no squadron has any bearing on grades/NSS for another squadron. These are computed per squadron and not from the total number of students. In other words, grades don't change come selection time because one squadron was "easier" than another. The NSS depends only upon the scores of other, same-squadron previous students.

Maybe it's changed, but while at the VTs, it was "common knowledge" among the STUCON people that after the NSS was figured (based off how you describe), CNATRA "evens out" the scores. If VT-x has a recent history of being so many points (not NSS) ahead of VT-y, they statistically "take care of the problem." Obviously it's not a constant as Santa Clauses and Grinches come and go.

But if you had evidence that was all an urban legend, I wouldn't be surprised.

 

[kmac]

Maybe it's changed, but while at the VTs, it was "common knowledge" among the STUCON people that after the NSS was figured (based off how you describe), CNATRA "evens out" the scores. If VT-x has a recent history of being so many points (not NSS) ahead of VT-y, they statistically "take care of the problem." Obviously it's not a constant as Santa Clauses and Grinches come and go.

But if you had evidence that was all an urban legend, I wouldn't be surprised.

I talked to the people who actually compute the scores for CNATRA, because I had heard the same urban legend as you. The reason for calculating scores with only that squadron's previous completed scores was to eliminate variation in different grading "standards" between the squadrons. This method eliminates any statistical differences because those differences don't reflect upon a student's score since the student is compared only to other students from that squadron.

The only significant change that I saw was that grades from previously completed blocks were counted rather than previously completed students. A kid who is about to finish is actually being compared (in part) to how the newer students are doing for all blocks that those newer students completed. Early contact flights/grades are mostly affected by this. It's sad, but helping the new guy out can negatively impact the completer's NSS.

 

[Erin M.]

Maybe it's changed, but while at the VTs, it was "common knowledge" among the STUCON people that after the NSS was figured (based off how you describe), CNATRA "evens out" the scores. If VT-x has a recent history of being so many points (not NSS) ahead of VT-y, they statistically "take care of the problem." Obviously it's not a constant as Santa Clauses and Grinches come and go.

But if you had evidence that was all an urban legend, I wouldn't be surprised.

Sir, as I understand it, it doesn't make sense mathematically to attempt to even out the scores. As a student, I'm probably wrong on this, bu since the scores are normalized within each data set from each squadron, the comparisons between squadrons shouldn't be adjusted. If they were comparing aggregrate performance scores, that would make sense, but they're supposed to be using each student's score relative to the normalized distribution of the squadron. Basically, the model they use is supposed to say "Stud A of VT-3 had a score that placed him at the top 10 percentile of the last 60 completers in VT-3, and he compares favorably to Stud B of VT-2 who was at the 40th percentile of the last 60 completers of VT-2." Stud A and Stud B may have the exact same composite scores, but maybe VT-3 grades much harder, so his/her composite score places him/her much higher amongst his/her peers at VT-3 than Stud A's scores did at VT-2. That's supposed to be why they standardize the score. If that wasn't the case, then it would make sense to adjust, but the adjustment is supposed to exist in the nature of the current system.

 

[KBayDog]

Sir, as I understand it, it doesn't make sense mathematically to attempt to even out the scores.

Don't worry about NSS. There are too many variables; you cannot directly control it.

Instead, focus on what you can control: Coming to each and every brief prepared, knowing your stuff cold, and ready to fly.

If you really want to focus on grading, get familiar with the MPTS, particularly the CTS for each maneuver.

 

[Erin M.]

Don't worry about NSS. There are too many variables; you cannot directly control it.

Instead, focus on what you can control: Coming to each and every brief prepared, knowing your stuff cold, and ready to fly.

If you really want to focus on grading, get familiar with the MPTS, particularly the CTS for each maneuver.

I agree sir. I have no intentions of trying to game the game or attempt to compute or alter my NSS. I was just trying to raise a point about the urban legend of evening scores across squadrons by CNATRA.

The concept of NSS makes sense to me because I took 484903840 calculus and statistics courses in college. The explanations I received at check-in as well as the little blurb in the welcome aboard packet, coupled with all the info on this board, made the NSS pretty clear. NSS is something I wanted to be knowledgeable of, simply because so many people don't understand it. Before I got here, I read a little about it. Now, I don't care about it. It isn't something I'm concerned with as a metric or goal for my performance. I assure you I'm not one of the guys that sits at home with an excel spreadsheet of everybody's scores trying to figure out where he stands and projecting that all the way to selection.

 

[HueyCobra8151]

You're a Marine. Don't worry about grades. Get helicopters. Fucking kill people and break things.

 

[KBayDog]

I assure you I'm not one of the guys that sits at home with an excel spreadsheet of everybody's scores trying to figure out where he stands and projecting that all the way to selection.

I should hope not, what with this being your 2nd day of Primary and all.

 

[KBayDog]

Fucking kill people and break things.

Before or after winging?

 

[Treetop Flyer]

You're a Marine. Don't worry about grades. Get helicopters.

fixed it for you

 

[scoolbubba]

Sir, as I understand it, it doesn't make sense mathematically to attempt to even out the scores. As a student, I'm probably wrong on this, bu since the scores are normalized within each data set from each squadron, the comparisons between squadrons shouldn't be adjusted. If they were comparing aggregrate performance scores, that would make sense, but they're supposed to be using each student's score relative to the normalized distribution of the squadron. Basically, the model they use is supposed to say "Stud A of VT-3 had a score that placed him at the top 10 percentile of the last 60 completers in VT-3, and he compares favorably to Stud B of VT-2 who was at the 40th percentile of the last 60 completers of VT-2." Stud A and Stud B may have the exact same composite scores, but maybe VT-3 grades much harder, so his/her composite score places him/her much higher amongst his/her peers at VT-3 than Stud A's scores did at VT-2. That's supposed to be why they standardize the score. If that wasn't the case, then it would make sense to adjust, but the adjustment is supposed to exist in the nature of the current system.

Stop nuking it. Go study your EPs.

 

[Gatordev]

I talked to the people who actually compute the scores for CNATRA, because I had heard the same urban legend as you. The reason for calculating scores with only that squadron's previous completed scores was to eliminate variation in different grading "standards" between the squadrons. This method eliminates any statistical differences because those differences don't reflect upon a student's score since the student is compared only to other students from that squadron.

The only significant change that I saw was that grades from previously completed blocks were counted rather than previously completed students. A kid who is about to finish is actually being compared (in part) to how the newer students are doing for all blocks that those newer students completed. Early contact flights/grades are mostly affected by this. It's sad, but helping the new guy out can negatively impact the completer's NSS.

That's interesting, and kind of makes sense, especially when you'd see guys with score A when they'd run the ad hoc "guess" numbers and then you'd see them (usually) come down a couple of NSS points when the official CNATRA numbers come out selection day.

 

[FrankTheTank]

Sir, as I understand it, it doesn't make sense mathematically to attempt to even out the scores. As a student, I'm probably wrong on this, bu since the scores are normalized within each data set from each squadron, the comparisons between squadrons shouldn't be adjusted. If they were comparing aggregrate performance scores, that would make sense, but they're supposed to be using each student's score relative to the normalized distribution of the squadron. Basically, the model they use is supposed to say "Stud A of VT-3 had a score that placed him at the top 10 percentile of the last 60 completers in VT-3, and he compares favorably to Stud B of VT-2 who was at the 40th percentile of the last 60 completers of VT-2." Stud A and Stud B may have the exact same composite scores, but maybe VT-3 grades much harder, so his/her composite score places him/her much higher amongst his/her peers at VT-3 than Stud A's scores did at VT-2. That's supposed to be why they standardize the score. If that wasn't the case, then it would make sense to adjust, but the adjustment is supposed to exist in the nature of the current system.

You're overthinking this.. Just study, drink and be professional and it all figures itself out. Also workout. Folks use the studying as an excuse and forget the bennies of a good lift/run!

 

[draad]

And remember, it's always better to be a stud that sucks and buys his onwing a lot of booze (at least one handle) at the tie cutting than a stud that sucks and skimps on the booze....just saying...