From the flight leader/stucon perspective...
Midnjac is correct in that there was a grading system change for Primary NSS. In a nutshell (as this has already been discussed on this board), 90% of the NSS is how you compare score wise (adding up all of the individual maneuver grades) with other students in your squadron (not all squadrons, just your squadron) and 10% of the grade comes from how you compare in the number of marginals and unsats (1 marginal = 1/2 unsat) with your fellow squadronmates. The only change that occurred was that before this, the 10% portion was how you compared in the number of total graded items (TGI). That meant that if you had less graded items than the squadron average, you would have a slightly (and a big SLIGHTLY) higher NSS. That is why under the old system one could argue that an accelerated student was better off because he/she would have a lower total graded items than the average. However, remember that that is only 10% of the grade. Would that same student do better if he/she had the additional flights (to match what a "normal" student would fly)?
The logic behind the argument that accelerating a student does NOT help is simple... if a student is already above average, then an additional flight(s) would most likely produce even higher scores for that student. Since the scores are 90% of the NSS, then those improved grades (compared to the average) would more than offset the cost of the minor increase in TGI (with that only counting for 10%). I believe that both had value points, and unfortunately I've never seen a study that compared the what-if scenario of accelerating a student (which actually wasn't accelerated) under the old system.
And now a little recent history... In late last year or early this year, such a research project happened under the new grading system at either CTW-4 or CNATRA (I'm not sure which). Several completers NSS from VT-27 (and perhaps others) were compared with a what-if scenario of skipping 2-3 flights. The results were that accelerating a student was still beneficial for that individual's NSS. My biggest gripe about the results was that the methodology to achieve them. Basically the assumption was made that the last flight of the block produced the highest grades (pretty safe assumption for the most part). However, the flights that were pulled to create an "accelerated" student were the second to last flight of each block. The assumption that the best grades come on the last flight is not because it's the last flight, but because of the flights prior to it producing the skills necessary to achieve the higher scores. Therefore, when pulling out the relatively weaker flights from a student's syllabus, of course the NSS is going to go up. I'd like to see the results when they pull the LAST flight of each block, since in reality that is the one that would not be there if a student was accelerated. Is that as clear as mud?
