TBA and JQR Item accomplishment (2 birds)

What problem(s) will it solve?

What problem do we solve?

Right now we have multiple systems in which we keep records (TBA, Share drive, and now gitlab) and none of them are coordinated. We ran into a situation in which someone completed basic dev training but was showing as having 0 items signed off in TBA. Leadership asked how a 3D0x4 could have accomplished in depth programming training not met their TBA objectives at the same time. Need to make sure to identify an satisfy parallel requirements at the same time.

Who is the intended user(s)?

• UTM - Needs to know how training hits multiple itmes at once and specifically TBA tasks.
• Trainee - Doesn't want to have to re-accomplish redundant/overlapping training multiple times.
• Trainer - Same, DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself).
• Requirements Managers - Want to know when duplicate requirements exist to try and eliminate duplication.

Lay out the expected user experience

1. A user completes a training task.
2. Their trainer signs them off on it.
3. Because this training task meets a requirement in more than one system (e.g. TBA and JQR) a notice is made to give credit in both systems.
4. The training tasks are marked complete in both systems.

Proposal

• Update/link/map KSATs to indicate when they also satisfy CFETP, MTP/MTL/Workcenter requirements by uploading those documents as source files. KSAT's may need to be mappable to multiple sources in order to support this feature (versus only having a single source record)

• Extend the schema for source files to be able to indicate which specific line items they satisfy.

• Create an additional Acceptance Criteria item in issues which satisfy TBA to require them to mark TBA complete before closing the JQR item in gitlab.

Further details

• We'll want to make sure to work with the UTM and trainers to ensure we reduce (not create more) work for them
• Looking forward to TBA shutdown/TFTR (or even before) might we want to explore an experiment with the JQR tracking system <-- Private for now if link 404's
  • Approach Chief Hellison about a TBA waiver for an experiment? @tparis00ap

Permissions and Security

• Trainers must have TBA permission to sign people off. If the trainer for the JQR item is not the same as the TBA trainer then these individuals must coordinate.

Documentation

Update User Documentation

• Update user documents so they can identify and handle JQR/TBA items correctly during sign off.

Update Developer Documentation

• Document the solution if applicable such as new fields in the JSON schema, etc.

Update CYT Overview briefing

• Update the overview brief to explain how we address TBA requirements as part of our plan.

Instructor and SEE training

• Address dual sign off procedures so they know how to handle these items when encourntered

Availability & Testing

Test changes to documentation by exposing intended audience to the language.

What does success look like, and how can we measure that?

If successful we will have saved time for both trainers and mentors by being able to satisfy multiple requirements with minimal re-work. For students to have to complete IDF and then also complete 3/5/7 upgrade while covering the same topics is wasteful and the current state of affairs. Students shouldn't have to accomplish redundant training. Lastly, supervisor/enlisted trainers should feel the system is "as good as possible" given we might have to continue using TBA to track upgrade training.

Links / references