Appendix A: Assessment Plan
Annex 1: W517 Planning Analysis Exam Instruction, Template, and Rubric
|
Student Name: |
Staff Group: |
|
Warfighting Function: |
Date: |
|
Instructor: |
Department: |
Purpose: This assessment evaluates your ability to exercise division staff judgment by analyzing change, identifying implications, and recommending doctrinally sound adjustments that support commander decision-making for three warfighting functions (WfF).
Instructions:
-
Task: You will receive a prompt describing a change in the OE. You will analyze that change and recommend adjustments to a division-level COA using doctrinal planning considerations.
-
Warfighting Function (WfF) Requirements: You must analyze three WfFs total. Intelligence, fires, and sustainment are mandatory analytical perspectives, unless you are assigned to one of those WfFs. If you are assigned to intelligence, fires, or sustainment, you will analyze the other two mandatory WfFs, and the protection WfF. You DO NOT analyze your assigned WfF.
-
Analytical Expectations: For each selected WfF, respond in paragraph form that clearly conveys:
-
What: What has changed (relevant data, conditions, and doctrinal factors, not exhaustive facts).
-
So What: Explain why those factors matter (analysis of risks, synchronization, and resources for the plan using doctrine).
-
Therefore: Recommend feasible, suitable, and acceptable COA adjustments that address identified risks and improve synchronization.
Support all recommendations with FM 5-0 planning considerations and other relevant doctrine.
-
-
Standards:
-
Submit through Blackboard when complete.
-
Format: Use the provided format at page A-2.
-
Write in clear, concise, grammatically correct sentences.
-
Individual assessment: Assistance is limited to your DTAC instructor.
-
Authorized references: Doctrinal publications, school-provided scenario information (including maps and graphics), curriculum materials, student group-developed MDMP products, CPCE products, running estimates, and internet access solely to view Onebrief planning products developed in class.
-
Prohibited (use constitutes an academic ethics violation under CGSC Bulletin 920): AI tools (including OneBrief’s built-in “AI Assist”), the internet for any purpose other than accessing OneBrief planning information developed in class, or other students’ work.
-
-
What Does Not Earn Credit
-
Descriptive summaries without analysis.
-
Bulletized lists that do not demonstrate doctrinal reasoning.
-
Recommendations that are not grounded in doctrine or that fail to modify the COA meaningfully.
-
|
Grade Scale |
|||||||
|
A+ |
A |
A- |
B+ |
B |
C+ |
C |
U |
|
97+ |
96-94 |
93-90 |
89-87 |
86-80 |
79-77 |
76-70 |
<70 |
W517 Planning Analysis Exam
Name: Rank Last Name, First Name Staff Group: XX# Date: dd Mmm yy
WfF #1: Intelligence
Provide your response in paragraph form, clearly articulating the “what,” “so what,” and “therefore” in accordance with applicable doctrine.
WfF #2: Select your second WfF from the drop-down menu.
Provide your response in paragraph form, clearly articulating the “what,” “so what,” and “therefore” in accordance with applicable doctrine.
WfF #3: Select your third WfF from the drop-down menu.
Provide your response in paragraph form, clearly articulating the “what,” “so what,” and “therefore” in accordance with applicable doctrine.
W517 Planning Analysis Exam Rubric
|
Criteria |
A+/A/A- Exceptional/Outstanding/Excellent 100-90 |
|
Information Use (20%): “What?” Use of relevant data and doctrinal factors to support conclusions and recommendations. |
20-18 points Identifies and integrates relevant data (from OE, WfF running estimate, maps, planning factors etc.); information directly enables analysis and recommendations. |
|
Analysis (40%) “So what?” Depth of operational and doctrinal reasoning.
|
40-36 points Analyzes and prioritizes key opportunities, risks, and constraints; synthesizes implications using doctrinal reasoning (e.g., FM 5-0 planning considerations). |
|
Recommendations (30%) “Therefore.” Doctrinally sound adjustments to the COA and addresses risk mitigation. |
30-27 points Recommends feasible, acceptable, COA adjustments; clearly mitigates risk and reflects WfF integration. |
|
Doctrinal Correctness (10%) Application of doctrinal planning considerations. |
10-9 points Correctly applies FM 5-0 planning considerations and other doctrine with no errors. |