How often have you heard this?
"You have to show progression by using a different proficiency code for each skill level (a for 3, b for 5, c for 7)." Or similar statements, the gist of
which is that you must have a different proficiency code for the 3-, 5-, and 7-skill level tasks.
At AFIADL we hear this a lot from writers and others, especially when a utilization and training workshop (U&TW) is looming on the horizon or is under way. We want to use this opportunity to clear the air and help you understand the relationship between proficiency codes, skill levels, and "progression."
Plainly stated, progression within a career field is indicated by the advancement from one skill level to the next. Mastery of the specialty training standard (STS) elements listed in the column for a particular skill level means that the airman has progressed in knowledge and skills and earned advancement to the next skill level.
Proficiency codes are related to skill levels because they tell trainers and supervisors the level of proficiency (or mastery) of the STS elements required for that skill level. The proficiency code for an STS element may be the same or different for each skill level within the career field. What is important to understand is that the same information is NOT being conveyed to the trainee at each level. What is being taught are the DIFFERENT skills/responsibilities required of the skill level the trainee is advancing to. The decision about which proficiency code to apply to each skill level for an STS element is arrived at with input from the training squadron providing the training, the career field manager, representatives from the major commands, and other input such as occupational assessment surveys, training constraints, and advice from AFIADL and others in the training community. So, while it is possible to have different proficiency codes for each skill level, it is NOT required. Indeed, a higher skill level may have a "lower" proficiency code than a lower skill level based on some of the factors just cited.
To illustrate, let's use an oversimplification: completing an AF Form 9 for a local purchase. The STS line item might read "Complete AF Form 9." Obviously there are different levels involved in completing the form. Again, to oversimplify, look at the following table.
| STS Element | 3 Skill Level | 5 Skill Level | 7 Skill Level |
| Complete AF Form 9 | Initiates the form, enters basic information and description of item(s). | Checks the form for accuracy and completeness. Determines if sole-source is required. Writes sole-source justification. |
Ensures accuracy of information. Provides funding citation.
Signs as requesting official. Forwards to next step in process. |
| Proficiency Code | b | b | b |
As you are no doubt aware, there is an increasing level of responsibility at each stage (reflected by the different skill levels). This is where you achieve the progression. The proficiency code tells the trainers the level to which you want this "new" knowledge taught. A "b" proficiency code (procedures) may be appropriate for all 3 skill levels: each needs to know the procedures involved for the skill level. But the procedures are obviously different for each; again, the progression comes from the skill level and its increased responsibilities, not the proficiency code for the training to achieve that skill level.
Plainly said:
You do not need to show "increasing" (a to b to c) proficiency codes from skill level to skill level.
You need to focus on what needs to be trained at each skill level and to what proficiency you want that training.
You may have the same proficiency code for an STS element across all skill levels.
You may have differing proficiency codes for an STS element across the skill levels.
Bottom line:
Proficiency codes indicate the extent of training required, not a progression in training.
