AAR: after-action review.
Why conduct one? Not because it is required, because the first sergeant said so, or because the instructor likes to hear himself talk. The purpose is to give students useful feedback on their performance, facilitate learning, and make the next attempt better.
The AAR Is Part of the Training
As a young infantryman, I hated AARs. I considered them a delay between training and whatever I would rather be doing next. Many years later, I see them differently. A well-conducted AAR is only slightly less important than the exercise itself because it gives students time to examine what happened, what they did, what worked, and what needs improvement.
The qualification matters: the AAR must be conducted well. A repetitive or performative review can still waste everyone’s time. Many instructors are expected to facilitate AARs without ever receiving meaningful instruction on how to do so.
Move Beyond “Three Up and Three Down”
A rigid requirement to identify three sustains and three improvements may be simple, but it can constrain the discussion. What if students did five things well? What if a new student cannot recognize what needs improvement because they do not yet know what they do not know? What if an experienced group already understands the obvious successes and needs time devoted to subtler problems?
I prefer to reconstruct the scenario chronologically. Work through each phase and, when useful, each significant action. This approach makes room for the good, the bad, and the ugly without forcing the observations into an arbitrary quota.
Use Questions to Reveal Decisions
A chronological review allows the instructor to understand the student’s thinking:
- What did you perceive at that moment?
- Why did you choose that action?
- Did it produce the result you expected?
- What information did you miss or discount?
- Looking back, what would you do differently?
It is faster to tell students what they did wrong and prescribe a correction. Students often learn more when guided to recognize the problem themselves. Socratic questioning encourages them to analyze the situation after the time pressure and stress have been removed.
If they cannot reach the relevant conclusion, introduce an alternative: “What might have happened if you had done this instead?” The instructor should guide the analysis without turning the review into a guessing game built around a hidden answer.
A confrontational or belittling approach can make students defensive and unreceptive. It can also undermine the instructor’s credibility. Productive self-assessment builds critical thinking and gives students a process they can use when an instructor is not present.
Video Creates an Objective Reference
Recording scenario training requires equipment, a dedicated camera operator, and a place to review the footage. The camera operator should not simultaneously serve as the safety officer or officer in charge; filming demands attention that those responsibilities cannot spare.
The payoff can be considerable. Stress affects perception and memory. A student may sincerely believe an action did not occur until video shows otherwise. Footage can reveal spacing, timing, positioning, missed information, and the actions of role players that the student could not see during the scenario.
The camera operator must move without impeding students or revealing the location and intent of role players. When the action spreads out, the operator must decide what will be most useful during the AAR. Film with the review in mind.
Video should support the discussion, not replace it. Follow applicable organizational rules concerning recording, storage, access, and participant privacy.
Match the Feedback to the Student
Assess the students before deciding how much feedback to deliver. Consider their experience, preparation, fatigue, motivation, confidence, and willingness to learn. Those factors should influence both the presentation and depth of the critique.
A well-prepared and experienced student may benefit from detailed criticism of small inefficiencies. Another student may become overwhelmed and stop processing if given the same volume of feedback. Even highly receptive students eventually reach a point when their glass is full and a break becomes more productive than another correction.
Pat McNamara has emphasized performance-based rather than outcome-based training. A favorable outcome can conceal poor decisions, while an unfavorable outcome can occur despite several good actions. The AAR should examine the performance that produced the outcome, not merely label the scenario a success or failure.
Each student’s path will be different. The instructor’s responsibility is to provide the best opportunity for that student to improve. If the student performs better or understands the problem more clearly at the end than at the beginning, the process is working.
Explain the Why to Adult Learners
Adult learners arrive with prior experience, established habits, and sometimes beliefs that have hardened into dogma. “This way is better” is rarely enough. The instructor must explain why, connect the method to its purpose, and sometimes present the explanation more than one way.
Some preferences can remain open to discussion. Other behaviors may be required for safety or effective participation and need firmer correction. Even then, understanding produces more durable compliance than “because I said so.” The objective is a student who applies the principle when the instructor is absent, not one who performs it only while being watched.
A Practical Scenario AAR Sequence
- State the objective. Remind everyone what the scenario was intended to test.
- Reconstruct events. Walk through the scenario chronologically without immediately assigning blame.
- Ask for the student’s perspective. Identify what they perceived, expected, and decided.
- Compare perception with evidence. Use instructor observations, role-player input, and video when available.
- Reinforce effective performance. Preserve actions and decisions worth repeating.
- Prioritize improvements. Focus on the changes with the greatest effect instead of overwhelming the learner.
- Identify the next action. Specify what should be practiced, tested, or changed before the next scenario.
The Standard Is Improvement
A scenario creates experience. The AAR converts that experience into learning. Conduct it with enough structure to reconstruct events, enough curiosity to understand decisions, and enough judgment to deliver feedback the student can use.