Notice the change
How does the trainee recognize relevant operational indicators, an influx, losses or a changing process condition?
Training & assessment · Endeavor drilling simulators
Drilling simulator competency assessment and autograding
Simulator training becomes more useful when decisions can be observed, reviewed and assessed consistently. Explore how instructor grading and autograding support drilling and well control exercises.
WHAT GOOD ASSESSMENT MEASURES
From simulator activity to training evidence
An assessment should evaluate the trainee’s decisions in context—not just whether the final displayed value looks correct.
Make the decision
Which steps and controls does the learner select, and in what sequence?
Act at the right moment
Review the relationship between observable conditions and operator actions, using criteria set for the exercise.
Repeat the exercise
Use comparable starting conditions to discuss what changed across attempts.
Understand the consequence
Examine how the running model responds after a pump, pressure-control or equipment decision.
Make feedback actionable
Give the instructor and trainee a structured basis for reviewing strengths and gaps.
CHOOSE YOUR EVALUATION METHOD
Autograding and instructor grading work together
Endeavor drilling and well control modules can be autograded or instructor graded. The appropriate approach depends on training objectives and course requirements.
| Assessment approach | Best suited to | What to agree with the instructor | What it does not replace |
|---|---|---|---|
| AutogradingRule-based assessment | Consistent exercise criteria and repeatable performance checks | Which actions, sequences and measured conditions count toward the result | Instructor interpretation and discussion of the trainee’s reasoning |
| Instructor gradingHuman evaluation | Judgment, communication, decision rationale and situational awareness | Rubric, observations, evidence and documented feedback | Objective simulator measurements when those would strengthen the review |
| Combined approachStructured debrief | Exercises needing both measurable process response and human judgment | How the automated result and instructor observations are combined | Clear, approved program-level competency standards |
Assessment scope is configurable: Request a demonstration of the actual grading criteria and report format proposed for your training program. Do not assume an example rubric is a universal industry accreditation standard.
EXAMPLE TRAINING EXERCISES
What a structured debrief can cover
Well control: influx response
Review recognition of relevant indicators, the shut-in approach, pressure response and the trainee’s explanation of decisions. Explore the Well Control Simulator →
Drilling: operational sequence
Discuss connections, circulation, equipment handling and how the learner responds when conditions change. Explore drilling scenarios →
Pressure management: control response
Compare the planned control action with the resulting pressure behavior and the trainee’s corrective decisions. Explore MPD training →
Integrated crew training
Assess coordination when roles must interact in one environment. For a shared driller–assistant driller experience, discuss an X1 configuration; independent X2 stations do not share that collaboration.
PROCUREMENT & COURSE DESIGN
Ask these questions before purchasing
A grading feature is valuable only when it supports the actual competencies your program needs to evidence.
- Modules: Which proposed drilling or well control exercises are included in the training package?
- Criteria: What specific actions and conditions are scored, and can instructors configure grading rules?
- Reports: What evidence does a completion report include, and how can the instructor review it?
- Consistency: Can the instructor repeat a scenario with comparable conditions?
- Roles: Is the exercise independent operator practice or a synchronized multi-role assessment?
- Course fit: How will the assessment align with the operator, contractor or training-center requirements?
- Validation: What review is needed before the rubric is used for formal competency decisions?
Compare the X1, X2, X3, Workstation and online simulator systems to find the hardware format that fits your assessment plan.
FREQUENT QUESTIONS
Simulator grading questions
Does every simulator exercise need automated grading?
No. Some exercises benefit from consistent rule-based evaluation; others need the instructor to interpret decisions and communication. Endeavor drilling and well control modules support either grading approach.
Is a simulator score the same as accreditation?
No. Scoring an exercise does not by itself confer IADC, IWCF or other certification. Accreditation depends on the relevant provider, course and approved assessment requirements.
Can a training center customize assessment rules?
Grading scope and configuration should be established during project scoping. Ask Endeavor to demonstrate the setup available for your proposed module and course.
Can separate X2s grade a shared driller–assistant driller exercise?
No. X2s operate as independent stations and do not share an integrated driller–assistant driller simulation environment. Discuss the X1 for collaborative crew scenarios.
DISCUSS YOUR PROGRAM
See a grading example before choosing hardware.
Tell Endeavor which exercises, trainee roles and reporting requirements matter to your organization. We can demonstrate appropriate grading workflows and help scope the simulator package.