Understanding Temporal Assessment
This format presents the same scenario at different time points, with correct actions changing
based on how the situation evolves. Actions that were correct early may become WRONG later
(like adding developers in Week 5 - Brooks's Law violation). This assesses adaptive reasoning
and ability to change strategy when conditions deteriorate. Students who select the same actions
for all time points demonstrate rigid thinking and receive a penalty.
WEEK
1
1
Week 1: Minor Delays Emerging
Development is 10% behind schedule. Team morale is good.
No critical issues yet. Initial estimates may have been slightly optimistic.
6 weeks remain until deadline.
What actions are APPROPRIATE at this point? (Select ALL that apply)
WEEK
3
3
Week 3: Situation Deteriorating
Now 30% behind schedule. Team working evenings. Code quality declining
with increased bugs. 3 weeks remain until deadline. Pressure mounting from stakeholders.
What actions are APPROPRIATE at this point? (Select ALL that apply)
WEEK
5
5
Week 5: Critical Juncture
Now 50% behind schedule. Only 1 week until deadline.
Team burnout visible. Code quality at all-time low. Stakeholders escalating. Crisis mode.
What actions are APPROPRIATE at this point? (Select ALL that apply)
POST
Post-Project: Recovery & Learning
Project completed (late, reduced scope, but delivered). Team exhausted. Quality concerns remain.
Now is time for recovery and process improvement.
What actions are APPROPRIATE at this point? (Select ALL that apply)
Scoring: Temporal Adaptation is Critical
Component 1: Per-Time-Point Accuracy (80%)
Week 1: (Correct / 3) × 20%
Week 3: (Correct / 4) × 20%
Week 5: (Correct / 3) × 20%
Post-Project: (Correct / 2) × 20%
Week 3: (Correct / 4) × 20%
Week 5: (Correct / 3) × 20%
Post-Project: (Correct / 2) × 20%
Component 2: Evolution Awareness Bonus (20%)
+10% if selections show appropriate strategy evolution across time
+10% if you AVOID selecting C (add developers) or E (overtime) at Week 5
+10% if you AVOID selecting C (add developers) or E (overtime) at Week 5
Penalties
-20% if same actions selected for all time points (rigid thinking)
-25% if selecting C (add developers) at Week 5 (Brooks's Law violation - critical error)
-25% if selecting C (add developers) at Week 5 (Brooks's Law violation - critical error)
SAMPLE STUDENT SCORES
Student A (Adaptive): All time points correct + bonuses = 100%
Student B (Partial Evolution): W1=3/3, W3=3/4, W5=2/3, Post=2/2 + partial bonus = 82%
Student C (Rigid): Selected A,H,J for all time points - Penalty = 35%
Why Temporal SATA Works
- Adaptive Reasoning: Assesses ability to change strategy when conditions deteriorate
- Real-World Complexity: Mirrors project management where situations evolve dynamically
- Strategic Thinking: Tests when to pivot vs. when to persist
- Brooks's Law Testing: Identifies who understands "adding people to late project makes it later"
- Diagnostic Power: Reveals rigid vs. flexible thinkers
- Prevents Gaming: Can't memorize - must understand temporal dynamics
- Professional Judgment: Reflects crisis management skills valued in industry
Answer Key Summary
Week 1: A, H, J (still time to recover)
Week 3: B, D, H, I (intervention needed)
Week 5: D, G, H (crisis triage)
Post-Project: I, J (learn & recover)
Key Insight: Notice how A (continue plan) is correct at Week 1 but WRONG by Week 3.
C (add developers) might seem reasonable at Week 3 but is a CRITICAL ERROR at Week 5 (Brooks's Law).
This demonstrates true temporal evolution - context AND timing both matter.