Technical Report - International Military Testing Association

During the post year, the fiOS Evaluation Tisting Program has been
extended to the evaluation of the ability of Active P.my personnel to
perform :he duties of their sccondery HOS and the ability of Reserve and
National Guard personnel to perform the dutiec of the N0.S for thefr current
duty positions. Uhile the fame tests and reporte are used for thece new
purposes, evaluations are beaed upon teat acores without courrander’e
evaluation ratings and are used only to identify those exmtneee who
failed to attain the Active Army minimum qualifying test BCOI’C for nosignment
and training purposes.
fumy l?OS Evaluation Tests are also used in determining the pay grede
and HOS of commissioned and warrant officers vho intend to enlist cr reenlist
upon termination of his current active commissioned or varrant
officer service, Eligible off tcers are permitted to take aa manv as three
HOS teat6 appropriate to pay f rade E-5 or their prior enlisted temporary
grade, if higher. At least c!-e of the tests must relate to an HDS which
hue vacancies at their reqtleh!ed pry grade. None of the tests may involve
an overstrength MOS. Finol tictcnninntion of pry grade and MS ia mnde by
the Department of Army Grade Determfnetion Board based upon the teat
acore6, cotprlander’s recommen;ations, and other pertinent, available
data.
In each of the current gpiicatl.ons of ;.rmy HOS TeLting Programs, it
is the connander who must take the final action. The cocszander can give
an enlisted man tiho fails to make a passing score and acquire a verified
primary HOS a second chrnce to improve his skills before the next
scheduled test session ior the HOS or reassign him to a more appropriate
MOS and okill level, but must reclassify the man who fails twice, The
connander can withhold Ruperior performance or opecialty pay from personnel
who attain an eligible score if he determines the individual is not currently
performing in a satisfactory manner. And major commandera may restrict
promotion8 to those whose scores fall within the upper third of the acores
for their specialty skill level.
Several have euggested that MOS Evaluation Teat reeults be ueed to
evaluate the effectiveness of service school training. At first glance,
the proposal appears to have merit; but closer inspection reveala crucial
f allaciee. In the first place, eervice school training is ordinarily
designed to provide enlisted personnel with the basic vocabulary, theory,
methods , and procedurea that enable them to begin their on-the-job training
at their first unit of assignment. However, HOS Evaluation Teats are intended
to cover the period from the completion of on-the-job training to
advancement to a higher akill level or MOS. In the second place, the
students vho fail the school NOS course are rarely, if ever, aoaigned the
NOS where they might succeed or fail depending upon the degree to b%ich
school training met on-the-job needs. In the third place, many of the
144