Technical Report - International Military Testing Association

More documents

Recommendations

Info

I-- , c Now, an MOS Evaluation Test. rates examinees’ ebilitiec to perform the full scope of the duties of an HOS skill level, weighted to fit the objective3 and concepts of relative importance of the standards setting level of the Army pro&ream manager3 staff. In other words, the testo are biased in favor of the broadly-skilled examinee rather than one who is exceptionally skilled in a pnrt of his HOS skill level reqafremcnts. The test score indicates the exazinee’s relative standing among all examineee ansigned the MOS skill level. If peers and supervisors can adjust their ratings of exr=,inces to comyenaate for their personal bioaes and influences, if they thoroughly understood and accepted the objectives and important concepts of the standards setting level of the program manager’s staff, and if they could simultaneously and comprehensively evaluate the abilities of all personnel assigned the primory MOS skill level, they would probably rate the exnminee as the test rated him, if the examinee reacted to them as he reacted to the ceet during the evaluation period. Ohviot~sly, peers, auperviuore, and exainees interreact differently, differ in their opinions a8 to the relative importance of tasks, have varying degrees of understanding of the specific objective3 of top level standard setter3, and have rarely, if ever, had the opportunity to evaluate the abilities of 311 persons assigned to any MOS skill level, let alone nimultaneously. The test3 do provide.a basis for predicting how well an examinee could do on the ; Jb when permitted to do the whole job rather than a oubspecialty and when motivated in the acne degree and direction aa he was at the time he took the test. A greet deal more information concerning his interpcreonal relationships and attitudes along with those of his peer3 and supcrvisor3, their rating attitudes 6J d abilities, and the dynamics of the group would bc required before one could predict Low an examinee would be regarded oy his peers with reasonable accuracy. A few item writing and technical publications writing groups have cooperatively used test question response data as a cue to whether technical material has been dietribuced to and understood by examinees. With few exceptions, the test question analyses developed by the Enlisted Evoluation Center reflect how all of the personnel in each MOS skill level responded to each test question. Items relating to equipment or doctrinal changes are carefully reviewed when only a small proportion of the CXaminecs answer the questions to determine whether the queetione or the cxaminees are deficient. Checks are also made to determine when guides and training materials were distributed to exeminees and whether these material6 require clarification or amplification. Many will envision other u3es of PiOS Evaluation Tests. In planning the uses, one must bear in mind and insure: a. The te6t content and objectives are compatible with each planned use. trolled, b. All pertinent variables are identified, evaluated, and con- ____ __- .--.--- -- 146 -.-_- _._. _ ..-.._. - - - -_ - -.
, . c. Test-ocorss which only reprtaant uslotive rtandlngr of %x~~~fncer ore not logically summed, multiplied, aubracted, or divided by ordinary arf thnotic p~xmmt1s. d. The cmponmto and wcighttngo of cmqcsbta ecoreo era cczqatible with the plantlad u8e. e. A teat deeignusd for one purpose cannot noceesarily ba used fox whet appear8 tc be n related pcrpoee. 147 ;; ^f
Page 1:
UNCLASSIFIED/UNLIMITED Technical Re
Page 4 and 5:
. r � � . . rnl.ITAkf ies?ING A
Page 6 and 7:
:a-- � . . __ ._ _ .._ _ .___. -
Page 8 and 9:
. . . _ _- -_ _.. ..--._... -.. .-.
Page 10 and 11:
.-. c 1. - - . . __. . _ _ _ _ . --
Page 12 and 13:
(i . * -. -._ _ . . . . have one @k
Page 14 and 15:
.-- A- . __ .-._ -.-.. - -‘--- .-
Page 16 and 17:
: i f I . . _.. _ ._ ” .-. -. ._
Page 18 and 19:
-. / ,’ i _. . . _. __ _. __. .._
Page 20 and 21:
. __ . ____ . . .- ---__.._ - __.__
Page 22 and 23:
., � � . 3 . i’ i i I , ‘ .
Page 24 and 25:
F ‘. r2r . * . . � , , ! ,. .
Page 26 and 27:
- ; , . -_ . . . . .’ , i: ‘. :
Page 28 and 29:
‘. . The initial objective of th
Page 30 and 31:
\I’ . . i ’ ’ _ . . I 1 Z-N -
Page 32 and 33:
. , . . Perspective DR. HAROLD A. E
Page 34 and 35:
. . . . . . need another sort of te
Page 36 and 37:
.___ ---.-.-a ---._- ~.-~“..CI.~.
Page 38 and 39:
. . - . -. . . ‘. - -m.__ ’ We
Page 40 and 41:
w - ------- --- -.-. ___..- - I _ .
Page 42 and 43:
. . . , - . . - . 2 . . . .--...-.
Page 44 and 45:
c. / I ’ . a . c . ’ , Summary
Page 46 and 47:
-- /-’ 1. Bxamfnatfoti Grade 2. P
Page 48 and 49:
: . A . . . 3. Officarr’ Administ
Page 50 and 51:
. . . Conctpta for Exploration in P
Page 52 and 53:
Here; UC are trying to make acveral
Page 54 and 55:
‘a : . -.. . . 1 . . . . . _. . .
Page 56 and 57:
f -. ‘Ibotertfaoul,X:-Cp I .- . .
Page 58 and 59:
-.. :.. . , / _ :. . .A. . . - ---.
Page 60 and 61:
Teat reliability? -- Certainly 6OmC
Page 62 and 63:
. . One of the p~oblmnr that we pro
Page 64 and 65:
. . . The Prsdictioa of fob Profici
Page 66 and 67:
. The basic fomula uhic:!~ generate
Page 68 and 69:
. - - . . . . * . i ’ f “. . z
Page 70 and 71:
-- 1 . * __-_..___ __.-_.- I . �
Page 72 and 73:
. . .* . - ..-.. ___ - --- -___ -._
Page 74 and 75:
_ . . . _ .- ._ ..-.-_ _---.---- -
Page 76 and 77:
__ ._ __ ._ .^ . .._--- -. ____. ..
Page 78 and 79:
� Teble 8 Thr Probubilitier of Gr
Page 80 and 81:
60 40 30 20 10 1. Identify PtlAEr 1
Page 82 and 83:
. . . . Parronality Tooting md Job
Page 84 and 85:
-. _- _. ._. ,. _ -- _ ______-_____
Page 86 and 87:
. . . . ,’ . . NW we rhould recog
Page 88 and 89:
_ . - . .._ - -_-..-.-- _-_- ._,__X
Page 90 and 91:
. -. . . . -- .--- ..-_ .--- . .--.
Page 92 and 93:
. . . In their reply the US Army Pe
Page 94 and 95:
. - _ _ - . - - . .* _ . . . -M1_1-
Page 96 and 97:
-. . :a. .\ -. -I- .’ -.., 7 -a!
Page 98 and 99:
- .-_ .! . . . __. _. . ._ 1 _____.
Page 100 and 101:
s-t g CD L-9 "0 aI - - -I -, 6-8 g
Page 102 and 103:
i’ I . . When developed with ing;
Page 104 and 105: . . are to be developed. Discus6 wi
Page 106 and 107: --- . . . . Aritm 1 CRTTRRU FOR IDX
Page 108 and 109: Page 1 GR4ia -- HOS -- Length of Ti
Page 110 and 111: . . ANNEX 3 CRITERIA FCR PERFORMANC
Page 112 and 113: . . ‘- -.- . .I : . -.. (. .- ,.
Page 114 and 115: . . .- . - ., .- 2 :. -W-.l.W.‘..
Page 116 and 117: . . and performed .the duties 01 th
Page 118 and 119: ’ . I , ._ ..--“.,.-.“..~...;
Page 120 and 121: . . . - . . . . -.. . ^. ‘. L ,..
Page 122 and 123: . . . contributions to the fir&l mu
Page 124 and 125: ._ _ --r -. :’ ,--_ .I’- ..__ .
Page 126 and 127: ,’ ‘. ,-- - : ’ ‘.b :’ _.
Page 128 and 129: .1 , .I . . ., .;., ., _- . -.< “
Page 130 and 131: . . Test Construction Procedures wI
Page 132 and 133: . . * .-a . ..” .-. ,. ., “.. _
Page 134 and 135: Ceoly, W. D., 6 Cratn, J. L. Dual c
Page 136 and 137: :. ‘ci � � � � � i I 1
Page 138 and 139: . personnel are assigned to jobe th
Page 140 and 141: . . _-. .._. -...a_-e,-,. .-Y.-e--.
Page 142 and 143: The octond 6reA of opercatfon’ fo
Page 144 and 145: O&#&RAL%YWP011U0111l-SRRS.GE~SEVIF.
Page 146 and 147: . Systematic upgrading. At the same
Page 148 and 149: 2 . . . - “.,.>__ ., . _ _ _ _ .
Page 150 and 151: . - . . -.. ..- . .-. .._-,_.-&s -.
Page 152 and 153: During the post year, the fiOS Eval
Page 156 and 157: f . Job P.na1ysi.r for Tart Develop
Page 158 and 159: h. i. 1. k. 1. m. n. . Reproduction
Page 160 and 161: . . Administration of the Job Inven
Page 162 and 163: . ‘,‘, . : . . ; . .,--- -. can
Page 164 and 165: . CL%TiS D. l!CYRIDZ US Army Artill
Page 166 and 167: When a request was made for the nam
Page 168 and 169: Item Writing Procedures for IncrasL
Page 170 and 171: - Preoentation to MTA Panel ConaLde
Page 172 and 173: -- -- . _ . _-._ ._- --- ..--._. -
Page 174 and 175: .- We probably ohould not conc1~rn
Page 176 and 177: . . . LOXCAL EKPIRICAL Content Vall
Page 178 and 179: , __-____ 14_1- -...-. -- _.._.~ _.
Page 180 and 181: , .- - L L . -. .--Ly -_ _. - . . \
Page 182 and 183: ._“...- . , ._ I . . ..,_ . _, _
Page 184 and 185: c r- ’ , L- .’ ./’ / :‘.. p
Page 186 and 187: ecause we do not like the criteria
Page 188 and 189: -- ., -__. . . . ,Establlshment has
Page 190 and 191: . 6. . . . .i 4 * .I .J ,I --. Dunn
Page 192 and 193: -. Item Writers Aptitude Test Devel
Page 194 and 195: . i . -- t ! Ens Harold AdaL-an Hr.
Page 196 and 197: 1 / . . . I . Cape Harry H. Craer,
Page 198 and 199: . ‘. . & . e . Fir. John J. Parke
Page 200 and 201: 6.. , . . 1% + , ,* ___ . ‘. * ,
show all

Technical Report - International Military Testing Association

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?