Technical Report - International Military Testing Association

c.
/
I ’
.
a
.
c
.
’ ,
Summary Comparison of Purposes and Programs d * i
:
of the Ullitary Services
zlr. Chairman, Rellw Conferees,
E. c. JoHHSo1’I
US ?rmy Enlisted Evaluation Center )
As we begin to explore possible approaches to improved measurement,
it will be well to review briefly, as a point of departure, the programs
that arc nw in operation within the military services. You each have a
detailed s-ry prepared by each service on their evaluation programs.
Yn this paper I will present a Summary Comparison of the I?urposes and
Programs of the Hilltary Servicer. I have prepared a char: that depicts
thi 8 canparison. his chart is listed as Appendix 1 at the end of this
paper. All the military services use a paper-and-pencil multiple choice
type test as the basic inrtrument of their evaluation progrsm. This
te8t is supplemented in some cases by a performance test. These tests
mre very similar, vith the exception of the Marine Corps, in that they
are designed to mcamre the job knwledga required for satisfactory performance
in the militury specialty that IS being evaluated. Each military
mpecialty has a separate test for each subdivision of the specialty.
These subdivisions are either pay grades or skill levels. The number
of questiono in these tests varies from 65 to 150. he NC0 tests include
coverage of general military and f.lpervisory abilities as vell as the job
specialty.
.ARmPRoGRAH
The Army uses two inotruments in its evaluation progrsm. An M0.S
evaluation test for each skill level and a rating form, Couxnanders
Evaluation Report (CER). The CER Is a rating form ueed to evaluate a
noldier’s performance characteristics in a specific HOS at an ertablished
level of skfll. One rating is accanplished by the soldier’r immediate
superfor and another by the immediate superior of the rater, The CER’s
include scales for rating the individual’s cooperativeness, reliability,
job performance, and other factors.
After the tests are administered Army wide, the MOS evaluation test
unswer cards and the canpleted CER’s are forwarded to the USAEEC. The
two Instruments are scored at the Center by canputer and aI canposite
evaluation score is obtained. An HOS Evaluation Data Report is prepared
for each individual teuted. This report contains the individual’s
Evaluation Score and a profile showing his standing in each subjectmatter
area of the test. The unit coaxmander receives a copy of the
individual’s EDR which he reviews and then forwards to the individual
soldier. Thus the individual and his unit commander is made aware of
the subject-matter areas’ in which the soldier stands “high” aa well as
those areas in which he needs to improve.
.
.
.
. .
._ .-- --.. - _--.__ _ ___ _ _-_ -___ -.-__,._ XI ..__w_._. ---I_-- --.. _.
_ _--__ -_ -. ---. - --
.
i
:
i