Technical b r Report - International Military Testing Association

areas are more complex than the old ones. These contain three to five sub-
tests each. a.p contrasted to only two in the old aptitude areas.
The result of putting so nmy tests in each composite is that the
new aptitude areas arc more accurate predictors of success in job training,
wtiich is good, but also that the scores arc more hig!lly inter-correlated,
which at first seems bad. We found, however, that the new area scores do
a much better job of sorting out the manpower into appropriate job areas
than did the old ones.
We analyzed the new scores hy subjecting them to extensive analyses
througn simulating scores on a coorpul-cr to rcprcsent random samples from the
mobilization population. WC assigned the simulated “men” to job areas hascd
on both the new and old aptitude? nrcas scores. We kept the quota restraints that
ccrrain pcrkenragcs.had to go into each job area which reiiccred rhe real
Amy quqtas at the tine. The consistent result is that the performance
estimates were higher under the new set of scores than under the old. The
increase in predictive accuracy more than compensatcJ for the increased
intercorrelation.
Another gain realized from the new aptitude area is that each of them
contain tests that require the ability to read. In former days, illiterate
men could qualify for Army scrvIce, and many did. Under the new system,
some functional illiterates iiro still gettfng through, that is, rend below
the fifth grade level, but the number has been reduced to an estimated
five percent.
Based on the promise of more accurate measurement of job pote,ltial,
the new ACB was adopted for opcrotional USC, and it was implemented on
1 Play 1973. Kow let’s see how it is being used.
37 ,