Airman Classification Batteries from 1948 to 1975: A Review and Evaluation

Weeks, Joseph L.; Mullins, Cecil J.; Vitola, Bart M.

doi:10.21236/ada026470

Cited by 3 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These validities were significant but the overall validity data are insufficient for interpretation. Differentiation between the composites was about the same for AQE-D as for AC-2A (Weeks et al, 1975).…”

Section: Airman Qualifying Examination Form D -Aqe-dmentioning

confidence: 71%

“…The discrimination between tests in AC-2A increased the differential validity over other versions. This battery provided improved composite predictors over the first two batteries (Weeks, Mullins, & Vitola, 1975).…”

Section: Airman Classification Battery Ac-2amentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Brokaw and Burgess (1957) reported that the classification batteries were updated to protect from loss of security from repeated use, change test content that was obsolete, add new technology, and take advantage of advances in test theory. These classification tests are described in detail by Lecznar and Davydiuk (1960) and by Weeks, Mullins, and Vitola (1975). A summary of the ten classification tests used from 1947 to 1972 is provided in an appendix to this paper.…”

Section: Air Force Classification Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The fifth AI was Radio Operator and Electronics Technician became Electronics. When the AQE-D was introduced in 1958, the Aptitude Indexes had been reduced to the four composites that are still used today, MAGE (Weeks et al, 1975). The ASVAB also yields composite scores in the MAGE areas for the Air Force.…”

Section: The Evolution Of the Mage Aptitude Indexesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It was revised again in April 1955 when the Services AI was dropped because it was showing very low predictive ability. (Weeks et al, 1975) Friedman and Ivens (1954) compared the AC-1B to the United States Employment Service General Aptitude Test Battery (USES GATB). The study identified the common factor loadings of the AC-1B and the GATB.…”

Section: Airman Classification Battery Ac-1bmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Enlisted Selection and Classification Tests: Precursors of the ASVAB

Thompson¹

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing this collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number.

show abstract

Section: Airman Qualifying Examination Form D -Aqe-dmentioning

confidence: 71%

Section: Airman Classification Battery Ac-2amentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Air Force Classification Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Evolution Of the Mage Aptitude Indexesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Airman Classification Battery Ac-1bmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Enlisted Selection and Classification Tests: Precursors of the ASVAB

Thompson¹

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The Validity of Test Scores for Selecting and Classifying Enlisted Recruits

Wise¹

1992

Test Policy in Defense

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An Empirical System for Assessing The Impact of Aptitude Requirement Adjustments on Air Force Initial Skills Training

Mumford¹,

Harding²,

Fleishman³

et al. 1987

PsycEXTRA Dataset

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A multivariate modeling approach was developed to assess the impact of changes in aptitude requirement minimums on U.S. Air Force technical training outcomes. Initially, interviews were conducted with technical training personnel to identify significant student inputs, course content, and training outcome variables. Measures of these variables were formulated on the basis of personnel records and routinely available training documents, znd data were assembled for over 5,000 trainees in 39 initial-skills courses at five Air Force bases. A cross-validation sample consisted of about 1,000 trainees in nine courses. Using formal path analysis (LISREL V computer program), an empirical model of the training process was developed. Although aptitude was one of the best predictors of the quality of student performance, it interacted with a vaiiety of other student input and course content variables in determining training outcomes. Course content variables tended to be defined by course subject-matter difficulty, occupational difficulty, and manpower requirements, Counseling mediated the relationship between training performance and distal training outcomes such as retraining time and student elimination. Appendices present sample interview questions, an Air Force policy document on student measurement (with reporting forms), and tables of input statistics and path analysis results.

show abstract

Airman Classification Batteries from 1948 to 1975: A Review and Evaluation

Cited by 3 publications

References 5 publications

Enlisted Selection and Classification Tests: Precursors of the ASVAB

Enlisted Selection and Classification Tests: Precursors of the ASVAB

The Validity of Test Scores for Selecting and Classifying Enlisted Recruits

An Empirical System for Assessing The Impact of Aptitude Requirement Adjustments on Air Force Initial Skills Training

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About