Development of the precommissioning leadership assessment program.

Rogers, Robert W.; Lilley, Leonard W.; Wellins, Richard S.; Fischl, M. A.; Burke, William P.

doi:10.1037/e465782004-001

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The Cadet Performance Report (CPR) contains performance ratings given at the end of each semester by supervisors, peers, subordinates and instructors, (Rogers, Lilley, Wellins, Fischl, & Burke, 1982;Schwager & Evans, 1996). Cadets are rated on a 5-point likert scale (from "excellent" to "needs much improvement") on 12 leadership dimensions.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychosocial development and leader performance of military officer cadets

Bartone

Snook²,

Forsythe

et al. 2007

The Leadership Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychosocial development and leader performance of military officer cadets

Bartone

Snook²,

Forsythe

et al. 2007

The Leadership Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Following a search of the literature (e.g., Burke, Kramer, & Butler, 1982;Puryear, 1971;Rogers, Lilley, Wellins, Fischl, & Burke, 1982) and a review of current Army student evaluation dimensions (e.g., officer evaluation reports), the definitions of 14 primary military qualities were compiled for consideration as evaluation dimensions by senior aviation officers. Several important military qualities were excluded from the survey because they are evaluated by academic scores (e.g., technical competence) or are unlikely to be demonstrated during the AVNOAC (e.g., development of subordinates).…”

Section: Military Oualities Surveymentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of a Peer Comparison Procedure for the U.S. Army Aviation Officer Advanced Course

McAnulty¹

1990

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

la. REPORT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION lb. RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS Unclassified-2a. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION AUTHORITY 3. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY OF REPORT-__Approved for public release; 2b. DECLASSIFICATION I DOWNGRADING SCHEDULE distribution is unlimited. 4. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S) S. MONITORING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S) AS1690-320-89 ARI Research Report 1549 6a. NAME OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION [6b. OFFICE SYMBOL 7a. NAME OF MONITORING ORGANIZATION Anacapa Sciences, Inc.J (if applicable) U.S. Army Research Institute Aviation If Research and Development Activity 6c. ADDRESS (City, State, and ZIP Code) 7b. ADDRESS (City, State, and ZIP Code) P.O. Box 489 ATTN: PERI-IR I Military qualities, C_2-1 9, ABSTRACT (Continue on reverse if necessa'y and identify by block number) 2 In response to a request from the School Secretary, U.S. Army Aviation Center, Fort Rucker, Alabama, a peer comparisoq (PC) procedure was developed to select Aviation Officer Advanced Course (AVNOAC) honor graduates on the basis of a "whole person" concept. Under this concept, students would be evaluated on and honored for both their academic performance and for other attributes important in the development of an Army aviation officer. The PC procedure is a combination of the peer nomination ard peer ranking methods and the psychophysical scaling technique of paired comparisons. Section members in each AVNOAC class nominate and rank order five of their peers on their potential as aviation officers. They then compare each pair of nominees on each of five military qualiWies identified by senior aviation officers as important and likely to be observed in the couse. The PC procedure was administered twice in each of two AVNOAC classes (N = 90 and 103). 'be results indicate that the procedure is easy to use, has high internal consistency and tempo l stability, and produces a consensus on which students have the highest potential. A-20. DISTRIBUTION /AVAILABILITY OF ABSTRACT 21. ABSTRACT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 0 UNCLASSIFIED/UNLIMITED i SAME AS RPT. 0 DTIC USERS Unclassified 22a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL 22b. TELEPHONE (Include Area Code) 22c. OFFICE SYMBOL Charles A. Gainer, COTR (205) 255-4404 PERI-IR DD Form 1473, JUN 86 Previous editions are obsolete.

show abstract

“…The dimensions assessed in the LAP which are to be trained with the Leadership Improvement Modules were determined through a comprehensive job analysis (see Rogers at al., 1982, for a full description).…”

Section: Design Features Of the Leadership Improvement Modules Lap Lementioning

confidence: 99%

The Leadership Improvement Modules of the Precommissioning Leadership Assessment Program

Burke¹,

Davis²

1986

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Item 20. .Abstract-continuation rehearsal is effected by having the student interact, through workbook exercises,. in unfolding scenarios presented in the audiovisual slides. A narrator provides feedback on correct responses to the exercise problems. Transfer of training is provided for by directing the student to further developmental activities in which the student can participate in his/her duty environment. The modules were developed in Training Extension Course (TEC) lesson format, each being a self-instructional audiovisual unit of artwork, slides and accompanying narration.

show abstract

Development of the precommissioning leadership assessment program.

Cited by 7 publications

References 2 publications

Psychosocial development and leader performance of military officer cadets

Psychosocial development and leader performance of military officer cadets

Development of a Peer Comparison Procedure for the U.S. Army Aviation Officer Advanced Course

The Leadership Improvement Modules of the Precommissioning Leadership Assessment Program

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About