Aptitude Requirements Based on Task Difficulty: Methodology for Evaluation. Interim Report for Period 1975-1980.

Autor/inn/en	Burtch, Lloyd D.; und weitere
Institution	Air Force Human Resources Lab., Brooks AFB, TX. Manpower and Personnel Div.
Titel	Aptitude Requirements Based on Task Difficulty: Methodology for Evaluation. Interim Report for Period 1975-1980.
Quelle	(1982), (47 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Aptitude; Aptitude Tests; Aptitude Treatment Interaction; Difficulty Level; Evaluation Methods; Job Analysis; Job Skills; Job Training; Military Training; Occupational Information; Personnel Evaluation; Personnel Selection; Postsecondary Education; Rating Scales; Task Analysis; Vocational Aptitude + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Eignung; Aptitude test; Eignungsprüfung; Eignungstest; Schwierigkeitsgrad; Arbeitsanalyse; Produktive Fertigkeit; Berufsqualifizierender Bildungsgang; Militärausbildung; Berufsinformation; Personalbeurteilung; Personalauswahl; Personalentscheidung; Post-secondary education; Tertiäre Bildung; Rating-Skala; Aufgabenanalyse; Ausbildungseignung; Berufseignung
Abstract	An objective procedure was developed and tested to determine the relative difficulty of Air Force jobs. Also investigated were (1) the measurement of task difficulty to allow comparability across specialties, (2) the quantitative appraisal of job demands based on component tasks being performed, and (3) the comparability of job difficulty to job aptitude requirement. The study was based on task-level specifications of learning difficulty provided by two sources: supervisors and benchmark ratings developed by contract job analysts. These data were used to weight the relative difficulty of each task when computing aggregate estimates of learning difficulty for each enlisted specialty. The Comprehensive Occupational Data Analysis Programs (CODAP) package was used for the analysis of task level data. Interrater reliability and correlation techniques were used to assess the agreement among supervisors and job analysis in the ratings of task difficulty. Regression equations were used to calibrate relative ratings on the benchmark scale. The calibrated ratings then were combined with average time-spent data to determine the relative difficulty of individual jobs and specialty groups. Both supervisory ratings and the contract job analyst ratings proved to be highly reliable, and the benchmark scales provided a highly reliable means of obtaining task difficulty ratings that were comparable across specialities. The methodology developed and implemented can be applied objectively to evaluate the relative aptitude requirements of Air Force jobs and to order jobs relative to each other based on the level of talent required. It was recommended that this method be used in operational realignment of current aptitude requirements. (KC)
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC