Screening for Attrition and Performance

Similar documents
Biometrics in US Army Accessions Command

Improving the Quality of Patient Care Utilizing Tracer Methodology

Mission Assurance Analysis Protocol (MAAP)

Validating Future Force Performance Measures (Army Class): End of Training Longitudinal Validation

DEVELOPMENT OF A NON-HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA GRADUATE PRE-ENLISTMENT SCREENING MODEL TO ENHANCE THE FUTURE FORCE 1

Contemporary Issues Paper EWS Submitted by K. D. Stevenson to

The Coalition Warfare Program (CWP) OUSD(AT&L)/International Cooperation

Panel 12 - Issues In Outsourcing Reuben S. Pitts III, NSWCDL

Independent Auditor's Report on the Attestation of the Existence, Completeness, and Rights of the Department of the Navy's Aircraft

Integrated Comprehensive Planning for Range Sustainability

White Space and Other Emerging Issues. Conservation Conference 23 August 2004 Savannah, Georgia

Military Health System Conference. Psychological Health Risk Adjusted Model for Staffing (PHRAMS)

Cerberus Partnership with Industry. Distribution authorized to Public Release

Shadow 200 TUAV Schoolhouse Training

Opportunities to Streamline DOD s Milestone Review Process

AFCEA TECHNET LAND FORCES EAST

US Coast Guard Corrosion Program Office

Improving ROTC Accessions for Military Intelligence

712CD. Phone: Fax: Comparison of combat casualty statistics among US Armed Forces during OEF/OIF

United States Army Aviation Technology Center of Excellence (ATCoE) NASA/Army Systems and Software Engineering Forum

United States Military Casualty Statistics: Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom

The Fully-Burdened Cost of Waste in Contingency Operations

terns Planning and E ik DeBolt ~nts Softwar~ RS) DMSMS Plan Buildt! August 2011 SYSPARS

ASAP-X, Automated Safety Assessment Protocol - Explosives. Mark Peterson Department of Defense Explosives Safety Board

Military Health System Conference. Putting it All Together: The DoD/VA Integrated Mental Health Strategy (IMHS)

Fiscal Year 2011 Department of Homeland Security Assistance to States and Localities

Tier One Performance Screen Initial Operational Test and Evaluation: Early Results

Laboratory Accreditation Bureau (L-A-B)

Research to advance the Development of River Information Services (RIS) Technologies

Wildland Fire Assistance

DDESB Seminar Explosives Safety Training

Integrity Assessment of E1-E3 Sailors at Naval Submarine School: FY2007 FY2011

Army Aviation and Missile Command (AMCOM) Corrosion Program Update. Steven F. Carr Corrosion Program Manager

Navy Recruiting and Applicant Attraction:

SPECIAL REPORT Unsurfaced Road Maintenance Management. Robert A. Eaton and Ronald E. Beaucham December 1992

Infections Complicating the Care of Combat Casualties during Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom

National Guard and Army Reserve Readiness and Operations Support

DOD Native American Regional Consultations in the Southeastern United States. John Cordray NAVFAC, Southern Division Charleston, SC

Munitions Response Site Prioritization Protocol (MRSPP) Online Training Overview. Environmental, Energy, and Sustainability Symposium Wednesday, 6 May

For the Period June 1, 2014 to June 30, 2014 Submitted: 15 July 2014

Social Science Research on Sensitive Topics and the Exemptions. Caroline Miner

Afloat Electromagnetic Spectrum Operations Program (AESOP) Spectrum Management Challenges for the 21st Century

The Landscape of the DoD Civilian Workforce

~ NATO STANDARDIZATION ~ 60 YEARS of NORMATIVE SUCCESS. NATO Standardization Agency

Defense Health Care Issues and Data

Engineered Resilient Systems - DoD Science and Technology Priority

ALLEGED MISCONDUCT: GENERAL T. MICHAEL MOSELEY FORMER CHIEF OF STAFF, U.S. AIR FORCE

2011 USN-USMC SPECTRUM MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE COMPACFLT

Product Manager Force Sustainment Systems

Electronic Attack/GPS EA Process

Tim Haithcoat Deputy Director Center for Geospatial Intelligence Director Geographic Resources Center / MSDIS

DOING BUSINESS WITH THE OFFICE OF NAVAL RESEARCH. Ms. Vera M. Carroll Acquisition Branch Head ONR BD 251

The Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act: Background and Issues

Military to Civilian Conversion: Where Effectiveness Meets Efficiency

Make or Buy: Cost Impacts of Additive Manufacturing, 3D Laser Scanning Technology, and Collaborative Product Lifecycle Management on Ship Maintenance

Aviation Logistics Officers: Combining Supply and Maintenance Responsibilities. Captain WA Elliott

The Shake and Bake Noncommissioned Officer. By the early-1960's, the United States Army was again engaged in conflict, now in

AFRL-ML-WP-TP

The DoD Siting Clearinghouse. Dave Belote Director, Siting Clearinghouse Office of the Secretary of Defense

On 10 July 2008, the Training and Readiness Authority

SIMULATOR SYSTEMS GROUP

AFRL-VA-WP-TP

TRICARE: A Regional View

A Scalable, Collaborative, Interactive Light-field Display System

TITLE: Spouses/Family Members of Service Members at Risk for PTSD or Suicide. Fairfax, VA 22030

2011 Military Health System Conference

The Impact of Accelerated Promotion Rates on Drill Sergeant Performance

Defense Acquisition Review Journal

Redefining how Relative Values are determined on Fitness Reports EWS Contemporary Issues Paper Submitted by Captain S.R. Walsh to Maj Tatum 19 Feb 08

Military Health System Conference. Behavioral Health Clinical Quality in the MHS : Past Present and Future


MOS 09L (Interpreter / Translator) Information Paper Updated November 2006

Environmental Trends Course Cultural Resources

Nuclear Command, Control, and Communications: Update on DOD s Modernization

USAF TECHNICAL TRAINING NAS Pensacola Florida Develop America's Airmen Today --- for Tomorrow

Systems Engineering Capstone Marketplace Pilot

AMCOM Corrosion Program

Harnessing the Power of MHS Information Systems to Achieve Meaningful Use of Health Information

Army Modeling and Simulation Past, Present and Future Executive Forum for Modeling and Simulation

Fleet Logistics Center, Puget Sound

Battle Captain Revisited. Contemporary Issues Paper Submitted by Captain T. E. Mahar to Major S. D. Griffin, CG 11 December 2005

United States Air Force 423 SCMS Hydraulic Actuator Chrome Replacement

Rapid Reaction Technology Office. Rapid Reaction Technology Office. Overview and Objectives. Mr. Benjamin Riley. Director, (RRTO)

Cold Environment Assessment Tool (CEAT) User s Guide

Presented to: Presented by: February 5, Aviation and Missile Research, Development and Engineering Center

Tier One Performance Screen Initial Operational Test and Evaluation: 2012 Annual Report

The Affect of Division-Level Consolidated Administration on Battalion Adjutant Sections

2010 Fall/Winter 2011 Edition A army Space Journal

Developmental Test and Evaluation Is Back

Water Usage at Forward Operating Bases

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE

Determining and Developing TCM-Live Future Training Requirements. COL Jeffrey Hill TCM-Live Fort Eustis, VA June 2010

IMPROVING SPACE TRAINING

MILITARY MUNITIONS RULE (MR) and DoD EXPLOSIVES SAFETY BOARD (DDESB)

Report Documentation Page

Infantry Companies Need Intelligence Cells. Submitted by Captain E.G. Koob

Warrant officer accessions

The Security Plan: Effectively Teaching How To Write One

NORAD CONUS Fighter Basing

Report Documentation Page

Transcription:

Screening for Attrition and Performance with Non-Cognitive Measures Presented ed to: Military Operations Research Society Workshop Working Group 2 (WG2): Retaining Personnel 27 January 2010 Lead Researchers: Tonia Heffner, Len White, Robert Kilcullen Presented by: Dr. Michael Rumsey, michael.rumsey1@us.army.mil, 703-602-7763; U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences

Report Documentation Page Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for the 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 the 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 Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 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 a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. 1. REPORT DATE 27 JAN 2010 2. REPORT TYPE 3. DATES COVERED 00-00-2010 to 00-00-2010 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE Screening for Attrition and Performance with Non-Cognitive Measures 5a. CONTRACT NUMBER 5b. GRANT NUMBER 5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER 6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER 5e. TASK NUMBER 5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences,Arlington,VA, 22202 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR S ACRONYM(S) 12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT Approved for public release; distribution unlimited 11. SPONSOR/MONITOR S REPORT NUMBER(S) 13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES Personnel and National Security: A Quantitative Approach (Unclass), 25-28 January 2010, Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, Laurel, Maryland 14. ABSTRACT 15. SUBJECT TERMS 16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT a. REPORT unclassified b. ABSTRACT unclassified c. THIS PAGE unclassified Same as Report (SAR) 18. NUMBER OF PAGES 16 19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98) Prescribed by ANSI Std Z39-18

ARI Selection and Assignment Research Goal: Develop and validate non-cognitive measures against performance/attitudinal outcomes to enhance selection and assignment Personnel Selection Tests Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) cognitive measures AFQT (math, verbal) Technical (e.g., mechanical) + ARI non-cognitive measures Temperament Person-environment environment fit Training Leader Development Education Mentoring Operational experience Outcomes Performance - Knowledge - Skills - Leadership Attitudes - Army values - Warrior ethos - Career intent Whole-person assessment = cognitive + non-cognitive measures 2

Organization of this Presentation Non-cognitive measures for enlisted Soldiers Tier Two Attrition Screen TAPAS Screen and TOPS program Way ahead Non-cognitive measures for officers

Tier Two Attrition Screen (TTAS) Educational Tier 2 (mostly GEDs) enlistments have historically been capped at 10% because Tier 2 have about 50% higher first-term loss rates than Tier 1 U.S. Army Research Institute developed the Tier Two Attrition Screen (TTAS) to identify Tier 2 with loss rates more similar to Tier 1 TTAS combines predictors of first-term t enlisted attrition for whole-person assessment Cognitive: Subtests from Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery Motivation: Assessment of Individual id Motivation (AIM) Physical : Gender-normed Body Mass Index Scores from these measures are combined into a TTAS score Higher TTAS Score = Lower Likelihood of Attrition

Assessment of Individual Motivation (AIM) 27-item, non-cognitive test for measuring Dependability, Adjustment, Physical Conditioning, Leadership, Work Orientation, and Agreeableness Special Army test at MEPCOM; 25 minutes 2 responses made for each 4-statement item: behaviors/preferences most and least like respondent Predicts attrition and will do, motivational aspects of performance (e.g., indiscipline, job effort) Scale scores have a low correlation with minority group status and gender

Note: Sample sizes, from left to right, are: 6 Month 166055, 25325, 21524; 18 Month 114272, 17445, 15146; 30 Month 68010, 9552, 8353

Way Ahead: Tier 2 Screening Computerized AIM Implementation on the ASVAB platform at all MEPS Added mode will make it easier to accomplish AIM testing Improve TTAS Prediction of Attrition and Performance Close gap between loss rates of Tier 2 passing TTAS and Tier 1 FY10 testing of Tier 2 applicants on Tailored Adaptive Personality Assessment System (TAPAS) and AIM and follow-up analyses of prediction of attrition and performance

TAPAS: Tailored Adaptive Personality Assessment System 15 dimensions including: Achievement Non-delinquency Even-tempered Intellectual efficiency Computer-adaptive test delivered on the CAT-ASVAB platform at MEPS Paired forced-choice choice self-descriptors Optimism Physical conditioning Attention seeking TAPAS provides two scores for each applicant TAPAS Which of these statements is most like you? I like roller coasters. I enjoy parties. Note: Forced choice measures provide no obvious best/worst answer options. Can do predicts AIT grades, training graduation rates, job knowledge Will do predicts APFT scores, job effort, indiscipline rate, attrition Females score slightly higher than males Females score slightly higher than males Blacks and Hispanics score slightly higher than Whites

AIM and TAPAS Constructs AIM CONSTRUCTS Dependability Adjustment Physical Conditioning Leadership Work Orientation Agreeableness TAPAS CONSTRUCTS Non-delinquency Optimism Physical Conditioning Dominance Achievement Even Tempered Generosity Excitement Seeking Intellectual Efficiency Orderliness Tolerance Cooperation Sociability TAPAS assesses these unique constructs

Research Approach: Validating TAPAS Administered non-cognitive selection measures (TAPAS) to enlisted Soldiers from all components at Reception BNs (approx 11K in 2007) Tracked Soldiers to completion of AIT/OSUT Collected outcome data in Initial Entry Training (IET) Attrition (RA only), AIT course grades (subset of MOS), graduation rates For 6 targeted MOS (11B, 19K, 31B, 63B, 68W, 88M): Job knowledge test Self-report: APFT scores; Disciplinary rates; Career intent Job performance ratings from drill sergeants and peers Continuing to track through first term of enlistment

TAPAS Related to Training Outcomes in Research Setting Tier 1 NPS CAT IIIB Soldiers passing TAPAS screen perform similar to or better than Soldiers in Higher AFQT Categories AIT Exam Grades Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) Average Exam Grade Latest APFT Score (n = 1,064) (n = 1,088) Disciplinary Incidents 6-Month Attrition (RA only) % with Incident(s s) % At ttrition 11 (n = 1,093) (n = 3,092) Outcome Data Collection: Oct07 - May08

IOT&E: Tier 1 Performance Screen (TOPS) Testing and Screening Process Administer TAPAS in MEPS to Army and Air Force applicants; phased in May-Aug 09 All Tier 1 (high school diploma graduates) NPS applicants Exception: CAT I-IIIB applicants arriving at MEPS with valid ASVAB score All Tier 2 (non high school diploma graduates) NPS applicants starting Mar 10 Use TAPAS to screen out a small number of low motivated CAT IV Army applicants (no screening for Air Force) Screen at the 10 th percentile; ~ bottom 13% are ineligible IOT&E concept endorsed by Secretary of the Army, 6 Jan 09 Implementation plan approved by Army G-1, 11 Mar 09 Supported by CG, USAAC, 24 Mar 09 Implementation memo signed by DMPM, 3 Apr 09

IOT&E: Tier 1 Performance Screen (TOPS) Testing and Evaluation Process Administer TAPAS in 7 MEPS (began 4 May 09) All Tier 1 (high school diploma graduates) NPS applicants Exception: CAT I-IIIB Soldiers arriving at MEPS with valid ASVAB score Phased implementation of TAPAS testing will have reached all MEPS by 17 July Track Soldiers to completion of Initial Entry Training (IET) and evaluate performance outcomes across AFQT categories Attrition (AC only), AIT grades (as available), graduation rates For 8 targeted MOS (11B, 19K, 25U, 31B, 42A, 63B, 68W, 88M): Job knowledge test Self report: APFT scores; disciplinary rates; career intent Job performance ratings from drill sergeants Review at 6 month intervals for evaluation/modification IOT&E concept endorsed by Secretary of the Army, 6 Jan 09

Way Ahead: Non-cognitive Measures for Enlisted Personnel 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Research Longitudinal Validation Track Soldiers; assess at 18 and 36 m. TIS Validate non-cognitive measures for selection against first term performance Research Training Validation Identified/administered noncognitive measures to new Soldiers in a research setting Validated non-cognitive measures for training criteria Validated TAPAS as potential screening tool In-service Validation Validate TAPAS to select NCOs for special assignments (recruiter, drill sergeant) Classification Validation Validate non-cognitives for MOS classification Completed Research Research evaluation Tier One Performance Screen (TOPS) Longitudinal Evaluation Administer TAPAS at MEPS Track Soldiers; Assess at end of training, 18 m., and 36 m. TIS Validate operational TAPAS for selection against first term performance Operational evaluation

ARI Research: Non-cognitive Measures for Officers Research goal: Develop/refine and validate non-cognitive measures to predict attitudinal and performance outcomes: Career continuance, Junior officer performance, and Senior leader potential. Initial research findings: ARI non-cognitive measures increase prediction of ROTC continuation and OCS career intentions, beyond traditional screening measures. Predictors of ROTC Continuation Predictors of Career Intentions in OCS enrollment Dis 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Current Non-Cog 0-25% 26-50% 51-75% 76-100% Assessment Percentile Scores Current System: Overall Whole Person Score Non-Cog Measure: Cadet Background Evaluation Form Enlistm ent Optio on In Serv vice Non-cogs add value to AFQT Army ID Work Values RBI Army ID Work Values RBI.17.26.17.17.34.34.34.23.42.13.22.32 AFQT Non Cog 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 Validity Coefficients Army ID: Strength, ability and depth of Army identification Work Values: Work-related desires and priorities RBI (Rational Biodata Inventory): Job-related temperaments

Way Ahead: Non-cognitive Measures for Officer Screening 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Development of Transition of Officer Predictor validated d measures Measures (ROTC/OCS) to AAC/TRADOC for officer accessioning - Subject to available funding Officer Job Analysis Predictive Validity of New Measures Development of Criterion Measures of fofficer Job Performance (ROTC/OCS) Analyses to refine Branch Assignment - Subject to available funding Final Products Specification of officer performance requirements across rank & branch Validated tests for officer candidate selection and branch assignment