Importance of aptitude tests
Thanks Ranga! 
Boning up with another Bloke's wife was ...
....yeah ok no it wasn't.
Boning up with another Bloke's wife was ...
....yeah ok no it wasn't.
Last edited by Horatio Leafblower; 9th Jan 2013 at 23:34. Reason: deletion of joke. Not accurate and probably not particularly funny.
...I hope that the other bloke was not your boss. A career limiting move, is that one....
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: melb
Posts: 2,162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...geee Jack Maths has it's advantages................I failed every test at school & I still got to fly a big shinny jet, I must have slipped thru the pyscho net crap
Just goes to show that all of today's hairy fairy stuff means Jack, or is that Ranger?
Wmk2
Just goes to show that all of today's hairy fairy stuff means Jack, or is that Ranger?
Wmk2
1. Passing an aptitude test means that you have an aptitude for passing an aptitude test, nothing else.
2. Personality tests can be learned and it is possible to mask most (but not all) personality traits and appear to be what you believe the HR people think they are looking for. This is taught by good lecturers at business school along with reading papers on peoples desks upside down.
Having said that, there has to be some form of screening and one might as well do it on the basis of mental acuity and perceived personality as anything else. THe problem that arises that everyone here is complaining about is false negatives - rejection of people who would make perfectly good pilots.
However it is a lot cheaper than using a method that produces a lot of false positives.....
2. Personality tests can be learned and it is possible to mask most (but not all) personality traits and appear to be what you believe the HR people think they are looking for. This is taught by good lecturers at business school along with reading papers on peoples desks upside down.
Having said that, there has to be some form of screening and one might as well do it on the basis of mental acuity and perceived personality as anything else. THe problem that arises that everyone here is complaining about is false negatives - rejection of people who would make perfectly good pilots.
However it is a lot cheaper than using a method that produces a lot of false positives.....
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 58
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've worked at companies that do aptitude testing and also at those who don't. I can't say that I detect a noticable diffence in the on-the-job performance of those who were successful in being employed in each instance. The HR people who devise these tests have spent several years at university studying somthing that is presumably of use in aircrew selection. Perhaps a HR person could write a posting to inform and educate us on this; I remain open minded.
In the world according to Anthill, rather than usingy arcane psychobabble testing (Do you think that pink is prettier than blue??) it really only needs to be determined in the candidate has the litteracy and numeracy skills for the job and has any discernable learning difficulties such as autism or dislexia. Beyond that, I fail to see any point for Myers Briggs or Transactional Analysis tests (apparently I have the "perfect" pilot profile* according to TA, but still didn't get past stage 1 at Qantas).
Good reading and comprehension skills, as well as numeracy skills, are essential for the job. Airlines should test to ensure candidates have at least these qualitites. For example, it is pointless to write a Policy and Procedures Manual if crew cannot correctly interpret the meaning and intent of the written words contained in its pages. It is extremely frustrating to try to apply, say, the fuel or duty time limit policy when you have to sit and explain to the other crew member what the policy actually means and allows.
Unfortunately I have met some pilots who can read but not comprehend. Further, pilots need to be able to comprehend and the apply a policy to a situation. For sound Human Factors reasons, pilots muct be functionally litterate as well as being able to count. There are a variety of ways that numeracy and litteracy can be assessed during pilot recruitment. Candidates can be presented with a complex MEL or Duty Time extension scenario and see how they perform. I support the idea that tests of this nature be used in a selection process.
(* the same TA profile for an "ideal" pilot is also the same for cops, nurses and paramedics: high 'parental' and 'adult' parameters combined with low scores in the 'child' dimension.
In the world according to Anthill, rather than usingy arcane psychobabble testing (Do you think that pink is prettier than blue??) it really only needs to be determined in the candidate has the litteracy and numeracy skills for the job and has any discernable learning difficulties such as autism or dislexia. Beyond that, I fail to see any point for Myers Briggs or Transactional Analysis tests (apparently I have the "perfect" pilot profile* according to TA, but still didn't get past stage 1 at Qantas).
Good reading and comprehension skills, as well as numeracy skills, are essential for the job. Airlines should test to ensure candidates have at least these qualitites. For example, it is pointless to write a Policy and Procedures Manual if crew cannot correctly interpret the meaning and intent of the written words contained in its pages. It is extremely frustrating to try to apply, say, the fuel or duty time limit policy when you have to sit and explain to the other crew member what the policy actually means and allows.
Unfortunately I have met some pilots who can read but not comprehend. Further, pilots need to be able to comprehend and the apply a policy to a situation. For sound Human Factors reasons, pilots muct be functionally litterate as well as being able to count. There are a variety of ways that numeracy and litteracy can be assessed during pilot recruitment. Candidates can be presented with a complex MEL or Duty Time extension scenario and see how they perform. I support the idea that tests of this nature be used in a selection process.
(* the same TA profile for an "ideal" pilot is also the same for cops, nurses and paramedics: high 'parental' and 'adult' parameters combined with low scores in the 'child' dimension.
Last edited by Anthill; 11th Jan 2013 at 04:09.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately I have met some pilots who can read but not comprehend
Then saw an ad for Australia Post motor cycle postmen. I had my own little Honda 50cc bike and reckon I could do the job. Besides I thought I would look real smart in those canary yellow get-ups, big crash helmets and big combat boots to kick the arse of any pit bull that was foolish enough to attack a former airline captain. Fronted up at the Moonee Ponds Australia Post (or whatever it was called in those days) and sat down with 20 other potential Honda 50cc hoons. The aptitude test was dead easy. Even a hoon could pass.
A month later received the Dear Tee Emm letter informing me I had unfortunately failed the aptitude test to be a motor cycle postman. Thank you for your interest.
Last edited by Tee Emm; 12th Jan 2013 at 10:48.
There was a rumour a few years back of an operational F111 driver who for a bit of fun went back to RAAF recruiting in Brisbane to see if he could still get in...
He was knocked back....
He was knocked back....
Be aware that there is an entire industry built around tthe flawed idea that it is possible to predict employee performance on the basis of personality tests - it ain't. For a start, personality is not stable over time (say Two years).
Aptitude testing on the other hand is possible.
For those interested, the entire "personality test" industry was debunked in the 1970's in the United States through a number of very high profile court cases involving discrimination complaints by Black Americans - the companies involved used "Personality Test Results" as their excuse for non promotion. The Corporations lost.
Unfortunately no one told Australia.
Be aware that certain employers are now using sophisticated methods to detect potential workplace psycopaths - which is a very noble aim. I won't explain the technique, but it is effective. My son went through it recently and passed OK - he didn't even know he was being tested for anything until he told me some of the questions they asked.
Aptitude testing on the other hand is possible.
For those interested, the entire "personality test" industry was debunked in the 1970's in the United States through a number of very high profile court cases involving discrimination complaints by Black Americans - the companies involved used "Personality Test Results" as their excuse for non promotion. The Corporations lost.
Unfortunately no one told Australia.
Be aware that certain employers are now using sophisticated methods to detect potential workplace psycopaths - which is a very noble aim. I won't explain the technique, but it is effective. My son went through it recently and passed OK - he didn't even know he was being tested for anything until he told me some of the questions they asked.
Last edited by Sunfish; 12th Jan 2013 at 18:23.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 58
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry to hear of that TeeEmm. Perhaps your experience was similar to mine. Some years ago a young Anthill was unemployed for 2 weeks and really wanted a job. The CES (remember them?) saw that I had a motorcycle licence and sent me off to Melbourne City Council for assessment as a Traffic Warden.
I was given a psychmetric test and an interview. At the interview, I was told that I had failed the aptitude test. The woman from HR told me that I was too imaginative and empathetic for that line of work. Simply, I would not make a good Traffic Warden.
Somehow, I was quite relieved...
Sunfish, perhaps personality tests could now be based on something tried and true...like Star Sign.
I was given a psychmetric test and an interview. At the interview, I was told that I had failed the aptitude test. The woman from HR told me that I was too imaginative and empathetic for that line of work. Simply, I would not make a good Traffic Warden.
Somehow, I was quite relieved...
Sunfish, perhaps personality tests could now be based on something tried and true...like Star Sign.
Last edited by Anthill; 13th Jan 2013 at 01:20.
The plant
We used to put one of our staff in a group of would be applicants at a place I used to work when we were having group selection. They would observe the candidates when they thought they weren't being "observed" by us. What it proved time and again was the way people acted when they were being themselves could be vastly different to how they acted when being in an interview scenario. The ones that looked perfect on paper were often the ones who got the worst assessment from our insider.
"Massive ego" was usually the cause of a rejection from a seemingly perfect candidate.
"Massive ego" was usually the cause of a rejection from a seemingly perfect candidate.
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: melb
Posts: 2,162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aptitude test= Humans testing Humans, now there's a conundrum !
It's really a 'feelgood' industry set up to move the responsibility of hiring the right person to someone else.
You can make 10 airframes identical but you will NEVER make 10 pilots identical despite all the HR/CRM/ Human Factors & Aptitude testing crap!
Wmk2
It's really a 'feelgood' industry set up to move the responsibility of hiring the right person to someone else.
You can make 10 airframes identical but you will NEVER make 10 pilots identical despite all the HR/CRM/ Human Factors & Aptitude testing crap!
Wmk2
Last edited by Wally Mk2; 13th Jan 2013 at 02:57.
Flying-saucer,
Remember, the real purpose of aptitude tests is only to select a small group of people (who will be further interviewed) from a large group of applicants.
The company is not trying to select the best applicants - just in reducing applicant numbers to something reasonable. If they were really interested in selecting the best applicants, there would be lots of follow-up studies to tune the tests - never heard of that happening.
So don't put any concern in test results - continue on just the same.
(I have a similar story to ramble-ons' - close friend - current aircrew - who did the aptitude test with his airline and was told don't-both-calling-us
Remember, the real purpose of aptitude tests is only to select a small group of people (who will be further interviewed) from a large group of applicants.
The company is not trying to select the best applicants - just in reducing applicant numbers to something reasonable. If they were really interested in selecting the best applicants, there would be lots of follow-up studies to tune the tests - never heard of that happening.
So don't put any concern in test results - continue on just the same.
(I have a similar story to ramble-ons' - close friend - current aircrew - who did the aptitude test with his airline and was told don't-both-calling-us
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Perth
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
aptitude tests...just another hurdle to jump over mate. no one likes them but if you want to fly the big birds then practice (at app tests) makes perfect.
currently doing tiger app tests...one month ago i was hopeless, now i'm blitzing it. in a month's time i expect to be hopeless again. learn the tricks, pass the tests and get on with flying!
currently doing tiger app tests...one month ago i was hopeless, now i'm blitzing it. in a month's time i expect to be hopeless again. learn the tricks, pass the tests and get on with flying!
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Someday I will find a place to stop
Posts: 1,021
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
6 Posts
The ones that looked perfect on paper were often the ones who got the worst assessment from our insider.
"Massive ego" was usually the cause of a rejection from a seemingly perfect candidate.
"Massive ego" was usually the cause of a rejection from a seemingly perfect candidate.
As for being perfect on paper, and massive ego, to which I admit to openly in both cases ha, isn't a massive ego a common trait amongst pilots?
Or is what you are describing really the difference between a pilot with experience and probably having done the job before compared to a pilot with lower experience or new? Which leads nicely into something I have read before about interviews which explains why airlines seem to take a lot of newbies, they promote what little they have compared to someone else with a lot to offer who rests on it all being explained in the CV.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That whole solo in 15 hours thing is Bullsh*t, i don't care how long people take, it doesn't really matter, its how they grow as a pilot and the mentality.
I took longer than 15 hours simply because my Medical was delayed due to an argument with the CAA (i don't have asthma BTW) instead of saving my money and staying on the ground i kept working through the syllabus until my med cert was done, i'd pretty much completed most of it by the time the cert came through.
I had a very overcooked Solo.
I'd rather fly with a thorough ''nana'' with better cockpit checks than me.. than a sh*t hot 6 hours to solo top gun type.
I took longer than 15 hours simply because my Medical was delayed due to an argument with the CAA (i don't have asthma BTW) instead of saving my money and staying on the ground i kept working through the syllabus until my med cert was done, i'd pretty much completed most of it by the time the cert came through.
I had a very overcooked Solo.
I'd rather fly with a thorough ''nana'' with better cockpit checks than me.. than a sh*t hot 6 hours to solo top gun type.
We used to put one of our staff in a group of would be applicants at a place I used to work when we were having group selection. They would observe the candidates when they thought they weren't being "observed" by us. What it proved time and again was the way people acted when they were being themselves could be vastly different to how they acted when being in an interview scenario. The ones that looked perfect on paper were often the ones who got the worst assessment from our insider.
"Massive ego" was usually the cause of a rejection from a seemingly perfect candidate.
"Massive ego" was usually the cause of a rejection from a seemingly perfect candidate.
Kiwi we could argue when one SHOULD solo, and because of the variables, come to no conclusion. If you are doing 30 minutes every month, it could take a very long time because of the lack of continuity. If you are learning at LAX International, ditto, because of the ATC situation, or if your instructor is useless, or if you are learning on some really tricky taildragger aircraft at a really challenging bush strip, maybe. But most flying schools use docile aircraft with training wheels on the front at benign airfields, if only for insurance purposes.
In a normal world, a normal person receiving proper and regular instruction should be able to meet approximate milestones that have been developed from past experience. I don't have statistical data, but would hazard a guess that 12 to 15 hours is about average time to solo for a westerner who has had normal exposure to the mechanical age. Perhaps a poll is in order, where pilots could qualify with things like time out for illness.....
One of the reasons airlines which run their own cadet programs do progress tests early is to weed out the slow learners whom they cannot afford to carry. Why should they have to make special cases when competition is so keen? Unfortunately for the psycho-babble exponents, the only definitive aptitude tests for pilots that I have seen to be reliable involve flying an aeroplane!
In a normal world, a normal person receiving proper and regular instruction should be able to meet approximate milestones that have been developed from past experience. I don't have statistical data, but would hazard a guess that 12 to 15 hours is about average time to solo for a westerner who has had normal exposure to the mechanical age. Perhaps a poll is in order, where pilots could qualify with things like time out for illness.....
One of the reasons airlines which run their own cadet programs do progress tests early is to weed out the slow learners whom they cannot afford to carry. Why should they have to make special cases when competition is so keen? Unfortunately for the psycho-babble exponents, the only definitive aptitude tests for pilots that I have seen to be reliable involve flying an aeroplane!
Last edited by Mach E Avelli; 15th Jan 2013 at 02:07. Reason: typo
Join Date: Feb 1998
Location: Formerly of Nam
Posts: 1,595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To the OP - I agree with the majority of posts esp ones re psych tests merely
to keep Human Remains personnel in a job. Its nothing to do with "aptitude"
of course - its only a check to see if you're as crazy as the rest of us.
Simply bullsh!t your way through it and stay consistent - those new "online"
assessments (usually with bloody time limits) are harder because you can't
go back like we did in the old days to check what you answered in a similar
question.
Good luck!
to keep Human Remains personnel in a job. Its nothing to do with "aptitude"
of course - its only a check to see if you're as crazy as the rest of us.
Simply bullsh!t your way through it and stay consistent - those new "online"
assessments (usually with bloody time limits) are harder because you can't
go back like we did in the old days to check what you answered in a similar
question.
Good luck!
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: South Pacific
Posts: 862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What Anthill said;
Forget Aptitude, - what is needed is a 'Laziness and Arrogance Test' at interview stage..
When you have Co-pilots (and Captains who may have been in the small operation for a while) who once they are hired can't be bothered, and find that daily Flight and Duty program recording is too much, (among other requirements), saving the Company Operations money instead of scamming it for more than they think they can get away with, yet still expecting time off when they choose - would be a better test to reduce the interview numbers for a better overall operation in the long run..
It is extremely frustrating to try to apply, say, the fuel or duty time limit policy when you have to sit and explain to the other crew member what the policy actually means and allows.
When you have Co-pilots (and Captains who may have been in the small operation for a while) who once they are hired can't be bothered, and find that daily Flight and Duty program recording is too much, (among other requirements), saving the Company Operations money instead of scamming it for more than they think they can get away with, yet still expecting time off when they choose - would be a better test to reduce the interview numbers for a better overall operation in the long run..
