-LWRITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGEForm Approved

REPCTATION PAGE OMBNo.0704.0188M 9 T I r I Exp Date Jun30 1986

la. REPORT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION jlm A & 1b. RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS

Unclassified ELECTE _ _ _ _ _ "_ _ _ _7a SECURITY CLASSIFICATION A(t lq"= 3. DISTRIBUTION /AVAILABILITY OF REPORT

A. Approved for public release; distributioJL _ is unlimited.

AD-A20 852 E S. MONITORING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S)AD-A208 852 . o ooo

6a NAME OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION 6b OF E SYMBOL 7a. NAME OF MONITORING ORGANIZATIONU.S. Army Soldier Support (if applicable) Soldier Support Center-National CapitalCenter ATSG-DD Region

6c. ADDRESS (City, State, and ZIP Code) 7b. ADDRESS (Cty, State, and ZIP Code)Fort Benjamin Harrison, Indiana 46216-5700 ATTN: ATNC-NMF-A, 200 Stovall Street,

Alexandria, VA 22332-0400

Ba. NAME OF FUNDING ISPONSORING i 8b. OFFICE SYMBOL 9. PROCUREMENT INSTRUMENT IDENTIFICATION NUMBERORGANIZATION U" S. Amy (If applicable)

Soldier Support Center j ATSG-DD N/A8c. ADDRESS (City, State, and ZIP Code) 10. SOURCE OF FUNDING NUMBERS

ELEMENT NO. NO. NO. ACCESSION NO.

11. TITLE (include Security Classification)Entry MOS Qualifications For PSS CMFs (U) -

rA

12. PERSONAL AUTHOR(S)

Vandivier, Phillip, Mahoney, Mike ....... _ _13a. TYPE OF REPORT 13b. TIME COVERED 14. DATE OF REPORT (Year, Month, Day) 15. PAGE COUNT

Final FROM 1 .._.7T,11 Octl. 29 Sep 87 6816. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTATION - ,

17. j COSATI CODES _. SUBJECT TERMS (Continue on reverse if necessary and identify by block number)FIELD GROUP SUB'GRO " PSS; Soldier Performance; ASVAB; CMF; Performance

H 4 Predictors; AFQT-

19. ABSTRACT (Continue-6n reverse if necessary and identify by block number) 9 v 2 -Emplbed a'step-wise multiple regression procedure to determine what multiple combinationof ele kSVAB) Area Composite scores did the be't job of predicting soldier performance(definedby SQI, scores) in ten different accessionOS) (CIEF 74) at Soldier Support Center.The study provided estimates of content validity and internal reliability (using thecoefficient alpha and Kuder-Richardson procedures) of the criterion measure; used analysisof variance and the t-test to determine whether significant differences existed betweenSQT means across different mental categories; determined percentages of SQT passes andfailures across different mental categories; determined FY89 recruiting accession require-ments "sing a statistical procedure provided by Soldier Support Center-National CapitalRegion; and provided mulLiple regression equations which predicted how well new recruitswould do on SQT scores for each MOS based on a combination of ASVAB Area Aptitude scores.Recommendations included the suggestion that further research be conducted to configure

better predictors of CMF 74 MOS-because the Clerical score, which is often used for tbese

2t. DIIOUTeT I IAVAILABILITY OF ABSTRACT 21 ABSTRACT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION0 UNCLASSIFIED/UNILM:TED 3 SAME AS RPT 0 DTIC USERS (U) A

22a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL 2,b TELEPHONE (include Area Code) 22c OFFICE SYMBOL--Phil Vandivier (3/7) _1 J/1 2 I ' ' 13

DD FORM 1473, 84 MAR 83 APR edition may ue used until exhausted SzECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGEAll other editions re obsolete, .

.IL

BestAvailable

Copy

1%-A1b tract continued.

10S, was considerably less predictive of MIOS petformance than others such as FieldArtillery. . -

. 7

41,

p24

II

I

*.4

;4

r

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMYUS ARMY SOLDIER SUPPORT CENTER 4

FORT BENJAMIN HARRISON. INDIANA

REPLY TOATTENTION OF

ATZI-PO (601c) 8 Oct 87

MEMORANDUM FOR: Commander, USASSC-National Capital Region,ATTN: ATNC-NMF-A, 200 Stovall St., Alexandria, VA 22332-0400

SUBJECT: FY 89 Proponent Distribution of Quality (DQ) ProgramSubmission

i. Attached as Enclosures 1 thru 10 are DQ requirements for MOSs71L, 71Q, 71R, 73C, 73D, 75B, 75C, 75D, 75E, and 75F respectively.

2. All requirements were derived by following the guidance containedin the June 1987 SSC-NCR Distribution of Quality Program Handbook.Follow up reports for FY 90 requirements will be submitted duringMay 1988.

3. Soldier Support Center POC is SFC Mahoney, AUTOVON 699-4584.

Encls H L R ENLas LTC, AG

Chief, PS5 Proponent Office

4

4

29 Sep 87

DISTRIBUTION OF QUALITY (DQ) REPORTFOR 71Q*

a. Summary

(1). The Public Affairs Proponent Activity believes theRequired Recruit Accession Quality Mix currently in effectrepresents a satisfactory level: Category I-IIIA represents 98%,and Category IIIB represents the remaining 2%. These levels arerequired to maintain the integrity of the Career ManagementField. To establish or accept a lessor standard would jeopardizethe credibility of the entire United States Army.

(2). These quality accession standards are needed becauseof the following:

How many Skill Level 1 soldiers from any CMF can you imagine Iasking sensitive questions for a print interview concerningissues that might be seen on the Six O'clock news"?

When Defense Information School graduates arrive at theirfirst assignments, they are immediately subject to the scrutinyand criticism of their audience. In print journalism, thisaudience may encompass twenty thousand or more members each week;in broadcasting--both radio and television--the Skill Level 1soldier is exposed daily to an audience of thousands of American 1soldiers and foreign nationals. Foreign media consider any Jsoldier an official spokesman for the entire military, and forthe U.S. government.

Most career fields can train, prepare, and further polishSkill Level 1 soldiers because they work in environments withmedium-to-heavy concentratiins of soldiers in the same MOS andskill level. But the opposite is true for the Public Affairssoldier.

Young, often inexperienced Public Affairs practitioners arehighly visible both within and outside a command. These soldiersperform three types of functions for any Public Affairs shop:They disseminate Command Information (via newsprint, etc.) andPublic Information, and perform Community Relations work. Thelatter two--Public Information and Community Relations--bring theSkill Level 1 soldier routinely in touch with civilian media anddignitaries to an extent unequalled y any other MOS in the Army.

*POC for statistical methodology is Dr. Phillip L. Vandivier (AV-699-3821).

b. Target Skill Level

(1). Skill level (SL) 1 (E-1 TO E-4) was used. SL 1 wasselected because:

The SL 1 soldier from the Public Affairs field must be thekind of individual who can function independently in a stressful -environment, publicly using speaking or writing skills on behalfof the command or his commander.

Consider, for example, the light division: Out of the 74enlisted positions in the HHC G-staff, there are three PublicAffairs slots. By comparison, there are three times as manystenographers as Public Affairs assets. The finance support unitas 42 and the personnel service company has 45 SL 1 solders--

compared to two SL 1 soldiers in the Public Affairs shop.

Granted, mission differences do exist, but the point here isthat the Public Affairs soldier at SL 1 often operates iindependently, with little professional guidance immediatelyavailable. The Public Affairs soldier in search of a story mayinterview a field grade or flag rank officer; or may be coveringa group of U.S. or foreign soldiers and local civilians. For this ireason, performance of SL 1 soldiers is critical for missionsuccess.

c. Performance Measure

(1). The Skill Qualification Test (SQT) was used to evaluateproficiency in the MOS. The selection of the SQT is based on theassumption that this measurement provides an acceptable estimateof performance of critical MOS tasks. Furthermore, the SOT wasused because it provides a reliable, valid means of estimatingthe ability to perform critical tasks at SL 1.

(2). Content Validity

Content validity is the extent to which a test measures jobperformance in the MOS. The SQT was systematically validated forcontent by the Public Affairs Proponent Activity using a seriesof rigorous checks and reviews outlined in TRADOC Regulation 351- A2, Skill Qualitification Test (SQT) and Common Task Test (CTT)Development, Policies, and Procedures. These procedures included-a review of the SQT task list, peer/psychometric review of eachtask test, expert/murder board review, editorial review,untrained tryout, soldier tryout, setting task training E istandards, assigning final administi ation time limit, setting [3minimum passing score, and final review of camera ready-materials.

(2.). Reliability

An estimate of the internal reliability of the test is o.important to determine the extent to which the instrument isr

C \ -

"Sj

sIconsistent (within itself) in measuring performance. TheCoefficient Alpha procedure was used to estimate internalreliability of the SL 1 SQT. Coefficient Alpha provides anestimate of the extent to which all test items intercorrelatewith one another. A coefficient of .791 was obtained, whichindicates the SL I SQT has moderate internal reliability.

d. Research Design and Implementation

(1). Test Administration and Data Collection Procedures

SQTs were administered lAW procedures outlined in TRADOC Re97351-2. Also, the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery4ASVAB) was administered upon soldier entry into the Army IAWroutine procedures.

Data was extracted from official test results obtained fromthe Military Personnel Center with the help of the SSC-NCRLiaison. All 245 available cases (the entire population of SL 171Qs) were used for data analyses.