DID YOU KNOW? DTIC has over 3.5 million final reports on DoD funded research, development, test, and evaluation activities available to our registered users. Click
HERE to register or log in.
Accession Number:
ADA247728
Title:
Subtest and Composite Validity of ASVAB Forms 11, 12, and 13 for Technical Training Courses
Descriptive Note:
Interim rept. Jan 1990-Aug 1991
Corporate Author:
ARMSTRONG LAB BROOKS AFB TX
Report Date:
1992-02-01
Pagination or Media Count:
29.0
Abstract:
The validity of the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery ASVAB subtests and composites for predicting final school grades in 150 technical schools was investigated. After correction for restriction of range and predictor unreliability, Paragraph Comprehension was found to be the most valid subtest average r .77 across all the schools. Within the traditional classification categories of Mechanical, Administrative, General, and Electronics M, A, G, E, Arithmetic Reasoning was found to be the most valid subtest after correction for range restriction. Except for the Electronics composite, the specific composite M, A, G, E used for classification was not as valid as the Armed Forces Qualification Test AFOT nor the sum of the four Air Force composites, both of which are measures of psychometric general cognitive ability. The Administrative composite was less valid under all circumstances than the three other composites, the AFOT, or the sum of M, A, G, E. Best-weighted-regression-based composites were slightly more predictive than the sum of M, A, G, E, but at the expense of penalizing good test performance through the use of negative weights. A selection and classification system based on either best-regression-weighted subtest or on the E composite and the AFOT would increase validity. AFOT, Aptitude, ASVAB, Correlation Training.
Distribution Statement:
APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
