Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

A study of the method of officer cadet assessment employed by the Royal Canadian School of Mechanical… Otke, Paul Gerald 1958

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1958_A8 O8 S8.pdf [ 6.01MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0106144.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0106144-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0106144-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0106144-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0106144-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0106144-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0106144-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0106144-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0106144.ris

Full Text

A STUDY OP THE METHOD OP OFFICER CADET ASSESSMENT EMPLOYED BY THE ROYAL CANADIAN SCHOOL OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING UTILIZING THE CRITICAL REQUIREMENTS AND PEER RATING TECHNIQUES fey PAUL GERALD OTKE A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n the Department of Psychology We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the standard r e q u i r e d from candidates f o r the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Members of the Department of Psychology THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA September, 1958 o i i ABSTRACT The Royal Canadian School of Mechanical E n g i n e e r i n g at Camp C h i l l i w a c k j B r i t i s h Columbia, assesses o f f i c e r cadets on a f i v e p o i n t scale, i n terms of 13 q u a l i t i e s which are considered by RCSME to be c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of a "good man"„ This r e s e a r c h was undertaken f o r the purpose of c r i t i c a l l y examining t h i s assessment method to suggest p o s s i b l e improvements t o i t 0 The assessment method was examined i n two ways : (a) By c a r r y i n g out a job a n a l y s i s by means of the c r i t i c a l incident" technique- to d e r i v e C r i t i c a l Requirements f o r COTC cadets and use these as a b a s i s f o r judging whether or not the c r i t e r i a of assessment at present i n use are w e l l formulated; (b) By o b t a i n i n g peer r a t i n g s by'the cadets themselves to serve as a b a s i s for-examin-i n g the v a l i d i t y of assessments that have been made by the e x i s t i n g procedures. The C r i t i c a l I n c i d e n t Technique, as o u t l i n e d by Flanagan, was used to obtain i n c i d e n t s from the e n t i r e cadet' p o p u l a t i o n and from the i n s t r u c t o r s who were c u r r e n t l y i n v olved with or were f a m i l i a r with COTC training,, There were three major d i f f e r e n c e s between cadets and i n s t r u c t o r s i n the i n c i d e n t s c o l l e c t e d : i i i (a) the rank orders of i n c i d e n t s showed marked d i f f e r e n c e s f o r a few C r i t i c a l Requirements but i n ' g e n e r a l c o n s i d e r a b l e s i m i l a r i t y e x i s t e d ; (b) the number of i n c i d e n t s c o l l e c t e d from c e r t a i n l o c a t i o n s d i f f e r e d , and (c) a d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y l a r g e number of i n e f f -e c t i v e i n c i d e n t s were c o n t r i b u t e d by i n s t r u c t o r s o A d e t a i l e d comparison was made between the C r i t i c a l Requirements i s o l a t e d i n t h i s study and the c a t e g o r i e s employed at the RCSME i n the assessment o f cadets„ There were 11 C r i t i c a l Requirements f o r which no corresponding c a t e g o r i e s existed„ Three main o b j e c t i o n s to tie RCSME ca t e g o r i e s were discussed„ Peer r a t i n g s were obtained f o r the e n t i r e cadet popul-a t i o n 0 These p r e d i c t e d f u t u r e o f f i c e r performance without being unduly a f f e c t e d by popularity., The peer r a t i n g s of F i r s t Phase cadets were found to be more accurate than those of Second Phase cadets. Peer r a t i n g s were scored by weighted and unweighted s c o r i n g techniques. Both methods y i e l d e d almost i d e n t i c a l r e s u l t s * The unweighted s c o r i n g technique, however, r e q u i r e s fewer c a l c u l a t i o n s and i s l e s s time consuming,, The r e s u l t s of t h i s study i n d i c a t e d ' t h a t peer r a t i n g s can be used as an independent measure of o f f i c e r cadet i v performance, Two improvement procedures were suggested„ F i r s t , that the C r i t i c a l Requirements i s o l a t e d i n t h i s study be used as a b a s i s f o r assessment i n the form of a check l i s t or other device and, second, that the employment of peer r a t i n g s be i n c o r p o r a t e d as one of the components o f the assessment methodo In presenting t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the requirements f o r an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r reference and study. I f u r t h e r agree that permission f o r extensive copying of t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e . I t i s understood that copying or p u b l i c a t i o n of t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l gain s h a l l not be allowed without my w r i t t e n permission. The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t Vancouver 8, Canada. Department Date September 15, 1958 V TABLE OP CONTENTS Page A.B S TR-A.C T o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o ooo 1 TABLE OP CONTENTS „ 0 . » . . ... ... ... ... v LXST OP TABLES o o o ooo . o . ... ... ... v i LIST OP APPENDICES ... ... ... ... ... ... v i i i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS « o . ... ... ... ... . .. i x CHAPTER I I n t r o d u c t i o n and Statement of the Problem 1 ( i n c l u d i n g p r a c t i c a l arrangements with the Royal Canadian School of Mechanical Engineers) I I The C r i t i c a l Requirements Approach to 5 Job A n a l y s i s :. Background I I I C r i t i c a l Requirements Study of Cadets : 17 Method' IV C r i t i c a l Requirements Study of Cadets : 27 Re s u l t s V The Peer Ratings Technique : Background 38 VI Peer Ratings of Cadets : Method 49 VII Peer Ratings of Cadets : R e s u l t s 54 VIII D i s c u s s i o n and Conclusion 61 BIBLIOGRAPHY o . . . =. <= ... ... ... ..<> 77 APPENDICES o o . o o . . . . o o . o . o ... 82 LIST OP TABLES D i s p o s i t i o n of I n c i d e n t s to C r i t i c a l Behaviours C r i t i c a l Requirements f o r O f f i c e r Cadets i n the Royal Canadian Engineers Frequency of Behaviours f o r each C r i t i c a l Requirement Rank Order of C r i t i c a l Requirements (based on frequency of behaviours f o r each C r i t i c a l Requirement) O r i g i n s of I n c i d e n t s - Drawn from 65 I n s t r u c t o r s and 127 Cadets (arranged i n order of o v e r a l l frequency) Summary of Recency of I n c i d e n t s C o e f f i c i e n t s of C o r r e l a t i o n between Peer Ratings ("Success as an O f f i c e r " ) and P i n a l Assessment (given Cadets by I n s t r u c t o r s ) , f o r Phase One Cadets C o e f f i c i e n t s of C o r r e l a t i o n between Peer Ratings ( p r e d i c t e d success as an o f f i c e r ) and F i n a l Assessment (given Cadets by I n s t r u c t o r s ) f o r Phase Two Cadets C o e f f i c i e n t s of C o r r e l a t i o n between Peer Ratings ("Like best") and O v e r a l l Assessment by I n s t r u c t o r s f o r Phase One Cadets C o e f f i c i e n t s of C o r r e l a t i o n between Peer Ratings ("Like best") and F i n a l Assessment by I n s t r u c t o r s f o r Phase Two Cadets o oo cont•d L i s t of Tables - cont'd Table No 0 XI C o r r e l a t i o n between P i n a l Assessment and (a) Peer Ratings ("Success as an o f f i c e r " ) , (b) Peer Ratings ("Like b e s t " ) , (c) " P o p u l a r i t y and Group Value" assessed by I n s t r u c t o r s XII P a r a l l e l T a b u l a t i o n of RCSME Assess-ments and C r i t i c a l Requirements v i i i LIST OP APPENDICES Appendix Page A P e r s o n a l Q u a l i t y D e f i n i t i o n s 82 B COTC Troop O f f i c e r ' s Report 93 C C r i t i c a l I n c i d e n t Technique 95 Question Forms ( i ) E f f e c t i v e ( i i ) I n e f f e c t i v e D F a c s i m i l e of C r i t i c a l Behaviour 98 Card E I n i t i a l (64) Categories I s o l a t e d 100 F Constituent O r i g i n of 33 C r i t i c a l 104 Requirements G Area of O r i g i n of C r i t i c a l 111 I n c i d e n t s H Recency of Behaviours 113 I Phase of T r a i n i n g of Cadets involved 115 i n C r i t i c a l I n c i d e n t s Peer R a t i n g Forms 117 ( i ) "Future O f f i c e r " ( i i ) "Like best" ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author wishes to express h i s app r e c i a t i o n to Professor E 0 S„ W. Belyea of the Department of Psychology. The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, f o r h i s guidance and assistance i n the study and f o r h i s c r i t i c a l e v a l u a t i o n i n the preparation of the present manuscript. He also wishes to make acknowledgement to Major G. W„ Graham, Chief I n s t r u c t o r at the Royal Canadian School of Mechanical Engin-eering, and h i s s t a f f . He i s indebted to L i e u t . - C o l o n e l W. R. N„ B l a i r , Head of Personnel S e l e c t i o n , Canadian Army, who made the f i n a l cadet assessment reports a v a i l a b l e , and to Major P„ L 0 Roth, Area Personnel Officer,Headquarters B„ C o Area, who a s s i s t e d i n making the f i n a l arrangements f o r the execution of the study. S p e c i a l thanks are due to the two Phases of o f f i c e r cadets at Camp C h i l l i w a c k f o r t h e i r w i l l i n g co-operation during the course of the study. CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OP THE PROBLEM The object of m i l i t a r y t r a i n i n g i s to produce as r a p i d l y as p o s s i b l e o f f i c e r s and men w e l l q u a l i f i e d to c a r r y out d u t i e s to which they w i l l be assigned. In order to i d e n t i f y the men who are best q u a l i f i e d f o r s p e c i f i c d u t i e s an e f f i c i e n t method of assessment i s e s s e n t i a l . During World War I I a number of assessment procedures such as s t r e s s i n t e r v i e w s (34), impression i n t e r v i e w s (31), and s p e c i a l t e s t s (44), were developed. Since World War I I many i n v e s t i g a t i o n s of assessment methods have been c a r r i e d out i n the armed f o r c e s : one group who have r e c e i v e d p a r t i c u l a r a t t e n t i o n are the o f f i c e r cadets. The Royal Canadian School of M i l i t a r y E n g i n e e r i n g (RCSME) at Camp C h i l l i w a c k , B r i t i s h Columbia, assesses Canadian O f f i c e r T r a i n i n g Corps (COTC) Cadets i n terms of t h i r t e e n q u a l i t i e s which are considered by RCSME to be c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of "a good man. Appendix "A" contains a l i s t of these t h i r t e e n q u a l i t i e s t o g e t h e r with s p e c i f i c d e f i n i t i o n s of each q u a l i t y , A f i v e point r a t i n g s c a l e provides the b a s i s f o r the a s s e s s -ment of each of these t h i r t e e n q u a l i t i e s : i n a d d i t i o n the t h i r -teen assessments are the b a s i s f o r the assignment of a s i n g l e , o v e r a l l grade to each COTC cadet f o r the t r a i n i n g p e r i o d . Appendix "B" i s a copy of the form which i s used i n r a t i n g the cadets. 2 Although the RCSME at Camp C h i l l i w a c k b e l i e v e t h a t t h i s assessment procedure i s s a t i s f a c t o r y , there i s no r e s e a r c h evidence to support t h i s belief„ To.provide res e a r c h evidence to evaluate t h i s p a r t i c u l a r assessment method, i t would be necessary t o determine the main c r i t e r i a o f what c o n s t i t u t e s s u c c e s s f u l performance as a COTC cadet. There are a number of methods that might be used i n an i n v e s t i g a t i o n such as t h i s . One method that has been used e x t e n s i v e l y i n s t u d i e s i n comparable m i l i t a r y s e t t i n g s i s the determination of the " c r i t i c a l requirements"* Flanagan and h i s a s s o c i a t e s (2) have been c h i e f l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the development of the technique. The term " c r i t i c a l requirements" r e f e r s to those requirements which make the d i f f e r e n c e between success and f a i l u r e i n c a r r y i n g out an important part of the job assigned i n a s i g n i f i c a n t number of i n s t a n c e s (15)» E s s e n t i a l l y , the procedure c o n s i s t s of o b t a i n i n g f i r s t hand r e p o r t s , known as c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t s . i n which ^ s p e c i f i c , observable behaviour r e s u l t e d i n success or f a i l u r e (45). A second l i n e of r e s e a r c h that might provide evidence to evaluate the present assessment method at RCSME i s the peer r a t i n g  technique i n which each group member evaluates h i s peers on some re c o g n i z a b l e q u a l i t y or set of c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s which are mani-f e s t e d d i r e c t l y , or i n f e r r a b l e i n d i r e c t l y , from day to day personal i n t e r a c t i o n s . Such e v a l u a t i o n s are then i n t e g r a t e d i n t o a composite score r e f l e c t i n g each person's s t a n d i n g i n the group (21). The r e s u l t s of assessment methods (22, 26, 41, 42) i n other m i l i t a r y s e t t i n g s have shown that o f f i c e r cadets, as unique 3 observers of each other, can make e v a l u a t i o n s which may be used to i d e n t i f y those cadets who are the most e f f e c t i v e i n t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r group. In many o f f i c e r cadet s t u d i e s s t u d i e s (22, 24, 26, 41) e a r l y peer r a t i n g s have proven to be more accurate p r e d i c t o r s of m i l i t a r y competence than other l a t e r assessment methods c a r r i e d out by the o f f i c e r s i n charge. S p e c i f i c a l l y , the major aims of t h i s study on COTC Cadets at Camp C h i l l i w a c k are as f o l l o w s ; (1) To compare the present assessment c a t e g o r i e s of the RCSME with c r i t e r i a of s u c c e s s f u l COTC Cadet p e r f o r -mance obtained with the c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t technique. (2) To compare r a t i n g s of COTC Cadets,made by the present assessment method of the RCSME, with peer r a t i n g s by the same cadets. (3) To i n v e s t i g a t e c e r t a i n methodological c o n s i d e r a t i o n s of the peer r a t i n g technique, namely, the v a l i d i t y of peer r a t i n g s , the r e l a t i o n s h i p between p o p u l a r i t y and peer r a t i n g , and the importance of weighting i n s c o r i n g peer r a t i n g s . P r eparatory arrangements with RCSME The RCSME at Camp C h i l l i w a c k were i n t e r e s t e d i n any e v a l u -a t i o n on an experimental l e v e l of t h e i r c urrent assessment methods - consequently the c h i e f i n s t r u c t o r gave f u l l support to t h i s study. The c h i e f i n s t r u c t o r b r i e f e d a l l o f f i c e r s con-cerned with COTC t r a i n i n g and requested t h e i r c o-operation i n the study. The i n v e s t i g a t o r subsequently contacted a l l 4 o f f i c e r s and non-commissioned o f f i c e r s (NCO's) and provided them with f u r t h e r i n f o r m a t i o n and i n s t r u c t i o n s . I t was agreed that the amount of i n t e r f e r e n c e from t h i s r e s e a r c h with the r e g u l a r t r a i n i n g r o u t i n e of COTC Cadets at Camp C h i l l i w a c k would be kept to a minimum. CHAPTER I I THE CRITICAL REQUIREMENTS APPROACH TO JOB ANALYSIS : BACKGROUND O r i g i n s of the C r i t i c a l I n c i d ent Technique The C r i t i c a l I n c i d e n t Technique r e c e i v e d i t s main impetus from the A v i a t i o n Psychology Program of the United S t a t e s A i r Force i n World War I I . One of the f i r s t s t u d i e s , by Preston (35), analysed the " s t a t e d " reasons f o r f a i l u r e i n l e a r n i n g to f l y that were reported f o r 1,000 p i l o t candidates undergoing t r a i n i n g . The reasons given f o r e l i m i n a t i n g candidates were v a r i e d and too n o n - s p e c i f i c . Some examples of the reasons g i v e n were " u n s u i t -able temperament", "poor judgment", or " i n s u f f i c i e n t progress". Few f a c t u a l i n c i d e n t s of behaviour were g i v e n . T h i s study emphasized the need f o r procedures which would provide a g r e a t e r r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of f a c t u a l i n c i d e n t s r a t h e r than s u b j e c t i v e impressions. A study by The American I n s t i t u t e f o r Research (2) i n 1943-44 emphasized the need f o r f a c t u a l r e p o r t s of a c t u a l performance made by competent observers. T h i s study on the 8th. 9th, 12th and 15th United S t a t e s A i r Force c o l l e c t e d reasons f o r the f a i l u r e s of bombing m i s s i o n s . The f i r s t r e a l e f f o r t to gather s p e c i f i c i n c i d e n t s of e f f e c t i v e and i n e f f e c t i v e behaviour on the job was made i n 1944 i n a s e r i e s o f s t u d i e s on combat l e a d e r s h i p by Wickert (53). Combat veterans were i n s t r u c t e d t o r e p o r t a c t u a l i n c i d e n t s i n v o l v i n g behaviour which was e s p e c i a l l y h e l p f u l or adequate i n 6 accomplishing the mission. They were further asked to "describe the o f f i c e r ' s actions" and "what did he do?". Several thousand incidents were collected and analysed to provide a set of descriptive categories of effe c t i v e combat leadership,, These categories were called " C r i t i c a l Requirements of combat leader-ship" o Another study (14) i n this series was concerned with d i s -orientation whilst f l y i n g o P i l o t s returning from combat were asked to think of some occasion during combat f l y i n g i n which they experienced a f e e l i n g of acute d i s o r i e n t a t i o n . Here also they were asked to describe what they "saw, heard or f e l t that brought on the experience". P i t t s and Jones (12) collected incidents involving f l y i n g on instruments, landing using controls and using instruments. These incidents were subsequently used to modify the cockpit design of a i r c r a f t . Studies by The American Institute f o r Research At the close of World War II a number of psychologists who had participated i n the United States Army A i r Force Aviation Psychology Program established the "American Institute for Research" (AIR) which followed the same general principles developed i n the Aviation Psychology Program, The AIR conducted i t s f i r s t two studies i n the spring of 1947. These studies resulted i n the development and naming of the " C r i t i c a l Incident Technique". Preston (36) isolated the c r i t i c a l requirements for the work of an o f f i c e r i n the United States A i r Force. The second study by Gordon (18, 19) determined the c r i t i c a l require-7 ments of the a i r - l i n e p i l o t based on 733 c r i t i c a l p i l o t -behaviours c l a s s i f i e d i n t o 24 c r i t i c a l requirements„ These were used to develop s e l e c t i o n t e s t s t o measure the a p t i t u d e s and p e r s o n a l i t y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s found c r i t i c a l f o r success on the job. A t h i r d study c a r r i e d out by the AIR centred i n o b t a i n i n g the c r i t i c a l requirements f o r research personnel (13)« F i v e hundred s c i e n t i s t s i n 20 Naval r e s e a r c h l a b o r a t o r i e s were intervi e w e d and approximately 2 ?500 c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t s were recordedo These i n c i d e n t s subsequently y i e l d e d 36 c r i t i c a l requirements f o r the e f f e c t i v e performance of the d u t i e s of research personnel i n the p h y s i c a l s c i e n c e s . Nagay (32) d i d a study f o r the C i v i l A e r o nautics A d m i n i s t r a t i o n which i n v o l v e d the i s o l a t i o n of the c r i t i c a l requirements f o r a i r route t r a f f i c c o n t r o l l e r s . P r i o r to t h i s a l l i n c i d e n t s had been c o l l e c t e d by q u a l i f i e d p s y c h o l o g i s t s but, i n t h i s study, Nagay (32) used C i v i l Aeronautics A d m i n i s t r a t i o n P e r s o n n e l . He found that they could, a f t e r a perio d of o r i e n t a t i o n , c o l l e c t i n c i d e n t s by means of the i n t e r v i e w without d i s t o r t i n g r e s u l t s . Many other s t u d i e s have subsequently been c a r r i e d out by the AIR. A study by an AIR team (2) i n v o l v i n g the development of procedures f o r e v a l u a t i o n o f f i c e r s i n the United S t a t e s A i r Force was conducted i n June, 1949» I t s main purpose was to develop a p r a c t i c a l , simple, d i r e c t e v a l u a t i o n form t o provide e a r l y i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of o f f i c e r s both f o r e l i m i n a t i o n and f o r a c c e l e r a t e d advancement. The method i n v o l v e d a d i r e c t a n a l y s i s of the job requirements i n terms of behaviour. W e i s l o g e l (50) 8 extended other AIR s t u d i e s oh r e s e a r c h personnel (13)» He developed a t e s t f o r s e l e c t i n g r e s e a r c h personnel. T h i s i n v o l v e d s e t t i n g up a check l i s t based on the p r e v i o u s l y d e t e r -mined c r i t i c a l requirements„ Another study by an AIR Group (3) t i t l e d , "Measuring P r o f i c i e n c y s v a Standard F l i g h t Check", u t i l i z e d the s t u d i e s of a c c i d e n t s , i n c i d e n t s r e p o r t e d by a i r l i n e p i l o t s and judg-ments of suspensions, to provide the c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t s l e a d -i n g to the f o r m u l a t i o n of c r i t i c a l requirements„ A develop-ment of job a n a l y s i s procedure ( l ) was a l s o i n v e s t i g a t e d . The purpose was to d e f i n e a set of job elements c o v e r i n g a l l the important tasks i n the group of r e l a t e d s p e c i a l i s t s . They u t i l i z e d the c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t technique t o accomplish t h i s . I t was discov e r e d that the job a n a l y s i s procedures based on a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e sample of observed c r i t i c a l behaviour provides a r a t i o n a l b a s i s f o r adopting t e n t a t i v e s e l e c t i o n and t r a i n i n g procedures. M i l i t a r y Studies Some of the most extensive s t u d i e s u t i l i z i n g the c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t technique have been conducted i n the Armed f o r c e s . Some of these (2, 12, 35, 36, 39, 42, 45, 46) have been r e f e r r e d to above, V a l l a n c e (45, 46) d i d an ext e n s i v e study i n which he i s o l a t e d the c r i t i c a l requirements f o r j u n i o r o f f i c e r s abord d e s t r o y e r type v e s s e l s In the US Navy, V a l l a n c e determined the requirements and then sei; up a check l i s t , complete with examples, which was u t i l i z e d t o assess personnel. An e x p l o r a t o r y study 9 of the a p p l i c a b i l i t y of i n c i d e n t techniques to the assessment of c u r r i c u l u m f o r Naval o f f i c e r candidate t r a i n i n g was c a r r i e d out by Glickman (17) o Its'lpurpose was to i d e n t i f y those aspects o f the o f f i c e r candidate school c u r r i c u l u m which are most and l e a s t r e l e v a n t to d u t i e s o f newly appointed ensigns aboard d e s t r o y e r type v e s s e l s . Glickman achieved t h i s by determining the c r i t i c a l requirements of the job and by s e t t i n g up a check l i s t to measure these requirements. In t h i s study the o f f i c e r s who had provided the c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t s were i n complete agreement with one another t h a t a j u n i o r o f f i c e r takes up q u i c k l y , a n d c a r r i e s on s a t i s f a c t o r i l y , r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s r e q u i r i n g s k i l l i n personal r e l a t i o n s and personal a d m i n i s t r a -t i o n i n v o l v i n g a l l those with whom he i s i n contact aboard h i s s h i p , and c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t s i n v o l v i n g such s k i l l s were the most frequent to occur. The c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t s were h e a v i l y loaded with s i t u a t i o n s e s s e n t i a l l y demanding a "know how" i n d e a l i n g with people. P r e s t o n (36) developed a procedure f o r e v a l u a t i n g o f f i c e r s i n the United S t a t e s A i r Force. He i n i t i a l l y made a study of the e f f i c i e n c y ( " P e r i o d i c Confidential Assessment Reports") of a l a r g e sample of o f f i c e r s . He found the i n d i v i d u a l a s s e s s -ments made by s u p e r i o r s of t h e i r j u n i o r o f f i c e r s were v e r y i n c o n s i s t e n t . Adjutants and s t a f f o f f i c e r s , f o r example, almost i n v a r i a b l y r e c e i v e d higher r a t i n g s on t h e i r e f f i c i e n c y r e p o r t s than o f f i c e r s f u r t h e r removed from t h e i r commanding o f f i c e r s . He concluded t h a t , " E f f i c i e n c y r e p o r t s o f t e n t e l l more about the o f f i c e r doing the r a t i n g , than about the person 10 being rated"„ I t was decided that to d e f i n e "a good o f f i c e r " the s p e c i f i c a t i o n shoulds (1) P e r t a i n to the s p e c i a l i z e d job which the o f f i c e r must do; (2) Be st a t e d i n terms of what a good o f f i c e r does r a t h e r than i n terms of q u a l i t i e s a good o f f i c e r possesses. For example, courage, f o r c e , i n t e l l i g e n c e , r e g a r d l e s s of how important they might be as q u a l i t i e s of a good o f f i c e r , cannot be observed d i r e c t l y but must be i n f e r r e d from what i s seen. U n f o r t u n a t e l y a l l e v a l u a t i n g o f f i c e r s are not e q u a l l y apt i n drawing c o r r e c t i n f e r e n c e s of such q u a l i t i e s . The c r i t i c a l requirements approach, however, d e f i n e s the good o f f i c e r i n terms of h i s behaviour, thus the n e c e s s i t y f o r i n f e r e n c e i i reduced, Preston concluded h i s study by summarising and c l a s s i -f y i n g the requirements i n t o b r i e f statements which d e s o r i b t d what e f f e c t i v e o f f i c e r s do and how they a ct - that i s i n t o c r i t i c a l requirements, Preston goes on to s t a t e that a s s e s s -ments should be made on the b a s i s of the number of c r i t i c a l requirements the o f f i c e r meets and how w e l l he meets each s e p a r a t e l y . Smith and Standohar (39) determined the c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e -ments of b a s i c t r a i n i n g t a c t i c a l i n s t r u c t o r s by an a n a l y s i s of the c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t s o f t a c t i c a l i n s t r u c t o r s behaviour. Krumm (27) u t i l i z e d the c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t technique to 11 establish the c r i t i c a l requirements of p i l o t instructors. His study reveals additional i n t e r e s t i n g information. Krumm found that instructors ages 20 - 24 received a greater proportion of i n e f f e c t i v e than e f f e c t i v e reports, whereas instructors ages 25 - 29 received a greater proportion of effective than i n e f f e c -tive reports. Other Studies and Applications of the C r i t i c a l Incident Technique Numerous studies have been sponsored by the University of Pittsburgh, with which the American Institute f o r Research i s associated, Wagner (48) did a study which i s useful as a model in employing the technique. He established the c r i t i c a l requirements f o r dentists, c o l l e c t i n g incidents from (a) dent-i s t s , (b) patients, (c) instructors i n dental schools. The incidents reported by each class of informant tended to d i f f e r from the others. Likewise the manner i n which the informants were instructed proved to have considerable bearing upon the outcome of the study. This study emphasized the need for adequate representation from a l l groups. In the f i e l d of education Smit (38) carried out a study to determine the c r i t i c a l requirements for instructors of a general psychology course. Students and instructors of the Pittsburgh and North Western University contributed c r i t i c a l incidents, A t o t a l of 2,342 c r i t i c a l behaviours were extracted and c l a s s i f i e d into 604 categories. A t o t a l of 33 classes, 10 sub-areas and three major areas were established. In the f i e l d of business and industry, M i l l e r and Flana-gan (30) were the f i r s t to u t i l i z e the c r i t i c a l incident 12 techniqueo In the spring of 1949 they undertook a study for Delco-Remy Division of the General Motors Corporation and determined the c r i t i c a l requirements for the hourly wage employees. Pinkie ( l l ) conducted a study to determine the c r i t i c a l requirements f o r i n d u s t r i a l foremen. Nevins.(33) established the c r i t i c a l requirements of bookkeepers i n sales companies. An interesting study by Weislogel (51) determined the c r i t i c a l requirements for l i f e insurance heads. Stoyva (40) at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia was concerned with trolley-bus operators for whom he established a set of job performance c r i t e r i a . Stoyva collected incidents from three types of informants - (a) trolley-bus operators, (b) supervisors and (c) members of the general public. The operators and supervisors were i n d i v i d u a l l y interviewed where-as the t r a v e l l i n g public was reached by a telephone interview, a new and successful approach. Stoyva's study supported Nagay's (32) e a r l i e r observations that older incidents tend to be more dramatic than those of recent occurrence, Stoyva also found that instructors with varying s e n i o r i t y displayed d i f f e r -ences i n the r e l a t i v e frequencies of incidents they reported i n each of his five "areas", De Vries (10) studied the c r i t i c a l requirements of r e a l estate s e l l i n g with the object of improving the training of real-estate salesmen. Devries however exper-ienced d i f f i c u l t y c o l l e c t i n g s u f f i c i e n t incidents to provide a comprehensive picture. Informants were asked, therefore, to provide general information.pertaining to the requirements of r e a l estate s e l l i n g i n addition to c r i t i c a l incidents. Two 13 kinds of data were analyzed independently and i t was De v r i e s ' c o n c l u s i o n that the "general i n f o r m a t i o n " items provided a u s e f u l adjunct to the c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t source. M e t h o d o l o g i c a l C o n s i d e r a t i o n s The C r i t i c a l I n c i d e n t Technique, as d e s c r i b e d by Flanagan (15), i s a procedure f o r g a t h e r i n g important f a c t s concerning behaviour i n d e f i n e d s i t u a t i o n s . An i n c i d e n t i s any observable type of human a c t i v i t y which i s s u f f i c i e n t l y complete i n i t s e l f to permit i n f e r e n c e s and p r e d i c t i o n s to be made about the person performing the a c t ; t o be c r i t i c a l an i n c i d e n t must be performed i n a s i t u a t i o n where the purpose or i n t e n t of the act seems f a i r l y c l e a r to the observer and i t s consequences are s u f f i c i e n t l y complete or d e f i n i t e so that there i s l i t t l e doubt concernings i t s e f f e c t . P r i m a r i l y t h i s technique i n v o l v e s - t h e q u e s t i o n i n g of respondents f o r t h e p u r p o s e ' o f o b t a i n i n g examples of e f f e c t i v e and i n e f f e c t i v e behaviour, Flanagan, who i s p r i m a r i l y respons-i b l e f o r the developmentof t h i s technique, has o u t l i n e d the f o l l o w i n g major steps i n determining c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t s (13,15): (a) Determine the aims of the job. The i n v e s t i g a t o r must make a c l e a r c o n c i s e statement of h i s o b j e c t i v e before any f u n c t i o n a l d e s c r i p t i o n of a job can be attempted. The respondent must know e x a c t l y what job i s being i n v e s t i g a t e d and who the job performers are, (b) Framing the que s t i o n . The qu e s t i o n ( s ) used must e l i c i t both p o s i t i v e and negative c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t s . 14 (c) Determine the respondents to be interviewed. The respond-ents should be individuals who are i n dai l y contact with the job and are, therefore, i n a position to make good observationso The respondents should not a l l belong.to any one s p e c i f i c group but should, rather, be representa-t i v e of a l l groups who are i n a position to make.valid observations„ (d) Gather the c r i t i c a l incidents. The c r i t i c a l incidents should be recent occurrences i n order to avoid d i s t o r t i o n . Generally i t i s preferable to use trained interviewers and to c o l l e c t the incidents by in d i v i d u a l interview. (e) Categorize c r i t i c a l incidents into c r i t i c a l requirements. The investigator must synthesize and reorganize the c r i t i c a l incidents into a manageable form. Flanagan (13, 14, 15) suggests that the purpose of this reorganization i s to make i t easier to draw inferences from these require-ments and to compare the a c t i v i t y with other a c t i v i t i e s . There are, however, no r i g i d rules f o r the formation of the categories into which the c r i t i c a l requirements are synthesized (14). A number of investigators have reported experimental data that are d i r e c t l y related to these major steps i n the C r i t i c a l Incident Technique as outlined by Flanagan, Finkle (11) suggests that the type of incidents obtained are not very greatly changed by the wording of the question used to e l i c i t the c r i t i c a l incident, Stoyva (40), however, found that the wording of a question did affect the type of incident obtained. 15 Support for Flanagan's views that respondents should not be confined to any s p e c i f i c group was given by Wagner (48) i n his determination of the c r i t i c a l incidents for dentists i n which he collected incidents from patients, dentists and dental instructors. He found that each group reported incidents from d i f f e r e n t areas and tended to emphasize d i f f -erent things, Vallance (45), in determining the c r i t i c a l requirements for junior o f f i c e r s aboard destroyer type vessels collected c r i t i c a l incidents from, a l l senior o f f i c e r s up to and including the Captain. Flanagan's study (13) on the c r i t i c a l requirements for research workers, indicated that reports by subordinates should not be excluded. Smith and Stan.dohar (39) i n determining the c r i t i c a l requirements for basic training instructors u t i l i z e d supervisors, instructors and basic airmen, Finkle (11) on his study of foremanship collected c r i t i c a l incidents from foremen, general foremen and l i v e personnel. Nagay (32) demonstrated that proper orientation of investigators i s more important than developing a l l the nice-t i e s of interviewing. In his study of a i r rout© t r a f f i c c ontrollers he u t i l i z e d C i v i l Aeronautics Administration personnel who were well acquainted with the nature of the job and found t h i s arrangement to be quite satisfactory, The most obvious method of c o l l e c t i n g c r i t i c a l incidents i s by individual interview, and a number of studies have employed this procedure. However, because such interviews are very time consuming, many investigators have u t i l i z e d 16 various patterns of group interview and have found them a s a t i s -factory alternative to ind i v i d u a l questioning„ In a m i l i t a r y setting Vallance (45) and Preston (36) interviewed groups of fi v e to seven respondents at a time, explaining the procedure to the group, and having each respondent write down his own incidents on a prepared form under general supervision,, Both report satisfactory r e s u l t s . Flanagan (13) gathered c r i t i c a l incidents for research personnel i n this manner. Wagner (47) compared results obtained from group, as contrasted with in d i v i d u a l , interviews and found the group interviews yielded data of comparable quality while requiring only one quarter the time. Most studies concerned with the gathering of c r i t i c a l incidents indicate i t i s advisable to c o l l e c t incidents of recent occurrence. Flanagan, M i l l e r and Burns (16) in the i r study i n foremanship collected incidents from three groups of foremen. One group recorded incidents d a i l y , one recorded incidents at the end of each week and the t h i r d recorded incidents at the end of a two week period. They found that foremen reporting at the end of the week had forgotten approx-imately half of the incidents and foremen reporting at the end of two weeks had forgotten eighty percent of the incidents, Nagay (32) in his study noted the selective r e c a l l of dramatic or other special kinds of incidents. This bias was more noticeable in incidents reported several months a f t e r t h e i r occurrence. CHAPTER III CRITICAL REQUIREMENTS STUDY OP CADETS : METHOD A» Selection of respondents and size of sample According to Vallance (45), Flanagan (13), Wagner (48), Finkle ( l l ) and Smith and Staudohar (39) the essential c r i t e r i a for selection of respondents i s that they should have adequate opportunity of observing members of the group under study on the job and should be q u a l i f i e d to judge e f f e c t i v e and i n e f f e c t -ive behaviour. Accordingly, two groups of respondents were employed i n the present study - (a) cadets themselves and (b) t h e i r instructors. Cadets : The entire cadet population consisting of 127 cadets, i n f i v e troops, was used f o r this purpose. The cadets were interviewed during the f i n a l month of t h e i r three month tr a i n i n g period i n the case of f i r s t year cadets, and a f t e r nine to ten months t r a i n i n g i n the case of second year cadets. There were 69 f i r s t year cadets and 58 second year cadets i n the group. Instructors : Only those instructors were interviewed • who were currently involved i n the COTC training or were f a m i l i a r with the t r a i n i n g and assessment of cadets from previous association. There were a t o t a l of 65 instructors, of which 16 were NCO's and 49 were 18 o f f i c e r s o A l l of the NCO's and 20 of the o f f i c e r s were i n d i v i d u a l l y interviewed. I n i t i a l l y an attempt was made to accumulate incidents by d i s t r i b u t i n g the interview forms to the instructors to be collected at a l a t e r date. These forms contained detailed d i r e c t -ions to respondents. Most instructors were d i s s a t i s -f i e d with the limited instructions and information the forms could provide and preferred a face to face contact with the investigator whom they could then ask additional questions. Furthermore, the instructors tended not to attempt the completion of forms because of t h e i r heavy load of other paper work. Accordingly, th i s method of c o l l e c t i o n was abandoned and i n d i v i d u a l or group interviews substituted, B. Framing the Question In framing the questions the problem was to ascertain which question forms would best e l i c i t the desired c r i t i c a l incidents. The question forms used were modelled a f t e r those used by Flanagan (14, p.342). • The guiding p r i n c i p l e determining the acc e p t a b i l i t y of the question forms was whether or not they produced a variety of c r i t i c a l incidents. The forms were given a t r i a l run and found acceptable i n th e i r o r i g i n a l form. Appendix "C" contains the question forms u t i l i z e d to obtain the c r i t i c a l incidents. The forms requesting e f f e c t i v e incidents were pink i n colour, whereas those requestion i n e f f e c t i v e incidents were white. By making these two forms 19 r e a d i l y d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e the e f f e c t i v e and i n e f f e c t i v e i n c i d e n t s c ould, f o r c l a s s i f i c a t i o n purposes, e a s i l y be separated. The forms contained a set of d i r e c t i o n s e x p l a i n i n g what c o n s t i t u t e s an i n c i d e n t and those p a r t i c i p a t i n g were asked (a) to d e s c r i b e what happened, (b) why was t h i s p a r t i c u l a r l y e f f e c t i v e or i n e f f -e c t i v e , (c) when d i d i t happen; what were the circumstances and (d) the phase of t r a i n i n g the cadet was undergoing, C, Gathering the C r i t i c a l I n c i d e n t s L i m i t a t i o n of time was a f a c t o r i n t h i s study and, f o r t h i s reason alone, i t was i m p r a c t i c a l to conduct i n d i v i d u a l i n t e r -views with a l l s u b j e c t s . Group i n t e r v i e w s were used f o r a l l of the cadets. They were assembled i n small groups of f i v e or s i x , the g e n e r a l purpose of the study was explained and t h e i r c o - o p e r a t i o n requested. Each cadet was handed f i v e pink blank q u e s t i o n forms r e q u e s t i n g e f f e c t i v e i n c i d e n t s and i n s t r u c t i o n s at the head of the forms were read to the group. When cadets had completed as many of these forms as they c o u l d , they were handed f i v e white question forms r e q u e s t i n g i n e f f e c t i v e i n c i d -ents and i n s t r u c t i o n s at the head of t h i s form were a l s o read aloud.' ' Two main poin t s were emphasized. F i r s t , i t was s t r e s s e d t h a t • a l l i n c i d e n t s r e p o r t e d must have a c t u a l l y happened and, second, these i n c i d e n t s must have been d i r e c t l y observed by the cadet r e p o r t i n g . The f i r s t two groups were g i v e n examples of c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t s which might occur i n a m i l i t a r y s e t t i n g . The purpose of doing t h i s was to c l a r i f y what was meant by a 20 " c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t " . T h i s procedure appeared to i n f l u e n c e the responses made by cadets who tended to r e p o r t i n c i d e n t s s i m i l a r to the examples. Because of t h i s i t was considered a d v i s a b l e t o avoid u s i n g any examples u n l e s s s u b j e c t s demanded an example. In these cases c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t s were drawn from u n r e l a t e d i n d u s t r i a l s e t t i n g s . Cadets who experienced d i f f i c u l t y comprehending the technique were asked to rec o r d what they b e l i e v e d was an i n c i d e n t . The i n v e s t i g a t o r then read the i n c i d e n t and reassured the cadet i f i t met the standards or rendered f u r t h e r a s s i s t a n c e i f r e q u i r e d . O r i g i n a l l y the cadets were g i v e n three q u e s t i o n forms and were i n s t r u c t e d to complete these i f p o s s i b l e . I t was obser-ved that the m a j o r i t y of cadets merely completed one or two of the three forms. By d i s t r i b u t i n g f i v e forms, accompanied by the same i n s t r u c t i o n s , the y i e l d per cadet was g r e a t l y i n c r e a s e d . The m a j o r i t y of i n s t r u c t o r s were i n t e r v i e w e d i n d i v i d u -a l l y . Each I n s t r u c t o r was given a b r i e f e x p l a n a t i o n of the study being conducted and the r o l e played by each c o n t r i b u t o r . At times i t was found necessary to meet the same i n s t r u c t o r s more than once because the ex i g e n c i e s of the s e r v i c e , on occasion, demanded a temporary t e r m i n a t i o n o f the i n t e r v i e w . In conducting the i n t e r v i e w s an e f f o r t was made to f o l l o w a standardized approach. In both the i n d i v i d u a l and group s e t t i n g the i n v e s t i g a t o r ' u s e d uniform i n t r o d u c t o r y remarks and i n s t r u c t i o n s . In the group i n t e r v i e w , where s u b j e c t s recorded i n c i d e n t s on the question form, i t was found necessary to 21 advise those p a r t i c i p a t i n g that l i t e r a r y performance was of minor importance, the main concern being that of r e c o r d i n g the i n c i d e n t o The cadet p o p u l a t i o n i n c l u d e d a s u b s t a n t i a l rep-r e s e n t a t i o n of French Canadians and these cadets i n p a r t i c u l a r r e q u i r e d the assurance that l i n g u i s t i c a b i l i t y was not a f a c t o r being i n v e s t i g a t e d . In the i n d i v i d u a l i n t e r v i e w s the i n v e s t i g a t o r h i m s e l f f i r s t recorded the i n c i d e n t s given and then read the recorded m a t e r i a l back to the s u b j e c t to determine whether i t a c c u r a t e l y d e s c r i b e d the i n c i d e n t he was attempting to p o r t r a y , D„ Screening of I n c i d e n t s against C r i t e r i a Before one can e x t r a c t c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t s i t i s e s s e n t i a l to e s t a b l i s h c r i t e r i a as to what i s a s a t i s f a c t o r y i n c i d e n t . The m a t e r i a l obtained from i n t e r v i e w s i s theft processed and only that m a t e r i a l which meets the c r i t e r i a r e t a i n e d . Accord-in g to Flanagan (13) the c r i t e r i a of a good c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t should be % (1) An accurate d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n of behaviour (2) An o b j e c t i v e unbiased d e s c r i p t i o n of behaviour (3) I t should c o n s i s t of r e p o r t s of a c t u a l behaviour of what the observed person d i d i n a s p e c i f i c s i t u a t i o n at a given time (4) I n c i d e n t s should be t y p i c a l l y r e p r e s e n t a t i v e i n s t e a d of dramatic ( 5 ) I n c i d e n t s should be c l e a r l y i d e n t i f i a b l e as e f f e c t i v e and i n e f f e c t i v e and the observer must be capable of judging both types of behaviour (6) I n c i d e n t s should not r e f l e c t p e r s o n a l f e e l i n g s The i n c i d e n t s c o l l e c t e d were evaluated a g a i n s t these c r i t e r i a , , Those f a i l i n g to s a t i s f y the c r i t e r i a were e l i m i n -ated o E o Category Formulation Step one : A l l i n c i d e n t s were d i v i d e d i n t o s u c c e s s f u l or e f f e c t i v e i n c i d e n t s and u n s u c c e s s f u l or i n e f f e c t i v e i n c i d e n t s , T h i s was a r e l a t i v e l y simple task s i n c e the e f f e c t i v e i n c i d e n t s had been recorded on pink sheets of paper, the i n e f f e c t i v e . o n white sheets. Step two : Each i n c i d e n t was then s t u d i e d to f i n d the key behaviour theme i n that i n c i d e n t , that i s , the way of a c t i n g which c o n t r i b u t e d most to the e f f e c t i v e n e s s or i n e f f e c t i v e n e s s of the i n d i v i d u a l i n the i n c i d e n t . This " c r i t i c a l behaviour" was then e x t r a c t e d from the i n t e r v i e w form and typed on a card f i v e by e i g h t Inches i n s i z e . The form used f o r t h i s purpose may be found i n Appendix "D", In some i n s t a n c e s two or more c r i t i c a l behaviours were contained i n a s i n g l e i n c i d e n t . Separate cards were prepared f o r each c r i t i c a l behaviour and the s e v e r a l d u p l i c a t e r e p o r t s then t r e a t e d separ-a t e l y . 23 Step three : For each category suggested by the behaviour an i n c i d e n t card f i l e s e p arator or d i v i s i o n card was made. These separators were coded to a master c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o u t l i n e which was being developed as c a t e g o r i e s were suggested by the i n c i d e n t s examinedo Each time a new i n c i d e n t card or se p a r a t o r was being considered the a n a l y s t would check i t a g a i n s t the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o u t l i n e to see i f a category a l r e a d y e x i s t e d f o r the behaviour i n the i n c i d e n t , At the beginning almost every i n c i d e n t r e q u i r e d a s e p a r a t o r but, as more and more i n c i d e n t s were reviewed, an i n c r e a s i n g number of i n c i d e n t s we're found a l i k e or con-s i s t e d or behaviour i d e n t i c a l i n nature to those a l r e a d y recorded, These i d e n t i c a l behaviours were f i l e d i n f r o n t of the a p p r o p r i a t e s e p a r a t o r card and a t a l l y was made on the master c l a s s i f i c a t i o n sheet. F o l l o w i n g the i n i t i a l s o r t i n g a l l c a t e g o r i e s were i n d i v i d u a l l y reviewed. Behaviours m i s f i l e d on o r i g i n a l s o r t i n g were e x t r a c t e d and r e f i l e d . This procedure was repeated u n t i l a l l behaviours were c a t e g o r i z e d . Since a l l the behaviour cards f i l e d behind each s e p a r a t o r were, from the stand-point of key behaviour, i d e n t i c a l , any one card i n each category could be used as a t y p i c a l card f o r that category and the r e s t of the cards considered as dupll<= cate cards. Thus, the f i r s t steps i n c l a s s i f i c a t i o n not only grouped the c r i t i c a l behaviour cards by d e s c r i p t i v e c a t e g o r i e s , but a l s o i n e f f e c t reduced the t o t a l number 24 of behaviour cards which had to be studied c l o s e l y i n the next step of a n a l y s i s . Step f o u r - Reduction of Categories ; A l l the estab-l i s h e d c a t e g o r i e s on f i l e s e parators were considered f o r p o s s i b l e combinations. Whenever two or more d e s c r i p t i v e c a t e g o r i e s seemed c l o s e l y r e l a t e d , " t y p i c a l " behaviour cards i n the c a t e g o r i e s were s t u d i e d to see i f the a c t u a l behaviours were as c l o s e l y r e l a t e d as' the category headings i n d i c a t e d . I f behaviours proved to be c l o s e l y r e l a t e d a new category was made and a l l cards i n the old c a t e g o r i e s were regrouped under t h i s new category. Such a combining and recombining of catego-r i e s could continue u n t i l the new category headings became so g e n e r a l that a person u n f a m i l i a r with the a n a l y s i s would have d i f f i c u l t y i n seei n g a d i r e c t r e l a t i o n s h i p between the headings and the c r i t i c a l b ehaviours. To avoid t h i s a r u l e was set up that no combination of c a t e g o r i e s would be made which d i d not r e s u l t i n a new category heading that continued to d e s c r i b e what the cadets i n the reported i n c i d e n t s a c t u a l l y d i d . Step f i v e : The summary statements w r i t t e n to de s c r i b e the g e n e r a l type o f behaviour appearing i n the catego-r i e s were reviewed and r e w r i t t e n to d e s c r i b e each group i n terms s u f f i c i e n t l y g e n e r a l to cover the b a s i c s i m i l -a r i t i e s of the group component behaviours yet s i g n i f i c -a n t l y s p e c i f i c to make the behaviour i n v o l v e d c l e a r . 25 These statements then became the category headings and were the sought-after " c r i t i c a l requirements", P. Comparison of C r i t i c a l Requirements with RCSME  Assessment Categories The 13 "Qualities Characteristic of a good man", which are the personal q u a l i t i e s assessed i n the "COTC Troop Officer's Report - RCSME" (see Appendix "B"), are the essential feature of the assessment procedure which i s under study. Each of these categories i s defined at some length i n the "Personal Quality Definitions " (Appendix "A"), so that i t i s possible to examine the categories quite c r i t i c a l l y . One of the most evident features of these 13 categories i s that many of them are defined i n terras of more than one personal quality or t r a i t . That i s , the several terms used denote t r a i t s which may vary independently of one another and so r e a l l y constitute separate q u a l i t i e s , f o r example, "obedience, l o y a l t y and Integrity" do not a l l denote the same quality. In preparation f o r a comparison of the C r i t i c a l Require-ments obtained i n the present study with these RC3M1 q u a l i t i e s , i t was found necessary to break down the 13 categories into components which might be regarded as being independent of on© another, Twenty=three headings thus resulted, laeh c r i t i c a l requirement was then examined i n turn to decide which of the 23 categories i t most closely matched. In thi s the detailed "Personal Quality Definitions" were frequently consulted. The corresponding c r i t i c a l requirements and categories 26 were then set down i n p a r a l l e l l i s t s . Those c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e -ments which could not be matched with any of the 23 c a t e g o r i e s were shown i n a separate l i s t . CHAPTER IV CRITICAL REQUIREMENTS STUDY OP CADETS : RESULTS Table I shows the numbers of c r i t i c a l behaviours derived from the o r i g i n a l data. The t o t a l number of incidents collected was.577. Of t h i s number 35 were discarded because they f a i l e d to meet the c r i t e r i a . Of the t o t a l number the instructors contributed 19 2 of which 14 were discarded. The cadets reported 385 of which 21 were rejected. A t o t a l of 91 multiple incidents were isolated; 74 were contributed by instructors, the remaining 17 incidents by cadets. The f i r s t y i e l d was thus 633 c r i t i c a l behaviours. TABLE I It was possible to c l a s s i f y these c r i t i c a l behaviours on the basis of close s i m i l a r i t y . The f i r s t sorting resulted i n the formulation of 64 i n i t i a l categories, These 64 categories are l i s t e d i n Appendix "E", These categories were further examined to reduce the number to a practicable set of c r i t i c a l requirements. These 33 C r i t i c a l Requirements are shown i n Table II. TABLE I I 28 T A B L E I DISPOSITION OP INCIDENTS TO CRITICAL BEHAVIOURS INSTRUCTORS CADETS OVERALL O r i g i n a l i n c i d e n t s ' .192 385 577 Less r e j e c t e d i n c i d e n t s 14 21 35 Net i n c i d e n t s 179 364 543 Add m u l t i p l e i n c i d e n t s 74 17 91 TOTAL CRITICAL BEHAVIOURS 252 381 633 T A B L E I I . CRITICAL REQUIREMENTS FOR OFFICER CADETS IN THE ROYAL CANADIAN ENGflNEERS 1. Plans f l e x i b l y to anticipate problems 2. F a c i l i t a t e s co-operation by appreciating the feelings of others 3. Leads t a c t f u l l y : achieves his aim without creating resentment 4. Maintains a high standard of appearance: demonstrates good personal habits, manners and hygiene 5. Maintains consistently high standards, regardless of conditions 6. Voluntarily assists others i n t h e i r work 7. Obtains the co-operation of the group by accepting help from i t 8. Maintains and increases team performance by encouragement, supervision and own high standards 9. Thinks up new ideas 10. Puts his ideas into practice 11. Admits mistakes, accepts c r i t i c i s m and instruction, and p r o f i t s by the experience 12. Remains calm and retains control under pressure 13. Carries out his duties and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s i n the face of opposition 14. Steps i n and takes over when need arises 15. Takes prompt and effective action i n a dangerous emergency 16. When placed i n charge asserts himself and maintains control without being unpleasantly aggressive or i n t e r f e r i n g 17. Checks completeness and correctness of work for which his team i s responsible 18. Accepts f u l l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r a l l assigned tasks 19. Prepared to make s a c r i f i c e s and put s e l f out for others 20. Delegates r e s p o n s i b i l i t y on the basis of careful matching of men to jobs 21. Gives clear and concise instructions, demonstrating where appropriate 22. Knows the Job to which he i s assigned 23. Provides others with needed information to do the Job 24. Gives assistance when asked or required without trying to take over 25. - Organizes and leads recreational a c t i v i t i e s 26. Behaves i n accordance with recognized rules of conduct for o f f i c e r s 27. Is "self-propelled" i n carrying out assignments 28. Makes suggestions to seniors when i n a position to do so and when appropriate to do so 29. Does not use rank or position f o r private advantage or personal convenience 30. Complies with rules and orders even though he disagrees 31. T e l l s the truth and acts honestly 32. Demands no more than he himself i s prepared to give 33. Makes an effort to co-operate with others and to work as a member of a team 30 I t has been the p r a c t i c e i n c r i t i c a l requirement s t u d i e s f u r t h e r to group c r i t i c a l requirements i n t o "areas". T h i s was considered u n d e s i r a b l e i n the present study because of the f e a r that the t i t l e s alone of the areas would be employed i n the assessment of cadets. Because of the generality of these area t i t l e s , the b e h a v i o r a l q u a l i t y of the c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e -ments would be l o s t . D i s t r i b u t i o n of Behaviours by C r i t i c a l Requirements Table I I I contains the frequency of behaviours f o r each c r i t i c a l requirement f o r both i n s t r u c t o r s and cadets. The t a b l e shows the number of e f f e c t i v e and i n e f f e c t i v e i n c i d e n t s c o n t r i b u t e d by i n s t r u c t o r s and cadets f o r each c r i t i c a l requirement and provides one with some i n s i g h t i n t o how much emphasis i n s t r u c t o r s and cadets place on each c r i t i c a l requirement. By examining the number and kind o f i n c i d e n t c o n t r i b u t e d , a guide to the weighting of c r i t i c a l requirements might be obtained. The dangers of i n f e r r i n g weights from f r e q u e n c i e s of c r i t i c a l behaviours w i l l be d i s c u s s e d below. TABLE I I I Rank Order of C r i t i c a l Requirements Table IV shows the c r i t i c a l requirements ranked i n order of frequency of the behaviours contained i n them. The t a b l e i s organized i n terms of o v e r a l l rank order and shows the rank of the c r i t i c a l requirements f o r i n s t r u c t o r s as w e l l as the 31 T A B L E I I I FREQUENCY OF BEHAVIOURS FOR EACH C R I T I C A L R E Q U I R E M E N T CRITICAL REQUIREMENTS (1) INSTRUCTORS (N=65) EFF. INEFF. (2) (3) CADETS EFF. (4) (N=127) INEFF. (5) 1. Plans f l e x i b l y to anticipate problems 12 16 13 13 2. F a c i l i t a t e s co-operation by appreciating feelings of others 2 i 11 8 3. Leads tactfully? achieves his aim without creating resentment 3 2 2 : 4 4. Maintains a high standard of appearances demonstrates good personal habits, manners and hygiene 1 4 2 5. Maintains consistently high standards regardless of conditions 2 16 3 8 6. Voluntarily a s s i s t s others i n their work 3 24 4 7. Obtains the co-operation of the group by accepting help from i t 6 3 3 1 8. Maintains and increases team's performance by encouragement, supervision and own high standards 10 9 2 9. Thinks up new ideas 3 1 6 2 10. Puts his ideas into practice 6 7 11. Admits mistakes, accepts c r i t i c i s m and instruction and pr o f i t s by the experience 5 13 2 13 12. Remains calm and retains control under pressure 1 13 6 .. cont' 9 Cl 0 * 0 31 (a) TABLE III cont'd (1) (2) i (3) (4) (5) 13. Carries but his duties and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s i n the face of opposition 1 1 14. Steps i n and takes over when need ar ises 4 20 15. Takes prompt and ef fect ive act ion i n a dangerous emergency 3 2 15 1 16. When placed i n charge asserts ; himself and maintains control ; without being unpleasantly ' aggressive or i n t e r f e r i n g 13 4 9 11 17. Checks completeness and c o r -rectness of work for which his team i s responsible 2 5 2 2 18. Accepts f u l l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for a l l assigned tasks 1 2 3 19. Prepared to make sacr i f i ce s and put himself out for others 1 34 10 20. Delegates r e s p o n s i b i l i t y on the basis of careful matching of men to jobs 7 4 17 10 21. Gives olear and concise i n s t r -uct ions , demonstrating where appropriate 2 4 22. Knows the job to which he i s assigned 3 3 3 6 23. Provides others with needed information to do the job 2 24. Gives assistance when asked or required without t ry ing to take over 2 2 1 25. Organizes and leads recreat -ional a c t i v i t i e s 4 2 » • • cont U e o . 31 (b) TABLE III cont'd (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 26. Behaves i n accordance with recognized rules of conduct for o f f i cers 1 9 2 8 27. Is"sel f -propel led" in carrying out assignments 2 5 8 14 28. Makes suggestions to seniors when i n a pos i t ion to do so and when appropriate to do so 2 29. Does not use rank or pos i t ion for private advantage or personal convenience 1 3 30. Complies with rules and orders even though he disagrees 21 1 15 31. T e l l s the truth and acts honestly 10 3 32. Demands no more than he himself i s prepared to give 1 1 4 33. Makes an e f fort to co-operate with others and to work as a member of a team 15 3 12 TOTALS s 98 154 212 169 32 absolute frequencies contributed by these two groups. The frequencies are based on a t o t a l of 633 i n c i d e n t s , Examina-t i o n of these ranks, p a r t i c u l a r l y the comparison of I n s t r u c -t o r s ' with Cadets', reveals a number of i n t e r e s t i n g d i f f e r -ences i n the performance or behaviour aspects of Cadets which, i n p r a c t i s e , are found to be c r i t i c a l by the two groups. The d i f f e r e n c e s w i l l be discussed l a t e r . TABLE IV O r i g i n of I n c i d e n t s I t i s of c o n s i d e r a b l e i n t e r e s t to determine where i n c i d e n t s c o n t r i b u t e d took p l a c e . Such knowledge, i f used as an a i d to assessment, could i n d i c a t e i n what areas of as s e s s -ment s p e c i a l a t t e n t i o n should be g i v e n . T h i s i n f o r m a t i o n was c o l l e c t e d on the c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t q u e s t i o n forms (see Appendix "C") i n connection with each i n c i d e n t . I n s t r u c t o r s and cadets were asked to i n d i c a t e where the i n c i d e n t d e s c r i b e d took p l a c e . I t was found p o s s i b l e to c a t e g o r i z e i n f o r m a t i o n obtained i n t o seven c a t e g o r i e s - 249 i n c i d e n t s occurred i n the t r a i n i n g area. The remaining i n c i d e n t s were f a i r l y evenly d i s t r i b u t e d throughout the remaining s i x c a t e g o r i e s . Table V i s a summary showing the o r i g i n of the i n c i d e n t s c o n t r i b u t e d . Appendix "G" shows the o r i g i n of each c r i t i c a l requirement s e p a r a t e l y . TABLE V 33 T A B L E I V RANK ORDER OP CRITICAL REQUIREMENTS (based on frequency of behaviours for each C r i t i c a l Requirement) CRITICAL REQUIREMENTS (arranged in order of overa l l rank) (1) CR | (2) OVERALL | Rank f j (3) (4)j| INSTRUCTORS Rank f (5) (6) CADETS Rank f (7) (8) Plans f l e x i b l y to a n t i c i -pate problems 1 1 54 | 1 i 28 4 26 Prepared to make s a c r i -f ices and put s e l f out for others 19 2 45 | 29 1 1 44 Delegates r e s p o n s i b i l i t y on the basis of carefu l matching of men to jobs 20 3 38 8 11 3 27 Complies with rules and orders even though he disagrees 30 4.5 1 37 2 21 9.5 16 When.placed i n charge asserts himself .and.main-tains control without being unpleasantly aggressive or i n t e r f e r i n g 16 4.5 37 5 17 6.5 20 Admits mistakes, accepts c r i t i o i s m and i n s t r u c t -ions and p r o f i t s by the experience 11 6 33 3.5 18 12 15 Vo luntar i ly as s i s t s others i n the ir work 6 7 31 24 3 2 28 Makes an ef fort to oo-operate with others and work as a member of a team 33 8 30 6 15 12 15 Maintains consis tent ly high standards, regard-less of conditions 5 10 29 3.5 18 14,5 1 1 1 • . . cont'd . . . 33 (a) TABLE IV cont'd ( 1 ) j ( 2 ) i i (3) ( 4 ) ( 5 ) 1 ( 6 ) ( 7 ) ( 8 ) Remains calm and retains control under pressure 1 2 1 0 2 9 7 I 1 4 1 2 1 5 Is "self -propel led" i n carrying out assignments 2 7 1 0 2 9 i 1 3 . 5 7 5 2 2 Steps i n and takes over when need ar i ses 1 4 1 2 2 4 2 2 4 6 . 5 2 0 F a c i l i t a t e s co-operation by appreciat ing the f e e l -ings of others 2 1 4 2 1 2 6 2 8 1 9 Maintains and increases team performance by encouragement, super-v i s i o n and own high standards 8 1 4 2 1 1 0 1 0 1 4 . 5 1 1 Takes prompt and e f f ec t -ive act ion i n a danger-ous emergency 1 5 1 4 2 1 1 9 5 9 . 5 1 6 Behaves i n accordance with recognized rules of conduct for o f f i cers 2 6 1 6 2 0 1 0 1 0 1 6 1 0 Knows the job to which he has been assigned 2 2 1 7 1 5 1 6 6 1 7 9 Obtains the co-operat-ion of the group by aocepting help from i t 7 1 9 1 3 1 2 9 2 3 o 5 4 Puts h is Ideas into pract ice 1 0 1 9 1 3 1 6 6 1 9 7 Tel ia the truth and acts honestly 3 1 1 9 1 3 1 0 1 0 2 6 , 5 3 Thinks up new ideas 9 2 1 1 2 2 2 4 1 8 8 Leads t a c t f u l l y , achieves his aim without creat ing resentment 3 2 2 . 5 1 1 1 9 5 2 0 6 0 o o cont'd . s o 3 3 (b) TABLE IV cont'd (1) (2) 0 ) (4) (5) : i (6) (7) ; (8) Checks completeness and correctness of work for which his team i s responsible 17 22.5 11 1 13.5 7 i i | 23.5 4 Maintains a high standard of appearances demonstrate good personal habi ts , manners and hygiene s 4 24 7 19 5 29.5 2 Accepts f u l l responsi -b i l i t y for a l l assigned tasks 18 26.5 6 29 1 21 5 Gives c lear and concise ins truc t ions , demonstrat-ing where appropriate 21 26.5 6 16 6 32.5 0 Organizes.and leads r e c r -eat ional a c t i v i t i e s 25 26.5 6 22 4 29.5 2 Demands no more than he himself i s prepared to give 32 26.5 6 26 2 23.5 4 Gives assistance when asked or required without t ry ing to take over 24 29 5 26 2 2 6 . 5 3 Does not use rank or p o s i -t ion for private advantage or personal convenience 29 30 4 32 0 2 3 * 5 4 Carries out h is duties and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s i n th© faoe of opposition 13 32 2 2 9 1 32.5 1 Provides others with needed information to do the job 23 32 2 3 2 0 2 9 . 5 2 Makes suggestions to seniors when i n a pos i t ion to do so and when appropr-iate to do so 28 32 2 32 0 29.5 2 34 T A B L E V ORIGINS OP INCIDENTS, DRAWN PROM 65 INSTRUCTORS AND 127 CADETS (ARRANGED IN ORDER OP OVERALL FREQUENCY) OVERALL INSTRUCTORS .CADETS f o $ f . f . £ T r a i n i n g area 249 39.2 95 39.3 154 39.1 Camp g e n e r a l l y 83 13.1 34 14.0 49 12,5 Barracks 67 10.5 14 5.8 53 13.5 Parade square 60 9.4 25 10.3 35 8.9 Mess 58 9.1 21 8.7 37 9.4 Classroom 30 4.7 16 6.6 14 3.5 Off camp 21 3.3 11 4.5 10 2.5 Others 68 10.7 26 10,8 42 10.6 TOTALS : 636 100.0 242 100,0 394 100.0 35 Recency of Incidents Appendix "HM shows the time i n t e r v a l between the occur-ence of each incident and the re c o l l e c t i o n of that incident. Each c r i t i c a l requirement i s dealt with separately and the recollections for both instructors and cadets are given. The results obtained for instructors were modified by the fact that a large number of instructors were interviewed three months aft e r completion of summer trai n i n g . There were therefore very few incidents (21) reported by instruc-tors as having occurred within the previous three months. Cadets, however, were a l l interviewed during t h e i r l a s t month of t r a i n i n g so that no such l i m i t a t i o n existed for them. TABLE VI Of the t o t a l of 633 behaviours only 625 were useable for t h i s purpose ; behaviours i n eiyht cases could not be u t i l i z e d because subjects f a i l e d to record the required o r i g i n of the incident described. Table VI i s a summary of the recency of incidents. Details as to how each incident was distributed are to be found i n Appendix "H". Comparison of RCSME Categories with C r i t i c a l Requirements . The 13 categories used i n the assessment of o f f i c e r cadets by RCSME were broken down into 23 components which were considered independent of one another. Each c r i t i c a l require-ment was then examined and an attempt made to place i t against 36 T A B L E V I SUMMARY OP RECENCY OP INCIDENTS Within one month a f t e r occurrence One to three months a f t e r occurrence Three to twelve months a f t e r occurrence Twelve to twenty-four months a f t e r occurrence TOTAL NUMBER OP INCIDENTS RECALLED O v e r a l l I n s t r u c t o r s Cadets 180 2 178 206 19 187 193 180 13 46 46 0 625* 247 378 * Time of occurrence of i n c i d e n t s not reported by 8 respondents 37 one of these 23 categories. Eleven C r i t i c a l Requirements could not be c l a s s i f i e d i n this way. There were six of the 23 categories against which no C r i t i c a l Requirements f e l l . In several instances, however, more than one C r i t i c a l Require-ment corresponded with a single RCSME category. Because the discussion of these results requires d i r e c t examination of the p a r a l l e l tabulation, Table XII has been placed i n Chapter VIII. This table contains the detailed results of the comparison. CHAPTER V THE PEER RATINGS TECHNIQUE : BACKGROUND Peer r a t i n g s r e f e r to each group member's r a t i n g of every other group member on a r e c o g n i z a b l e q u a l i t y such as l e a d e r s h i p . These r a t i n g s y i e l d a score which may e i t h e r be r e l a t e d to a c r i t e r i o n or may,be used as a c r i t e r i o n a g a i n s t which other f a c t o r s are v a l i d a t e d . There are e s s e n t i a l l y two v a r i a t i o n s o f t h i s procedure both of which are covered by the term, "Peer R a t i n g s " . In the f i r s t v a r i a t i o n , each group member ranks a l l of h i s peers through the assignment of a score or by an a c t u a l process of rankings i n the second v a r i a t i o n each group member nominates a s p e c i f i e d number of h i s peers whom he c o n s i d e r s "high" or "low" on the q u a l i t y being measured. Both procedures y i e l d a score which serves as an index of the i n d i v i d u a l ' s s t a t u s w i t h i n h i s group on the s p e c i f i c f a c t o r under i n v e s t i g a t i o n s Both methods r e s t on the assumption, however, that members of a group know each other w e l l , that they are adequately informed or i n s t r u c t e d as to the q u a l i t y on which they art r a t i n g , and are capable of r e c o g n i z i n g differences between people with respect to that q u a l i t y . The basic procedure followed i n o b t a i n i n g peer r a t i n g s i s to ask each member of the group t o s e l e c t the top f i v e men from the group and rank these i n order with respect to the q u a l i t y under e v a l u a t i o n and then choose the bottom f i v e men and rank these i n order. 39 C o n s i d e r a t i o n s i n the Use of Peer Ratings-Peer r a t i n g s must be based on s e l e c t i o n s made by group members who know each other w e l l . Unless t h i s c o n d i t i o n i s met, the r a t i n g s peers a s s i g n to each other are nothing more than s u p e r f i c i a l impressions„ S u c i (41) summarizes t h i s requirement when he s t a t e s why the o f f i c e r cadets i n h i s study at the U. S, Naval Academy were i d e a l l y s u i t e d f o r employing such a technique. S u c i s t a t e s , " O f f i c e r cadet students are organized i n t o platoons of about 25 men. These men l i v e together i n p h y s i c a l p r o x i m i t y , eat together, attend c l a s s e s together and probably choose t h e i r f r i e n d s and leave mates together". In such i n s t a n c e s v a l i d r e s u l t s can be expected. The respondent may have an A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Set - that i s , he may f e e l t h a t he should give acceptable responses. I t has o f t e n been shown that respondents who are advised that questions are f o r r e s e a r c h purposes only, and who are guaran-teed the maximum p o s s i b l e amount of anonymity, are s t i l l r e l u c t a n t to s t a t e t h e i r r e a l o p i n i o n s . I t i s essentials, t h e r e f o r e , that the i n v e s t i g a t o r use a l l h i s s k i l l to reassure the respondent i n a peer r a t i n g study. B a y r o f f ' s study (7) i s p e r t i n e n t i n t h i s connection, He u t i l i z e d two groups of s u b j e c t s . One group was informed that the results obtained through peer r a t i n g s would be used i n w r i t i n g f i n a l assessments. The second group was informed that the r a t i n g s would only be used f o r r e s e a r c h purposes. The r e s u l t s of t h i s study showed no s i g i n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between groups. 40 D i f f e r e n c e s do e x i s t from i n d i v i d u a l to i n d i v i d u a l i n r a t i n g a b i l i t y . Browning and A s s o c i a t e s (9) conducted a study of o f f i c e r r a t i n g methodology and found that r a t e r s who achieved higher academic standing made more v a l i d r a t i n g s of t h e i r a s s o c i a t e s than d i d r a t e r s with lower standing. B a y r o f f (7) found that r a t e r s high i n a b i l i t y and experience made more v a l i d r a t i n g s than d i d r a t e r s who scored, low on. t h i s v a r i a b l e . S c o r i n g and E v a l u a t i n g Peer Ratings There are v a r i o u s ways of o b t a i n i n g a f i n a l score f o r each member of the group. Two methods w i l l be di s c u s s e d here but other v a r i a t i o n s (21) do e x i s t - Hollander's (21) approach i s used most f r e q u e n t l y . He employed a weighting procedure to d e r i v e nomination s c o r e s . The highest nominee was awarded +5» next +4 and so on through the f i v e c a t e g o r i e s ; so a l s o the lowest nominal was assigned a - 5 , the next lowest a -4 and so on, An a l g e b r a i c sum was then obtained f o r each su b j e c t and d i v i d e d by "N" of the group minus one,(None of h i s s u b j e c t s could nominate themselves). T h i s r e s u l t s i n an average score v a r y i n g on a continuum from plus 5 to minus 5* To remove the minus s i g n a constant of 5 was added t o t h i s score, The r e s u l t a n t value was then m u l t i p l i e d by 10 In order to permit two d i g i t scores without the i n t e r v e n i n g decimal point* H o l l a n d e r i n another study (23) used a m o d i f i c a t i o n of t h i s approach. In t h i s study he had three p o s i t i v e and th r e e nega-t i v e c a t e g o r i e s . The hig h e s t nomination was g i v e n a weight of +3» the second highest a weight of +2 and the t h i r d a 41 weight of +1: the f i r s t l e a s t nomination was given a weight of -3 e t c . Each i n d i v i d u a l i n turn r e c e i v e d a nomination score which was the a l g e b r a i c sum of the weighted s c o r e s . For example, i f an i n d i v i d u a l was named twice as the second h i g h e s t choice and once as a t h i r d l e a s t choice, h i s score became 2 + 2 - 1 = 3» An i n d i v i d u a l who was not named re c e i v e d a score of 0, Another approach i s to a s s i g n equal weights t o each of the f i v e top nominees ( i . e . - 1 to each) and s i m i l a r l y weight each bottom nominee -1. The r e l a t i v e p o s i t i o n s of the members of the group are then determined by the number of nominations they r e c e i v e to e i t h e r top or bottom group, t h i s being represented by the a l g e b r a i c sum of the plus and minus nomination. Accuracy of Peer Ratings and L i f e - s p a n of the Group Numerous i n v e s t i g a t i o n s have been concerned with the accuracy of peer r a t i n g s made at v a r i o u s times i n the l i f e span of the group. H o l l a n d e r (24) found t h a t peer r a t i n g s scored at the end of the t h i r d week of t r a i n i n g c o r r e l a t e d at a high l e v e l with those scores secured from the same group at the end of the s i x t h week; that i s , both y i e l d s u b s t a n t i a l l y the same r e s u l t s . He concluded that peer r a t i n g s adminis-t e r e d as e a r l y as the t h i r d week of t r a i n i n g w i l l y i e l d s u b s t a n t i a l l y the same i n f o r m a t i o n as those obtained s i x weeks or l a t e r . H o l l a n d e r (21) i n another study again noted the speed with which r a t i n g s were e s t a b l i s h e d and again observed that scores drawn from l a t e r weeks of t r a i n i n g d i d 42 not show s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r r e s u l t s , H o l l a n d e r i n (20) yet another study found that r e l i a b i l i t i e s of r a t i n g s are g r e a t e r , but not s i g n i f i c a n t l y so, as one proceeds to l a t e r time p e r i o d s . I t would appear on the b a s i s of t h i s study that a major i n c r e a s e occurs from the o r i e n t a t i o n week, to the t h i r d week a f t e r which c o r r e l a t i o n s do not change a p p r e c i a b l y . F i n a l l y , H ollander (22) i n h i s study of " c o n d i t i o n s a f f e c t i n g m i l i t a r y u t i l i z a t i o n of peer r a t i n g s " found an i n c r e a s e i n r e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y from one to three weeks at which time c o r r e l a t i o n s became s t a b i l i z e d . The o b s e r v a t i o n that r e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y a p p a r e n t l y do become s t a b i l i z e d by the end of the t h i r d week supports the view t h a t h i s technique could become a v a l u a b l e t o o l i n a m i l i t a r y s e t t i n g both f o r assessment and guidance. The poor o f f i c e r cadet could r a p i d l y be s i n g l e d out e a r l y i n the course of t r a i n i n g , and could be given s p e c i a l a t t e n t i o n with the view of a v e r t i n g f a i l u r e . The top cadets l i k e w i s e could perhaps be s i n g l e d out f o r p o s i t i o n s of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . In any case, i t would be advantageous to detect both the " e f f e c t i v e " and " i n e f f e c t i v e " cadet e a r l y i n the course of t r a i n i n g . P o p u l a r i t y and Peer Ratings The view has been expressed t h a t peer r a t i n g s c o n s t i t u t e a " p o p u l a r i t y c o n t e s t " . However resea r c h i n d i c a t e s that they y i e l d p r e d i c t i o n s of performance not ad v e r s e l y a f f e c t e d by f r i e n d s h i p t i e s . H o l l a n d e r (24) suggests t h i s r e l a t i o n -s h i p operates so as to favour as f r i e n d s those of hig h 43 status for friends o Although the v a l i d i t y of peer ratings has been demonstrated time and again, resistance to their use s t i l l p e r sists. The major objection i s based on the b e l i e f that they are the outcome of sheer popularity. Hollander (23) f e l t that a b e l i e f such as this assumes : (a) that individuals w i l l be more in c l i n e d to favour friends as "high" nominees; (b) that this bias towards friends w i l l operate independently of the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c rated; (c) that peer rating w i l l consequently be heavily weighted with "popularity"; (d) that this i s a bad state of a f f a i r s . Hollander's studies (24, 23) lead to a rejection of the contention that friendship operates as a biasing factor invalidating peer ratings. Further, although popularity tends to have a weight i n peer rating scores, t h i s f a i l s to a l t e r basic predictions. F i n a l l y , Hollander (23) states, " i t i s quite possible that t h i s weighting may a r i s e from some greater premium being attached to having friends of acknowledged high status i n certain continua, as opposed to simply creating high status f o r friends." Comparison of Peer Ratings with Ratings of Supervisors The majority of studies indicate that peer ratings are more v a l i d than the ratings of supervisors and certain other commonly used predictors, Williams and Leavitt (54) found peer ratings were more v a l i d predictors both of success at 44 o f f i c e r candidate school and of combat performance than several objective t e s t s . Furthermore, peer ratings were si g n i f i c a n t l y , better than superiors' ratings i n predicting the c r i t e r i a being measured. They conclude that the peer ratings technique has greater v a l i d i t y than these other measures because group members have more time to observe each other than do superior o f f i c e r s , and they know each other i n a r e a l i s t i c context and react more d i r e c t l y to each other's behaviours. These are a l l conditions they observe which are favourable to the formulation of better judgments, A man's peers are usually i n closer contact with what he does hour by hour and day by day than are his supervisors. Furthermore, a man naturally t r i e s to present his best side to his superiors but his peers see him as he i s . Bitner (8) states, "Using peers as raters makes i t possible to get a number of judgments the average of which w i l l be more r e l i a b l e than a simple measure alone. R e l i a b i l i t y of Peer Ratings The results of numerous investigations indicate that r e l i a b i l i t y of peer ratings i s high, Vallance, Suci and Glickman (43) found the r e l i a b i l i t y of peer ratings i n t h e i r study remained at ,90 i n spite of influences of l i k e and d i s -l i k e introduced. Hollander (24) found l i t t l e difference i n r e l i a b i l i t y between groups where subjects had been informed that peer ratings would be used administratively and other groups where assurance was given that they would not be so used, Hollander (21) i n another study u t i l i z e d four forms 45 to c o l l e c t peer r a t i n g s : (a) nominations f o r success as future n a v a l o f f i c e r s ; (b) nominations f o r i n t e r e s t i n and enthusiasm f o r n a val s e r v i c e ; (c) l e a d e r s h i p q u a l i t i e s ; (d) p r o b a b i l i t y of success at o f f i c e r candidate s c h o o l . He found the r e l i a b i l i t y f o r a l l forms was ,90 even though the groups had been created only f o u r to f i v e days b e f o r e . In a t h i r d study H o l l a n d e r (23) reported an average r e l i a b i l i t y of ,87, In only three of the 82 groups (each with an N of 7 - 13) were the r e l i a b i l i t i e s below ,50. The range was from ,34 to ,95. F i n a l l y , Wherry and F r y e r (52) found the r e l i a b i l i t y of nominations a f t e r f o u r months was o u t s t a n d i n g l y h i g h e r than t h a t of any other v a r i a b l e upon which the t e s t was made. V a l i d i t y of Peer Ratings The v a l i d i t y s t u d i e s on peer r a t i n g s r e v e a l much the same r e s u l t s as do the r e l i a b i l i t y s t u d i e s , Kareher (26) found the v a l i d i t y of a s i n g l e q u a l i f i e d r a t e r was r =s ,33, There was a s u b s t a n t i a l l y g r e a t e r c o n s i s t e n c y between means of r a t i n g s made by two groups of 10 r a t e r s each ( r = „80) than between r a t i n g s made by i n d i v i d u a l r a t e r s ( r a ,38), He concluded "the g r e a t e r the number of r a t e r s the more accurate the r a t i n g . Browning and a s s o c i a t e s (9) found r a t e r s who achieved h i g h e r academic standing made more v a l i d r a t i n g s of 46 of t h e i r a s s o c i a t e s than d i d r a t e r s with lower st a n d i n g , B a y r o f f (7) found the most e f f e c t i v e means of i n c r e a s i n g the v a l i d i t y of the r a t i n g s was by i n c r e a s i n g the number of r a t e r s . Peer r a t i n g does t h i s . B a i e r (6) showed that peer nominat-ions of West Po i n t graduates were more h i g h l y r e l a t e d to l a t e r performance as o f f i c e r s than were any other measure a t the m i l i t a r y academy, McLure and a s s o c i a t e s (28) reported that the most promising c r i t e r i o n found was a rank order peer r a t i n g . Wherry and F r y e r (52) found peer r a t i n g s s u p e r i o r to academic i n s t r u c t o r s ' r a t i n g s i n an o f f i c e r candidate school i n terms of making p o s s i b l e the e a r l y determination of the " l e a d e r s h i p " f a c t o r . They f u r t h e r found t h a t peer r a t i n g s at the end of the f i r s t month of t r a i n i n g measured the same f a c t o r three months l a t e r . Moreover what they measured i n the f i r s t month was the same as that r a t e d by s u p e r i o r s a f t e r f o u r months ob s e r v a t i o n . The r a t i n g s of s u p e r i o r s measured something q u i t e d i f f e r e n t i n the f i r s t and f o u r t h months, I t was not u n t i l the f o u r t h month that s u p e r i o r s ' r a t i n g s r e f l e c t e d the l e a d e r s h i p f a c t o r which f e l l o w students i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e i r f i r s t month of t r a i n i n g , R i c c i n t (37) at the United S t a t e s Naval Academy reported c o r r e l a t i o n s of .38 to e 77 between midshipmen r a t i n g s of each other and executive o f f i c e r s ' r a t i n g s . Sue! and V a l l a n c e (42) at the Marine O f f i c e r s Candidate School found c o r r e l a t i o n s o f .47 and ,43 between peer r a t i n g s and combat r a t i n g s by combat l e a d e r s , and c o r r e l -a t i o n s of .22 and .36 between r a t i n g s by s u p e r v i s o r s at o f f i c e r candidate school and combat l e a d e r r a t i n g s . The 47 usefulness of peer ratings as an independent measure i s shown in another study at the naval o f f i c e r s candidate school, in which correlations ranging from ,33 to ,73 were obtained between peer ratings and m i l i t a r y aptitude ratings by s t a f f members„ Value of Peer Ratings An important value of peer rating results from peer ratings on each man being the resultant of ratings by many observers. Each rater draws from a large pool of d a i l y observations i n making his choice. This i s not the case i n superiors' ratings which emerge from few observations and observers and where these observers usually make only limited numbers of observations under limited conditions. Thus, r e l i a b i l i t y and r e l a t i v e absence of s u p e r i f i c i a l i t y are l o g i c a l l y on the side of peer ratings, Kareher and associates (26) i n t h e i r study on o f f i c e r rating methodology found peer ratings of two groups of a sample size of 10 produced v a l i d correlations of ,80, However, indi v i d u a l ratings by instructors on the same group resulted in a correlation of ,38. Anderhalter (5) has suggested that an analysis of the ratings that a candidate makes of the members of his group might also be of value. Thus the a b i l i t y of a man to recognize o f f i c e r potential in his peers might be an i n d i c -ation of his potential as an o f f i c e r . In addition to studying a man as he i s perceived by the group, i t i s also possible to study him as he perceives that group. 48 In summarizing, one can say that peer r a t i n g s do p r e d i c t such phenomena as performance a t o f f i c e r candidate s c h o o l , success o r f a i l u r e i n t r a i n i n g and l e a d e r s h i p adequacy. Peer r a t i n g s could a l s o be used to s e l e c t l e a d e r s from the group f o r promotion, not only at the o f f i c e r cadet l e v e l but, perhaps, at the j u n i o r and s e n i o r NCO l e v e l . F i n a l l y peer r a t i n g s can be used as an index of morale. CHAPTER VI PEER RATINGS OP CADETS : METHOD In a m i l i t a r y s e t t i n g a d e c i s i o n o f t e n has to be based on the e v a l u a t i o n of one or more i n d i v i d u a l s . Such e v a l u -a t i o n s , to be accurate, r e q u i r e an i n t i m a t e knowledge of each and every member of the group over a l o n g p e r i o d of time. Consequently, i t would be most advantageous i f a reasonably accurate assessment of the i n d i v i d u a l group members could be a t t a i n e d r a p i d l y and e a s i l y . Peer r a t i n g s can be e a s i l y obtained and can be r a p i d l y scored and i n t e r p r e t e d . However the value of peer r a t i n g s depends on t h e i r v a l i d i t y , that i s the degree to which they a c c u r a t e l y p r e d i c t success or f a i l u r e . In the present study i t was t h e r e f o r e necessary t o determine whether the peer r a t i n g s d i d a c t u a l l y c o r r e l a t e with the f i n a l grading awarded each cadet at the completion of the t r a i n i n g p e r i o d . I t was a l s o considered worth while, as i n other s t u d i e s (23, 24), to i n v e s t i g a t e the p o s s i b i l i t y that peer r a t i n g s c o n s t i t u t e a " p o p u l a r i t y c o n t e s t " . Would the most popular cadets, as a r e s u l t of t h e i r p o p u l a r i t y , r e c e i v e the h i g h e s t vote when rated on the v a r i a b l e - "Future success as o f f i c e r s " ? I t was considered e s s e n t i a l to determine the c o r r e l a t i o n e x i s t i n g between "Future success as an o f f i c e r " p r e d i c t e d by peer r a t i n g s and " F i n a l assessment" awarded by the c l a s s 50 i n s t r u c t o r s o I f " p o p u l a r i t y " and "Future success as an o f f i c e r " are one and the same t h i n g , the two obtained c o r -r e l a t i o n s should c l o s e l y resemble each other,, A comparison was a l s o made between " p o p u l a r i t y " assessed by peer r a t i n g s and " p o p u l a r i t y " or "group v a l u e " assessed by i n s t r u c t o r s . I n t e r e s t here was focussed on whether cadets and i n s t r u c t o r s view p o p u l a r i t y i n the same way and whether f i r s t and second phase cadets d i f f e r e d i n t h e i r views as to what c o n s t i t u t e s p o p u l a r i t y . Another problem considered was the p r a c t i c a l i s s u e of the importance o f weighting i n the s c o r i n g o f peer r a t i n g s . The u t i l i z a t i o n of a non-weighted s c o r i n g method i s l e s s time-consuming. I f the r e s u l t s obtained c l o s e l y resembled those obtained through weighted s c o r i n g , the adoption of the non-weighted s c o r i n g technique would then appear a d v i s a b l e . The peer r a t i n g s were scored by both methods and comparison was made of the r e s u l t s obtained. S e l e c t i o n of Subjects and S i z e of Sample The study was based on a t o t a l of f i v e troops of o f f i c e r cadets numbering approximately 20 to 30 cadets i n a troop. Four, F i v e and S i x Troops, t o t a l l i n g 69 cadets were i n Phase One of t h e i r t r a i n i n g , that i s , they were undergoing t h e i r f i r s t p r a c t i c a l phase of t r a i n i n g . Two and Three Troops i n c l u d e d 51 cadets i n Phase Two, Although peer r a t i n g s were obtained f o r a l l cadets, i t was not p o s s i b l e to o b t a i n f i n a l assessments by i n s t r u c t o r s f o r a l l cadets concerned. T h i s was due p r i m a r i l y to corps t r a n s f e r s . However, su b j e c t s 51 were a l s o l o s t due to academic f a i l u r e at u n i v e r s i t y , com-passionate problems, e t c Twenty s i x F i r s t Phase cadets and nine Second Phase cadets were l o s t i n t h i s way, l e a v i n g 43 and 42 cases r e s p e c t i v e l y . A c q u i s i t i o n o f Ratings Cadets were paraded i n two separate groups, the F i r s t Phase c o n s t i t u t i n g one group, Second Phase the other. A l a r g e l e c t u r e t h e a t r e accommodated each group i n one s i t t i n g . One hour was a l l o t t e d f o r each group to complete the d e s i r e d peer r a t i n g s . A l l cadets were informed that the r e s u l t s of these r a t i n g s were to be used f o r resea r c h purposes o n l y and would i n no way a f f e c t t h e i r f i n a l r a t i n g s at the s c h o o l . F i r s t Phase cadets accepted these remarks without any sign of r e l u c t a n c e . The Second Phase cadets, however, appeared much more apprehensive and r e q u i r e d a d d i t i o n a l reassurance t h a t t h e i r r a t i n g s would not be used i n t h e i r s e r v i c e assessment. Two main forms were used t o obt a i n the peer r a t i n g s . One form requested nominations f o r success and f a i l u r e as f u t u r e army o f f i c e r s . The second requested nominations f o r p o p u l a r i t y amongst the group members. Appendix " I " contains these forms. Each form r e q u i r e d f i v e h i g h and f i v e low nominations. Cadets were i n s t r u c t e d to s e l e c t the top f i v e men from the troop and rank these i n order. They then chose the bottom f i v e men and ranked these i n order. Since a l l cadets were i n the same room they could glance around and thereby r e f r e s h t h e i r memory as to the composition o f the group. Nominations were confi n e d to the troop o f which the cadet was a member. 52 S c o r i n g Two main methods of s c o r i n g were employed, A weighting procedure was a p p l i e d i n the f i r s t method to d e r i v e the peer nomination s c o r e s . The h i g h e s t nominee was awarded a plus f i v e and the next plus four and so on through the f i v e h e i g h t s . So a l s o the lowest nominee was assigned a minus f i v e , the next lowest minus f o u r and so on. An a l g e b r a i c t o t a l was then obtained f o r each s u b j e c t . To remove the minus s i g n a constant o f 100 was added t o each i n d i v i d u a l s c o r e . In the second method of s c o r i n g , no .weights were assigned. Each time a nominee r e c e i v e d a vote he was awarded a value of one. Therefore the h i g h e s t nominee r e c e i v e d a value of plus one, the next h i g h e s t , plus ones the lowest nominee was assigned a minus one, the next lowest minus one and so on. Here a l s o an a l g e b r a i c t o t a l was obtained f o r each sub j e c t and a value of 100 was added to each i n d i v i d u a l score to e l i m i n a t e minus v a l u e s . I n s t r u c t o r s i n compiling the f i n a l assessment evaluated cadets on a f i v e point s c a l e -A, B, C, P, P. The f i n a l "F" category was not used by i n s t r u c t o r s i n any of the assessments made, and. i t consequ-e n t l y was omitted f o r t h i s study. The remaining four c a t e g o r i e s were assigned numerical values, with A becoming +4, B +3, C +2 and F +1. C o r r e l a t i o n s of the peer r a t i n g s with the f i n a l assessment were then computed i n numerical form, u s i n g the Pearson Product-Moment method. I t was p r e d i c t e d that the r e s u l t i n g peer r a t i n g , when scored by both methods and c o r r e l a t e d with f i n a l assessment, should d i f f e r v ery l i t t l e i f the two s c o r i n g methods were b a s i c a l l y the same. These c o r r e l a t i o n s were obtained by use of a c a l c u l a t o r and were rechecked once by the i n v e s t i g a t o r . CHAPTER VII PEER RATINGS OP CADETS : RESULTS Peer ratings predicting "Future success as an o f f i c e r " and "Cadet Popularity" were obtained for both F i r s t and Second Phase COTC cadetso Two methods of stating the peer ratings quantitatively were employed, one using weighted values f o r dif f e r e n t peer ranks, the other employing unweighted values. These ratings were correlated with the f i n a l assessment awarded each cadet by instructors. Correlations were com-puted separately by troop and for the t o t a l F i r s t and Second Phases. Table VII, based on the t o t a l F i r s t Phase cadets, records a correlation between weighted and unweighted peer ratings, predicting "future success as an o f f i c e r " and the o v e r a l l assessment given cadets by instructors of .732 and .780, Both correlations are quite high and. tend to support the b e l i e f that peer ratings do predict future success i n o f f i c e r t r a i n i n g . TABLE VII and TABLE VIII Table VIII records a correlation between weighted and unweighted peer ratings for a l l Second Phase cadets and instructor ratings of .546 and .536. Although these values 55 T A B L E V I I COEFFICIENTS OF CORRELATION BETWEEN PEER RATINGS ("SUCCESS AS AN OFFICER") AND FINAL ASSESSMENT (GIVEN CADETS BY INSTRUCTORS), FOR PHASE ONE CADETS TOTAL 4 Troop 5 Troop 6 Troop PHASE 1 Weighted peer r a t i n g s versus I n s t r u c t o r r a t i n g s r = + , 8 6 2 * * r = + . 4 3 7 r = + . 7 8 3 * * r = + „ 7 3 2 * * Unweighted peer r a t i n g s versus I n s t r u c t o r r a t i n g s r=+.899** r = + , 3 8 8 r = - o 8 3 6 * * r = + , 7 8 0 * * Sample S i z e . . . N = 1 4 N = 16 N = 12 N = 43 * P < o 0 5 * * p < . 0 1 T A B L E V I I I COEFFICIENTS OF CORRELATION BETWEEN PEER RATINGS (PREDICTED SUCCESS AS AN OFFICER) AND FINAL ASSESSMENT (GIVEN CADETS BY INSTRUCTORS) FOR PHASE TWO CADETS 2 Troop 3 Troop PHASE^2 Weighted peer r a t i n g s versus I n s t r u c t o r r a t i ng s r=+„639 * * Unweighted peer r a t i n g s versus I n s t r u c t o r r a t i n g s r=+,600** Sample S i z e ... N = 2 5 r = + . 4 5 5 * r=+.546** r=+,49l* r = + . 5 3 6 * * N = 24 N = 49 * p < . 0 5 * * p < . 0 1 56 are considerably lower than those obtained for F i r s t Phase they nevertheless s t i l l indicate a s i g n i f i c a n t relationship between peer ratings and overall assessment. It i s note-worthy that the troops d i f f e r somewhat i n size of c o r r e l -ation with regards to Table VIII and Table IX and Five Troop has noticeably lower correlations between peer ratings "Success as an o f f i c e r " and "Fi n a l assessment". Tables IX and X show the c o e f f i c i e n t s of correlation of peer ratings assessing "Cadet Popularity" with "overall assessment" for F i r s t and Second Phase, TABLE IX and TABLE X Table IX records correlations based on weighted and un-weighted peer rating values of .497 and ,486, The c o r r e l -ations obtained for Second Phase are shown i n Table X where correlations of .222 and ,215 are reported. The correlations f o r F i r s t Phase, although low, do indicate a s i g n i f i c a n t relationship between popularity assessed by peer ratings and "group value" or "popularity" assessed by instructors. The results for Second Phase indicate an absence of such a relationship. The u t i l i z a t i o n of weighted and unweighted peer rating values resulted i n correlations which were very similar and could, for a l l p r a c t i c a l purposes, be considered i d e n t i c a l . The correlation between "popularity" assessed by peer ratings and "popularity" assessed by instructors was i n v e s t i g -ated. Interest here was focussed on whether cadets and 5 7 T A B L E I X COEFFICIENTS OF CORRELATION BETWEEN PEER RATINGS ("LIKE BEST") AND OVERALL ASSESSMENT BY INSTRUCTORS FOR PHASE ONE CADETS TOTAL 4 Troop 5 Troop 6 Troop PHASE 1 Weighted peer r a t i n g s versus I n s t r u c t o r r a t i n g s r = + „ 5 7 2 * r = + o 3 5 0 r = + . 2 1 3 r = + , 4 9 7 * * Unweighted peer r a t i n g s versus I n s t r u c t o r r a t i n g s • r = + . 5 6 8 * r = + , 3 5 9 r = + < , 5 4 5 * r = + „ 4 8 6 * * Sample S i z e ... N = 1 5 N = 1 6 N = 1 3 N = 4 4 * p< o 0 5 ** p < .01 T A B L E X COEFFICIENTS OF CORRELATION BETWEEN PEER RATINGS ("LIKE BEST") AND FINAL ASSESSMENT BY INSTRUCTORS FOR PHASE TWO CADETS 2 Troop 3 Troop TOTAL PHASE 2 Weighted peer r a t i n g s versus I n s t r u c t o r r a t i n g s r=+..200 r=+.225 r=+„222 Unweighted peer r a t i n g s versus I n s t r u c t o r r a t i n g s r=+„190 r=+.250 r=+.215 Sample S i z e ... N = 18 N = 24 N = 42 * p < o 0 5 ** P ^  .01 instructors assess popularity i n the same way. The cor r e l a t -ion of .467 obtained f o r F i r s t Phase i s low but does indicate instructors and F i r s t Phase cadets tend to assess popularity in the same way. The low correlation of ,230 for Second Phase i s not si g n i f i c a n t and suggests that Second Phase cadets may not view popularity i n quite the same manner as t h e i r instructors. Table XI i s a summary showing the correlation between F i r s t and Second Phase f i n a l assessment and (a) peer ratings - "Success as an o f f i c e r " (b) peer ratings - "Like best" (c) instructors' assessment of "popularity and group value" T A B L E X I A perusal of these results indicates correlations f o r F i r s t Phase are consistently higher than those obtained for Second Phase. The greatest discrepancy exists between peer ratings "Like best" and f i n a l assessment. The correlation between instructors' assessment of "popularity and group value" and t h e i r f i n a l assessment i s si g n i f i c a n t (Phase 1, r = ,550, Phase 2, r = -,499). While i t i s recognized that some correlation must be present due to the inclusion of "Popularity and group value" as one of the 13 categories in the ov e r a l l assessment, the size of these c o e f f i c i e n t s would suggest "Popularity and group value" i s not an independent factor and that the molar f i n a l assessment 59 T A B L E X I CORRELATION BETWEEN PINAL ASSESSMENT AND (a) PEER RATINGS ("SUCCESS AS AN OFFICER"), (b) PEER RATINGS ("LIKE BEST"), (c) "POPULARITY AND GROUP VALUE" ASSESSED BY INSTRUCTORS FINAL ASSESSMENT Phase 1 Phase 2 Peer Ratings "success as an o f f i c e r " . . . . .M . r = + . 7 8 0 * * r = + . 5 3 6 * * Peer Ratings " l i k e best" . o . . . . o . . o r = + o 4 8 6 * * r = + . 2 1 5 I n s t r u c t o r s r a t i n g of " p o p u l a r i t y and group v a l u e " . . . . . . . . . . r = + . 5 5 0 * * r = + . 4 9 9 * * * p = < . 0 5 ** p = < . 0 1 60 may be r a t h e r s t r o n g l y influenced by the p o p u l a r i t y or unpop-u l a r i t y of the cadet„ The i n v e s t i g a t o r was al s o i n t e r e s t e d i n determining whether troop o f f i c e r s ' r a t i n g s of the same cadets remained much the same f o r F i r s t and Second Phase, The obtained c o r r e l a t i o n f o r cadets who had completed both F i r s t and Second Phases was .546 (P< .01). This suggests that these r a t i n g s are r e l a t i v e l y stable from year to year on the same cadet. I t i s , however, important to remember that o f f i c e r s w r i t i n g Second Phase reports have a v a i l a b l e the preceding year's assessment and, as a r e s u l t , the assessment made at the end of the second year i s not an independent one. CHAPTER V I I I DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION Comparison of RCSME Personal Q u a l i t i e s with C r i t i c a l  Requirements The Royal Canadian School of Mechanical Engineering at present assesses the personal q u a l i t i e s f o r COTC o f f i c e r cadets i n terms of 13 "Characteristics of a good man" (see Appendix "A" and Appendix "B"). These categories, which are given t r a i t t i t l e s , are regarded as "inner" q u a l i t i e s of the cadet which the r e p o r t -i n g o f f i c e r i s required to i n f e r from h i s observations, using the ra t h e r d e t a i l e d d e f i n i t i o n s of "Personal q u a l i t i e s " made a v a i l a b l e to him i n the "COTC Guide to Troop Commanders" (see Appendix "A"). Although the d e f i n i t i o n s l a y down f i v e point weightings f o r each of the 13 r a t i n g s , i t i s d o u b t f u l i f troop o f f i c e r s often consult the d e f i n i t i o n s while they are assessing each cadet. The very form i n which the weightings are provided makes reference to them inconvenient. Several objections may be put forward to the employment of such l i s t s of categories : (a) I t i s t a c i t l y implied that the l i s t i s complete -that i s that every way i n which a cadet behaves which might have a bearing on h i s success i s represented by one c h a r a c t e r i s t i c or another (b) Many of the 13 c a t e g o r i e s are s p e c i f i e d i n m u l t i p l e terms and the s e v e r a l terms i n some i n s t a n c e s are qu i t e d i f f e r e n t (c) The c a t e g o r i e s now u t i l i z e d are expressed i n the form of t r a i t s or inn e r q u a l i t i e s which must be i n f e r r e d by the r e p o r t i n g o f f i c e r . The meanings of these terms are not n e c e s s a r i l y the same f o r a l l r e p o r t i n g o f f i c e r s , i n s p i t e of t h e i r being l a b e l l e d " s e l f - e v i d e n t " i n the d e f i n i t i o n s (see Appendix "A") To f a c i l i t a t e a comparison of the RCSME Per s o n a l Q u a l i -t i e s " c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of a good man" with the C r i t i c a l Require ments de r i v e d from the present study, Table XII was drawn up. TABLE XII In t h i s t a b l e the 13 c a t e g o r i e s used i n the assessment of o f f i c e r cadets by RCSME were broken down i n t o 23 components considered independent of each other. For example, Categ-ory One - "Obedience, L o y a l t y and I n t e g r i t y " - was broken down i n t o three separate components : (a) obedience, (b) l o y a l t y , (c) i n t e g r i t y . Each C r i t i c a l Requirement was then examined and an attempt made to place i t aga i n s t one of the 23 RCSME component c a t e g o r i e s . Although every care was taken i n matching l i s t s , by c o n s u l t i n g d e t a i l e d d e f i n i t i o n s f o r these c a t e g o r i e s s et down i n Appendix "A", d i f f e r e n t a l l o c a t i o n s could be made i n some i n s t a n c e s . A p e r u s a l of Table XII i n d i c a t e s that there were 11 T A B L E X I I PARALLEL TABULATION OF RCSME ASSESSMENT CATEGORIES AND CRITICAL REQUIREMENTS RCSME ASSESSMENT.CATEGORY CORRESPONDING CRITICAL REQUIREMENT 1. Obedience 30. Complies with rules and orders even i f he disagrees Loyalty i n t e g r i t y 31. Telle the truth and acts honestly 2. Motivation 27. Is "self-propelled" i n carrying out assignments Senae of responsibility 18. Accents f u l l resDonsibilltv f o r a l l assigned tasks R e l i a b i l i t y 17. Checks completeness and correctness of work for which he i s responsible 3. I n i t i a t i v e 9. 10. 14. 15. Thinks up new ideas Puts his ideas into practice Steps i n and takes over when the need arises Takes prompt and effective action i n a dangerous emergency Determlnat ion-perseverance 13. Carries out his duties and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s in the face of opposition 4. Self-confidence Maturity 11. Admits mistakes, accepts c r i t i c i s m and instruction, and prof i t s bv the experience Emotional s t a b i l i t y - coolness under stress 12. 15. Remains calm and retains control under pressure Takes prompt and effective action i n a dangerous emergency 5. A b i l i t y to control men 8. 16. Maintains and increases team performance by encouragement, supervision and own high standards When placed in charge asserts himself and maintains control without being unpleasantly aggressive or i n t e r f e r i n g 6. Knowledge 22. Knows the job to which he i s assigned 7. A b i l i t y to organize tasks (including planning) 1. 20. Plans f l e x i b l y to anticipate problems Delegates r e s p o n s i b i l i t y on the basis of careful matching of men to jobs 8. Intelligence - a b i l i t y to learn 9. Appearance and bearing 4. Maintains a high standard of appearance: demonstrates good personal habits, manners and hygiene 10. Tact - discretion 2. 3. F a c i l i t a t e s co-operation by appreciating the feelings of others Leads t a c t f u l l y : achieves his aim without creating resentment Courtesy 11. Physical stamina and energy 12. A b i l i t y of expression o r a l l y 21. Gives clear and concise instructions, demonstrating where approDriate A b i l i t y of expression i n writing 13. Popularity Group value 25. Organizes and leads recreational a c t i v i t i e s No corresponding RCSME Assessment Category could be found for the following C r i t i c a l Requirements 5. Maintains consistently high standards regardless of conditions 6. Voluntarily assists others i n t h e i r work 7. Obtains the co-operation of the group by accepting help from them 19. Prepared to make s a c r i f i c e s , put s e l f out for others 23. Provides others with needed information to do the job 24. Gives assistance when asked or required without trying to take over 26. Behaves in accordance with recognized rules of conduct for o f f i c e r s 28. Makes suggestions to seniors when i n a position to do so, and when appropriate to do so 29. Does not use rank or position for private advantage or personal convenience 32. Demands no more than he himself i s prepared to give 33. Makes an effort to co-operate with others and to work as a member of a team 6 4 C r i t i c a l Requirements f o r which no corresponding RCSME c a t e g o r i e s could be found. I t would be g e n e r a l l y agreed, however, that these 11 requirements represent important f a c t o r s i n the success of cadets. T h i s i s taken as evidence that the RCSME l i s t i s not complete and there are important areas of cadet performance which i t does not as s e s s . With regard to the second o b j e c t i o n we may take as an example the RCSME category, " M o t i v a t i o n , Sense of r e s p o n s i b i -l i t y , R e l i a b i l i t y " . In Table XII t h i s has been separated i n t o three components which were not considered i d e n t i c a l . C r i t i c a l Requirement 27 - "Is s e l f - p r o p e l l e d i n c a r r y i n g out h i s assignments" - was regarded as r e p r e s e n t i n g the q u a l i t y "motivation", C r i t i c a l Requirement 18 - "Accepts f u l l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r a l l assigned t a s k s " - i s a b e h a v i o u r a l statement o f the q u a l i t y "sense of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y " . C r i t i c a l Requirement 17 - "Checks completeness and c o r r e c t -ness of work f o r which he i s r e s p o n s i b l e " - i s an expre s s i o n of the q u a l i t y " r e l i a b i l i t y " . S i m i l a r examples occur throughout the t a b l e , A c l o s e examination of these p a r a l l e l l i s t s s u b s t a n t i a t e s the c r i t i c i s m that t r a i t s which have been combined i n the RCSME scheme should have been l i s t e d separ-a t e l y . The corresponding C r i t i c a l Requirements, expressed as they are in. b e h a v i o u r a l terms, make t h i s d i f f i c u l t y more evident. With regard to the t h i r d s p e c i f i c c r i t i c i s m , the main point i n support i s that an "inner t r a i t " i s more d i s t a n t l y removed from what r e p o r t i n g o f f i c e r s can observe than i s 65 some kind of behaviour. Here again, Table XII lends support to the c r i t i c i s m by demonstrating that a large number of the characteristics can be expressed i n behavioural terms, f o r example, "Accepts r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r a l l assigned tasks" i s a report of observed behaviour whereas "Sense of Responsibility" i s a quality which must be inferred. It i s believed the C r i t i c a l Requirements isolated i n this study are more extensive and deal with singular independ-ent requirements as opposed to the categories used at RCSME which tend to combine several non-identical requirements. Furthermore, the C r i t i c a l Requirements are stated in behav-io u r a l terms and f o r t h i s reason are d i r e c t l y reportable. Comparison of Instructors and Cadets regarding t h e i r  Contribution of C r i t i c a l Behaviours The rank order of C r i t i c a l Requirements was established in terms of the frequencies f a l l i n g i n each C r i t i c a l Require-ment, A comparison of the instructors and cadets,in terms of the rank order of C r i t i c a l Requirements and the frequencies of incidents for each Requirement, reveal a number of major differences. For 65 instructors 1.52 effective and 2.37 i n e f f e c t i v e incidents per person were contributed. For 127 cadets 1.67 effective and 1,33 i n e f f e c t i v e incidents per person were contributed, A possible explanation of t h i s difference may be that instructors tend to be more negatively c r i t i c a l i n t h e i r observations than cadets and consequently record a greater number of negative behaviours. An examination of Table I I I shows marked d i f f e r e n c e s 66 between i n s t r u c t o r s and cadets at to tbe number of behaviours c o n t r i b u t e d by each group f o r c e r t a i n of the C r i t i c a l Require-ments. The number of C r i t i c a l Behaviours respondents w i l l r e p o r t w i l l depend on, (a) t h e i r opportunity to observe that p a r t i c u l a r area of behaviour, (b) t h e i r s e n s i t i v i t y to that area. For example, area 19 ranked f i r s t f o r cadets and 29 f o r i n s t r u c t o r s would appear to show a d i s p a r i t y and might be accounted f o r by e i t h e r or both reasons given above. S i m i l -a r l y C r i t i c a l Requirement 6,ranked second by cadets and 24th by i n s t r u c t o r s , " V o l u n t a r i l y a s s i s t s others i n t h e i r work", i s q u i t e c l e a r l y behaviour which i n s t r u c t o r s have only l i m i t e d o p p o r t u n i t y t o observe, whereas cadets are able to observe i t d i r e c t l y and are very s e n s i t i v e to i t . I t i s r a t h e r more d i f f i c u l t to f i n d examples i n which the i n s t r u c t o r s r e p o r t e d l a r g e numbers of i n c i d e n t s while the cadets had very few. The o v e r a l l c o n c l u s i o n i s that i n s t r u c t o r s tend to have some-what r e s t r i c t e d o pportunity f o r observation as compared with cadets. These requirements n e v e r t h e l e s s are c r i t i c a l , consequ-e n t l y one should u t i l i z e methods of assessment which i n c l u d e them. The u t i l i z a t i o n of peer r a t i n g s would achieve t h i s end. These r e s u l t s a l s o i n d i c a t e that d i f f e r e n t informants r e p o r t d i f f e r e n t i n c i d e n t s and, t h e r e f o r e , i n order to d e r i v e a complete l i s t of C r i t i c a l Requirements i t i s e s s e n t i a l that 6 7 each group c o n t r i b u t e c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t s . One might be tempted to weight C r i t i c a l Requirements on the b a s i s of the o v e r a l l f r e q u e n c i e s o f the behaviours rep o r t e d f o r each. However, t h i s could be most m i s l e a d i n g ; although C r i t i c a l Requirements may be comprized of few fr e q u e n c i e s , t h i s does not n e c e s s a r i l y make them l e s s import-ant. These may merely be Requirements which are s u b j e c t e d to minor v a r i a b i l i t y i n performance among job p a r t i c i p a n t s and, although they are e s s e n t i a l p arts o f the t o t a l job, the manner of performing these v a r i e s so l i t t l e t h a t they are not a source of judgments re g a r d i n g i n c i d e n t s of e f f e c t i v e n e s s . Furthermore, some C r i t i c a l Requirements that are i n f a c t v ery important may be i n f r e q u e n t l y represented, because they do not occur very o f t e n . Because of these l i m i t a t i o n s some other weighting proced-ure must be adopted, Preston (22), i n v e s t i g a t i n g procedures f o r e v a l u a t i n g o f f i c e r s i n the United S t a t e s A i r Force, had the C r i t i c a l Requirements ranked i n r e l a t i v e importance by the same people who i n i t i a l l y c o n t r i b u t e d the i n c i d e n t s . T h i s method produced a c c e p t a b l e r e s u l t s and might w e l l be ' adopted to weight the C r i t i c a l Requirements i s o l a t e d i n t h i s study. O r i g i n of In c i d e n t s An examination of Table V i n d i c a t e s the g r e a t e s t p r o p o r t i o n of i n c i d e n t s (36) c o n t r i b u t e d occurred i n the t r a i n i n g area. T h i s suggests t h a t the t r a i n i n g a r e a i s one which must be regarded as t h a t most l i k e l y to a f f o r d an 68 o p p o r t u n i t y f o r assessment. I t i s a l s o i n t e r e s t i n g t h at i n s t r u c t o r s and cadets c o n t r i b u t e d approximately the same percentage of i n c i d e n t s ( 3 9 . 3 % and 3 9 . 1 % ) from t h i s area. Of f u r t h e r i n t e r e s t are the percentages of i n c i d e n t s that are drawn from the barracks and from classroom s e t t i n g s . A t o t a l of 5.8$ of the i n c i d e n t s c o n t r i b u t e d by i n s t r u c t o r s o r i g i n a t e d i n the barracks while 1 3.5$ of cadet i n c i d e n t s o r i g i n a t e d i n t h i s s e t t i n g . So a l s o 6.6$ of the i n c i d e n t s c o n t r i b u t e d by i n s t r u c t o r s occurred i n the classroom while 3 . 7 $ of cadet i n c i d e n t s o r i g i n a t e d here. These r e s u l t s suggest that i n s t r u c t o r s and cadets d i d not have the same oppor t u n i t y to observe cadet behaviours i n these s e t t i n g s . The u t i l i z a t i o n of peer r a t i n g s once again would tend t o a s s i s t troop o f f i c e r s i n overcoming t h i s d e f i c i e n c y . I t i s f u r t h e r noted that 4.5% of i n s t r u c t o r i n c i d e n t s o r i g i n -ated o f f camp whereas only 2.5$ of cadet i n c i d e n t s took place away from camp. One would have expected cadets to have c o n t r i b u t e d a h i g h e r percentage than i n s t r u c t o r s i n t h i s area. The r e s u l t s would l e a d one to conclude t h a t i n s t r u c t o r s place a g r e a t e r emphasis on cadet behaviour away from camp than cadets do. Recency of I n c i d e n t s A d i r e c t comparison of the recency of i n c i d e n t s by i n s t r u c t o r s and cadets i s not very meaningful because they were not c o l l e c t e d at the same time. However, s i n c e h a l f the i n c i d e n t s c o n t r i b u t e d by cadets occurred w i t h i n one month and a l l w i t h i n three months, one can, on the b a s i s of previous 69 s t u d i e s which i n d i c a t e v a l i d i t y i s h i g h e r i n the more recent c o l l e c t i o n of i n c i d e n t s , have c o n s i d e r a b l e confidence i n those i n c i d e n t s c o l l e c t e d from cadets. The circumstances of c o l l e c -t i o n of some i n s t r u c t o r i n c i d e n t s , three months a f t e r comple-t i o n of the t r a i n i n g - p e r i o d , v i r t u a l l y f o r c e d them to r e c a l l i n c i d e n t s between three and s i x months. As a r e s u l t of t h i s d e l a y there i s some p o s s i b i l i t y that the i n s t r u c t o r i n c i d e n t s show some d i s t o r t i o n . Weighted versus Unweighted S c o r i n g of Peer Ratings The c o e f f i c i e n t s o f c o r r e l a t i o n of peer r a t i n g s , p r e d i c t -i n g f u t u r e success as an o f f i c e r , with f i n a l assessment given F i r s t and Second Phase cadet3 by i n s t r u c t o r s , were c a l c u l a t e d on weighted and unweighted peer r a t i n g s c o r e s . The same pro-cedure was followed i n measuring c o r r e l a t i o n of peer r a t i n g s of F i r s t and Second Phase p o p u l a r i t y with f i n a l assessment. With one exception, only minor d i s c r e p a n c i e s were recorded. One can conclude, t h e r e f o r e , that e i t h e r method might be employed with equal e f f i c i e n c y to o b t a i n peer r a t i n g scores,. However, the unweighted s c o r i n g method r e q u i r e s fewer c a l c u l -a t i o n s and i s much l e s s time-consuming. For these p r a c t i c a l reasons i t would appear to be the more a p p r o p r i a t e method to employ. The f o l l o w i n g d i s c u s s i o n has adopted t h i s framework. The most c r u c i a l t e s t of s u i t a b i l i t y of peer r a t i n g s i n t h i s s i t u a t i o n i s the degree to which they c o r r e l a t e with o v e r a l l o f f i c e r assessment. The c o r r e l a t i o n between " f u t u r e success as an o f f i c e r " with troop o f f i c e r s ' f i n a l assessment f o r F i r s t Phase cadets i s s i g n i f i c a n t as i n d i c a t e d by a 70 c o r r e l a t i o n of .732. The c o r r e l a t i o n s f o r Second Phase are s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t but are not as h i g h as those obtained f o r F i r s t Phase. A study c a r r i e d out by H o l l a n d e r (22) i n d i c a t e s that c o r r e l a t i o n s tend to become high e r as the l i f e span of the group i n c r e a s e s . In the l i g h t of H o l l a n d e r ' s f i n d i n g s , the r e s u l t s obtained i n t h i s study are somewhat s u r p r i z i n g i n t h a t the reverse i s i n d i c a t e d . No p a r t i c u l a r e v a l u a t i o n of t h i s r e v e r s a l can be suggested. I t i s of s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t that the c o r r e l a t i o n f o r F i v e Troop, shown i n Table VII, f a i l s to meet the c r i t e r i o n f o r s i g n i f i c a n c e . In view of previous s t u d i e s (26, 27, 42), which tend to support the p r e d i c t i o n s of peer r a t i n g s , t o gether with the f a c t that the other two. troops i n F i r s t Phase show a high c o r r e l a t i o n , i t would appear reasonable to suggest that o f f i c e r s who made the assessment i n t h i s troop were not employing the same c r i t e r i a as those a s s e s s i n g cadets i n the other four t r o o p s . The s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s between peer r a t i n g s and o v e r a l l assessment, both i n F i r s t and Second Phase cadets, provides j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r the use of peer r a t i n g s i n t h i s m i l i t a r y s e t t i n g . Peer r a t i n g s c o u l d , t h e r e f o r e , be used as an independent measure o f o f f i c e r cadet p o t e n t i a l . They a l s o have the added advantage of being a v a i l a b l e e a r l y i n t r a i n i n g . According to s t u d i e s by H o l l a n d e r (21, 24) peer r a t i n g s scored a t the end of the t h i r d week of t r a i n i n g c o r r e l a t e d a t a high l e v e l with those secured from the same 71 group at the end of the s i x t h week. An e a r l y knowledge of cadet p o t e n t i a l would be of c o n s i d e r a b l e value e s p e c i a l l y i n determining p o t e n t i a l f a i l u r e s which i f detected e a r l y i n t r a i n i n g might be averted. Peer Rating "Like best" versus Assessment of " P o p u l a r i t y  and group value" The peer r a t i n g " l i k e best" may be considered as the cadets' e v a l u a t i o n of t h e i r f e l l o w s . The c o r r e l a t i o n between p o p u l a r i t y assessed by i n s t r u c t o r s f o r F i r s t Phase cadets i s s i g n i f i c a n t and suggest t h a t i n s t r u c t o r s and F i r s t Phase cadets tend to view and assess p o p u l a r i t y i n a s i m i l a r manner. However the much lower c o r r e l a t i o n s f o r Second Phase cadets i n d i c a t e that i n s t r u c t o r s and Second Phase cadets are a s s e s s -i n g d i f f e r e n t aspects of p o p u l a r i t y . These r e s u l t s f u r t h e r suggest that " p o p u l a r i t y " f o r F i r s t and Second Phase i s not i d e n t i c a l and must subsequently be assessed d i f f e r e n t l y . C o r r e l a t i o n s between peer r a t i n g s of cadet p o p u l a r i t y and f i n a l assessment f o r F i r s t Phase cadets was low (r=,486) but s i g n i f i c a n t . This c o r r e l a t i o n i s c o n s i d e r a b l y lower than the c o r r e l a t i o n obtained f o r peer r a t i n g s p r e d i c t i n g f u t u r e success as an o f f i c e r with f i n a l assessment where a c o r r e l a t i o n of ,780 was obtained. For the Second Phase cadets l i t t l e c o r r e l a t i o n was shown. However the c o r r e l a t -i o n of peer r a t i n g s , p r e d i c t i n g success as an o f f i c e r with " f i n a l assessment",for Second Phase was s i g n i f i c a n t . These r e s u l t s were i n accordance with those of H o l l a n d e r (23) that f r i e n d s h i p does not operate as a b i a s i n g f a c t o r i n v a l i d a t i n g peer r a t i n g s . Although popular-i t y tends to have a weight i n peer r a t i n g s , t h i s f a i l s to a l t e r b a s i c p r e d i c t i o n s , A comparison of F i r s t and Second Phase c o r r e l a t i o n s of peer r a t i n g s of cadet p o p u l a r i t y with f i n a l assessment, suggests that Second Phase cadets are i n f l u e n c e d by p o p u l a r i t y to a l e s s e r degree than are F i r s t Phase cadets. Although F i r s t Phase cadets are i n f l u e n c e d by p o p u l a r i t y , i t would appear that they are b e t t e r able to d i f f e r e n t i a t e between p o p u l a r i t y and l e a d e r s h i p a b i l i t y . Perhaps a f t e r a l o n g e r perio d of a s s o c i a t i o n with one another i n the group i t i s more d i f f i c u l t to be o b j e c t i v e i n r a t i n g one's f r i e n d s . The c o r r e l a t i o n s between p o p u l a r i t y assessed by i n s t r u c -t o r s and f i n a l grading awarded by i n s t r u c t o r s f o r F i r s t and Second Phase although not hig h were s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t . I n s t r u c t o r s should probably be made aware of t h i s f a c t i n order t h a t , i n t h e i r f i n a l assessment of a cadet, h i s p o p u l a r i t y i s not allowed to weight unduly h i s f i n a l a s s e s s -ment . C o r r e l a t i o n between F i r s t Phase F i n a l Assessment and Second  Phase F i n a l Assessment f o r the Same Subjects T h i s c o r r e l a t i o n was .546 and suggests that the gr a d i n g obtained by the cadets does not f l u c t u a t e g r e a t l y from year to year. There appear t o be c e r t a i n advantages to the use of peer r a t i n g s i n the RCSME s e t t i n g : ( l ) S i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s are shown with o v e r a l l assessment (2) There i s evidence from the c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t study that s i g n i f i c a n t f a c t o r s i n cadet per-formance not r e a d i l y a c c e s s i b l e to troop o f f i c e r s can be observed by the cadets themselves. Peer r a t i n g s would be a means whereby assessment of these f a c t o r s by cadets might be made to augment assessments by i n s t r u c t o r s , (3) These r a t i n g s of cadets can be r e a d i l y obtained e a r l y i n t h e i r summer t r a i n i n g p e r i o d r a t h e r than a f t e r the completion o f the t r a i n i n g p e r i o d . Summary The Royal Canadian School of Mechanical Engineering at Camp.Chilliwack, B r i t i s h Columbia, assesses o f f i c e r cadets on a f i v e p o i n t r a t i n g s c a l e i n terms of 13 q u a l i t i e s which are considered by RCSME to be c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of a "good man". This research was undertaken f o r the purpose of c r i t i c -a l l y examining t h i s assessment method t o suggest p o s s i b l e improvements to i t . The assessment method was examined i n two ways : ( l ) By c a r r y i n g out a job a n a l y s i s by means of the c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t technique to d e r i v e C r i t i c a l Requirements f o r COTC cadets and use these as a b a s i s f o r judging whether or not the c r i t e r i a 74 of assessment at present i n use are well formulated (2) By obtaining peer ratings by the cadets them-selves to serve as a basis f o r examining the v a l i d i t y of assessments that have been made by the existing procedures. The c r i t i c a l incident technique as outlined by Flanagan was used to obtain incidents from the entire cadet population (n= 127) and from the instructors (n=65) who were currently involved with or who were familiar with COTC tra i n i n g . Five hundred and seventy-eight c r i t i c a l incidents, y i e l d i n g 633 c r i t i c a l behaviours^ were obtained and c l a s s i f i e d into 33 C r i t i c a l Requirements, There were three major differences between cadets and instructors i n the incidents collected : (a) the rank orders of incidents showed marked differences for a few C r i t i c a l Requirements but in general considerable s i m i l a r i t y existed; (b) the number of incidents collected from certain locations d i f f e r e d and (c) a disproportionately large number of i n e f f e c t -ive incidents were contributed by instructors, A detailed comparison was made between the C r i t i c a l Requirements isolated i n t h i s study and the categories employed at the RCSME i n the assessment of cadets. There were 11 C r i t i c a l Requirements f o r which no corresponding RCSME categ-o r i e s e x i s t e d . Three main o b j e c t i o n s to the RCSME c a t e g o r i e s were r a i s e d : (a) the l i s t of c a t e g o r i e s was not s u f f i c i e n t l y complete; (b) many of the 13 c a t e g o r i e s are s p e c i f i e d i n terms of m u l t i p l e t r a i t s which are not i d e n t i c a l ; (c) the c a t e g o r i e s are expressed i n the form of t r a i t s which must be i n f e r r e d by the observer. Peer r a t i n g s were obtained f o r the e n t i r e cadet popul-a t i o n . These p r e d i c t e d f u t u r e o f f i c e r performance without being unduly a f f e c t e d by p o p u l a r i t y . The peer r a t i n g s of F i r s t Phase cadets were found to be more accurate than those of Second Phase cadets. Peer r a t i n g s were scored by weighted and unweighted s c o r i n g techniques. Both methods y i e l d e d almost i d e n t i c a l r e s u l t s . The unweighted s c o r i n g technique, however, r e q u i r e s fewer c a l c u l a t i o n s and i s l e s s time consuming. For these p r a c t i c a l reasons i t was considered the d e s i r a b l e method. The r e s u l t s of t h i s study i n d i c a t e t h a t peer r a t i n g s can be used as an independent measure of o f f i c e r cadet perform-ance . From these f i n d i n g s two improvement procedures are 76 suggested. . F i r s t , that the C r i t i c a l Requirements i s o l a t e d i n t h i s study be used as a b a s i s f o r assessment i n the form of a check l i s t or other device and, second, that the employ-ment of peer r a t i n g s be i n c o r p o r a t e d as one of the components of the assessment method. 77 BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. American Institute f o r Research, The development of job analysis procedures. Research Notes, American Institute f o r Research, Pittsburgh, No. 2, June 1949. American Institute for Research, The development of a procedure for evaluating o f f i c e r s i n the United States A i r Force. Research Notes, American Institute for Research, Pittsburgh, No. 3, June 1949. American Institute f o r Research, Measuring proficiency: a standard f l i g h t check. Research'Notes. American Institute for Research, Pittsburgh, No. 12, October 1950. American Institute for Research, The development of  tests of aptitude and proficiency. Pittsburgh, American Institute for Research, June 1951. Anderhatter, 0, F„, Wilkins, W, L. and Ribby, Marilyn K. Peer ratings: Relationship between o f f i c e r and peer-candidate predictions of effectiveness' as a company grade o f f i c e r i n the U. S. Marine Corps and the a b i l i t y to predict estimated o f f i c e r s effectiveness of peer. Technical Report. November 30, 1952. No. 2. Baier, D. B. Selection and evaluation of West Point cadets, Amer. Psychol.. 1947, 2, 325-326. Bayroff, A, G,, Haggerty, Helen R. A study of o f f i c e r rating methodology, P. R. B. Research Report. No. 910, Bitner, R. Developing an employee merit rating procedure. In Dooher, M, I. and. Marguis, Vivienne (Eds), Rating  employee and supervisory performance. New York, American Management Association, 1950, 20-34. Browning, Rufus C , Campbell, Noel T., Birnbaum, A, H,, Haggerty, Helen R. and Schneider, Dorothy E. A study of o f f i c e r r a t i n g methodology: Effect of selected rater c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s on v a l i d i t y of ratings. P. R. 3. Report, No. 909. De Vries, A. Training of re a l estate salesmen. Unpublished master's thesis. University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1957, 78 11. P i n k i e , R, B. A study of the c r i t i c a l requirements of foremanship. Univ. of P i t t s b u r g h B u l l . , 1950, 46, 291-297. 12. P i t t s , P. M. and Jones, R. E, P s y c h o l o g i c a l aspects of instrument d i s p l a y : a n a l y s i s of 270 " p i l o t e r r o r " .experiments i n reading and i n t e r p r e t i n g a i r c r a f t  instruments. U. S, A i r Force, A i r M a t e r i a l Command, Wright-Patterson A i r Force Base, 1947, 13. Flanagan, J , C, C r i t i c a l requirements f o r r e s e a r c h personnel. P i t t s b u r g h , American I n s t i t u t e f o r Research, March 1949. 14. Flanagan, J . C. The c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t technique, P s y c h o l . B u l l . . 51, 1954, 327-358. 15. Flanagan, J . C. The c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t technique i n the study of i n d i v i d u a l s , , In Modern e d u c a t i o n a l  problems: Report of the Seventh E d u c a t i o n a l Confer-ence . New York, 1952, 16. Flanagan, J , C , M i l l e r , R. B,, Burns, R. K., Hendrix, A. A., Stewart, B,, Preston, H. 0. and West, E. D. The performance r e c o r d f o r h o u r l y employees. Chicago, Science Research A s s o c i a t e s , 1953. 17. Glickman, A, S, and V a l l a n c e , T, R, An e x p l o r a t o r y study of the a p p l i c a b i l i t y . o f the c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t techniques to the assessment of c u r r i c u l a r f o r o f f i c e r . c a n d i d a t e t r a i n i n g . Research Notes, American I n s t i t u t e f o r Research, P i t t s b u r g h , No. 26, October 1955. 18. Gordon, T. The development of a method'of e v a l u a t i n g f l y i n g . s k i l l . J . Personnel P s y c h o l . . 1950, 3, 71-84. 19. Gordon, T. The development of a standard f l i g h t - c h e c k f o r the a i r l i n e t r a n s p o r t r a t i n g board on the c r i t i c a l  requirement's of the a i r l i n e p i l o t ' s .job. Washington, C i v i l A eronautics A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , 1949. 20. H o l l a n d e r , E. P. Buddy r a t i n g s : m i l i t a r y r esearch and i n d u s t r i a l i m p l i c a t i o n s , J . Personnel P s y c h o l . , 1954, 2, 335-393. 21. H o l l a n d e r , E, P. Conditions a f f e c t i n g the m i l i t a r y u t i l i z a t i o n of peer r a t i n g s : the Newport Study I, Navy T e c h n i c a l Report. January 1956, 22. Hollander, E, P. Conditions a f f e c t i n g the m i l i t a r y u t i l i z a t i o n of peer r a t i n g s : the Newport Study I I , Navy T e c h n i c a l Report, February 1956, 79 23. Hollander, E, P. Conditions a f f e c t i n g the m i l i t a r y , u t i l i z a t i o n of peer r a t i n g s : the Newport Study I I I . Navy T e c h n i c a l Report. A p r i l 1956, 24. Hollander, E. P. C o n d i t i o n s a f f e c t i n g the m i l i t a r y u t i l i z a t i o n o f peer r a t i n g s s the Newport Study P i n a l Report. Navy T e c h n i c a l Report. May 1956. 25. H o l l a n d e r , E, P. Peer nominations on l e a d e r s h i p as a p r e d i c t i o n of the p a s s - f a i l c r i t e r i o n i n n a v a l a i r t r a i n i n g . J . Appl. Psychol... 1954« 38, 150-153. 26. Kareher, E.K., J r . , Winer, B. J , , F a l k , G l o r i a H. and Haggerty, Helen R, A study o f o f f i c e r r a t i n g methodology V ; v a l i d i t y and r e l i a b i l i t y o f r a t i n g s by s i n g l e and m u l t i p l e f a c t o r s . P, R. S. Report, No, 904, 27. Krumm, R. L, C r i t i c a l requirements of p i l o t i n s t r u c t o r s . Human Resources Research Centre, l a c k l a n d A i r Force Base, San Antonio, September 1952, 28. McLure, G, E,, Tupes, E, C, and D a i l e y , L, T, Research on c r i t e r i a of o f f i c e r e f f e c t i v e n e s s , H. R. R. C. Research B u l l . , Lackland A i r Force Base, San Antonio,' August 1951. • 29. M i l l e r , N. E.' P s y c h o l o g i c a l r e s e a r c h on p i l o t t r a i n i n g . Washington, U, 3. Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1947. 30. M i l l e r , R, B, and Flanagan, J , 0. The performance re c o r d : an o b j e c t i v e merit r a t i n g procedure f o r i n d u s t r y . Amer. P s y c h o l . . 1950, 5, 331-332. 31. Myers, C, S. S e l e c t i o n of army personnel. Lancet, 1942, 243, 591-592. 32. Nagay, J . A. The development of a procedure f o r evalua-t i n g the p r o f i c i e n c y of a i r route t r a f f i c c o n t r o l l e r s . Washington, C i v i l A eronautics A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , 1949. 33. Nevins, C h a r l o t t e I, An a n a l y s i s of reasons f o r the success or f a i l u r e of bookkeepers i n s a l e s companies. Unpublished master's t h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y of P i t t s b u r g h , 1949. 34. O l d f i e l d , R, C, The psychology of the i n t e r v i e w . London, Methuen, 1941. 35. Preston, H. 0, Improved method of observing o f f i c e r e f f e c t i v e n e s s . .Human Resources Research L a b o r a t o r i e s , Headquarters Command, U. S. A. F,, B o i l i n g A i r Force Base, J u l y 1951. 80 36. Preston, H, 0. The development of a procedure f o r evaluating o f f i c e r s i n the United. States A i r Force. Pittsburgh, American Institute f o r Research, July 1948. 37o R i c c i n t , H . N. and French, J. W. Development of personality tests for naval o f f i c e r selection I Analysis of U , S , naval academy c r i t e r i o n of aptitude for service. Tech. Rep. No. 1, E. T, S, Princeton, 1944. 38. Smit, JoAnne. A study of the c r i t i c a l requirements for instructors of general psychology courses. Univ. of  Pittsburgh B u l l . . 1952, 48, 279-284. 39. Smith, R. G. and Standohar, F„ T. C r i t i c a l requirements of basic t r a i n i n g t a c t i c a l instructors. A i r Force Personnel and Training Research Centre, Lackland A i r Force Base, San Antonio, 1954. 40. Stoyva, M. S. C r i t i c a l requirements of a trolley-bus operator's job. Unpublished master's thesis. University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1956. 41. Suci, G. J. and Vallance, T, R, An analysis of peer ratings I I : t h e i r v a l i d i t y as predictors of m i l i t a r y aptitude and other measures i n the naval o f f i c e r candidate school. Tech. B u l l . No. 54. Divi s i o n of Personnel Analysis, Bureau of Naval Personnel, October 1954. 42. Suci, G„ J. and Vallance, T. R. The v a l i d i t y of several non-cognitive tests as predictors of certain naval o f f i c e r candidate school c r i t e r i a . Tech. B u l l . No. 55. Division of Personnel Analysis, Bureau of Naval Personnel, October 1954. 43. Suci, G. J., Vallance, T„ R. and Glickman, A. 3. The assessment of r e l i a b i l i t y of several question forms  and techniques used at the naval o f f i c e r candidate school. Pittsburgh, American Institute for Research, 1951. 44. U, S . War Department, Personnel c l a s s i f i c a t i o n test. Washington, U. S. Government Printing Office, 1946. 45. Vallance, T. R,, Glickman, A. S a and Vasilas, J, N, C r i t i c a l incidents i n junior o f f i c e r duty aboard  destroyer-type vessels. Pittsburgh, American Institute for Research, 1948. 81 46o V a l l a n c e , T. R., Glickman, A„ S. and V a s i l a s , J , N. C r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t s i n .junior o f f i c e r d u t i e s aboard  destroyer-type v e s s e l s . P i t t s b u r g h , American I n s t i t u t e f o r Research, 1949» 47. Wagner, R. P. A group s i t u a t i o n compared with i n d i v i d u a l i n t e r v i e w s f o r s e c u r i n g personnel i n f o r m a t i o n , J . Personnel P s y c h o l . . 1948, 2, 93-107. 48. Wagner, R. P. A study of the c r i t i c a l requirements f o r d e n t i s t s . Univ. of P i t t s b u r g h B u l l . . 1950, 46, 331-339. 49. Wagner, R. P. Using c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t s to determine the s e l e c t i o n of t e s t weights. P i t t s b u r g h , American I n s t i t u t e f o r Research, January 1950, 50. W e i s l o g e l , Mary H, The development of a t e s t f o r s e l e c t i n g r e s e a r c h personnel. Report sponsored by O f f i c e of Naval Research. P i t t s b u r g h , American I n s t i t u t e f o r Research, January 1950. 51. Weislogel, R. L, C r i t i c a l requirements f o r l i f e insurance agency heads. U n i v e r s i t y of P i t t s b u r g h B u l l , , 1952, 48, 300-305, 52. Wherry, R, J . and F r y e r , D. H. Buddy r a t i n g s : popul-a r i t y contest or l e a d e r s h i p c r i t e r i a , J . Personnel  P s y c h o l , . 1948, 2, 147-159. 53. Wickert, F. P s y c h o l o g i c a l research on the problems of r e d i s t r i b u t i o n . ' Washington, U, S. Government P r i n t i n g . O f f i c e , 1947. 54. W i l l i a m s , 3. B. and L e a v i t t , H. J , Methods of s e l e c t i n g Marine Corps o f f i c e r c andidates. In K e l l y , G, A, (Ed.) New methods i n applied: psychology. C o l l e g e Park, Md,, U n i v e r s i t y of Maryland, 1947, 96-99. 82 APPENDIX "A T h i s appendix contains the "personal q u a l i t y d e f i n -i t i o n s " reproduced from the "COTC Guide to Troop Commanders" which i s i n the hands of every troop o f f i c e r to a s s i s t him i n making assessments. The d e f i n i t i o n s set f o r t h i n some d e t a i l each of the 13 c a t e g o r i e s used by RCSME i n the assessment of o f f i c e r cadets. A guide i s a l s o provided to the c o r r e c t weighting of each of these c a t e g o r i e s . The weights +2, +1, 0, -1, -2, correspond to the s c o r i n g c a t e g o r i e s A B C P P i n the COTC Troop O f f i c e r ' s r e p o r t i n Appendix "B". 8 3 PERSONAL QUALITY DEFINITIONS OBEDIENCE. LOYALTY AND INTEGRITY 1, When a s s e s s i n g these q u a l i t i e s t r y to assess the o f f i c e r cadet's a t t i t u d e towards orders, does, he obey them with a sense of duty or merely because " i t has to be done"? T r y to c o n s i d e r l o y a l t y with respect to h i s troop and f e l l o w cadets as w e l l as to h i s s u p e r i o r s . When a s s e s s i n g i n t e g r i t y t r y to determine whether the o f f i c e r cadet i s i n f a c t genuine or i s he merely p u t t i n g on an act f o r your b e n e f i t . The gradings are as followss (a) H i s l o y a l t y and i n t e g r i t y towards h i s s u p e r i o r s and h i s contemporaries are of the hig h e s t order. He c a r r i e s out the orders of h i s s u p e r i o r s promptly and a c c u r a t e l y +2 (b) He i s an o f f i c e r cadet who shows a g r e a t e r sense of l o y a l t y and i n t e g r i t y than most and c a r r i e s out orders i n an e f f i c i e n t manner +1 (c) He i s a w i l l i n g o f f i c e r cadet who obeys orders without q u e s t i o n 0 (d) There are times when he appears to be r e l u c t a n t to obey orders OR he'has been known to express opinions which cast a doubt on h i s l o y a l t y or I n t e g r i t y (e) He i s r e l u c t a n t to c a r r y out orders and shows h i s d i s l o y a l t y or l a c k of i n t e g r i t y i n a p o s i t i v e way -2 MOTIVATION. SENSE OF RESPONSIBILITY. RELIABILITY 2, Under t h i s heading you should attempt to determine whether or not the o f f i c e r cadet has a genuine motive behind h i s a c t i o n s o r i s h i s only motive "to impress h i s assessors"? 84 With regard to sense of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and r e l i a b i l i t y does he show i n a p o s i t i v e way that he i s capable of independent e f f o r t without constant s u p e r v i s i o n ? The gradings are as f o l l o w s : (a) He has proved that he can be r e l i e d upon to c a r r y out a task without s u p e r v i s i o n and he has a sense of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y which ensures t h a t the task i s completed to the best of h i s a b i l i t y +2 (b) He shows a w e l l developed sense of respons-i b i l i t y and can be r e l i e d upon to c a r r y out a task s a t i s f a c t o r i l y +1 (c) He i s a r e l i a b l e o f f i c e r cadet with a sense of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y 0 (d) He cannot be r e l i e d upon to c a r r y out a task s a t i s f a c t o r i l y OR h i s sense of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y i s weak and he r e q u i r e s s u p e r v i s i o n t o ensure that he completes a task s a t i s f a c t o r i l y -1 (e) He i s i r r e s p o n s i b l e and cannot be r e l i e d upon to produce the standard of work of which he i s capable unless he i s under constant s u p e r v i s i o n - 2 INITIATIVE. DETERMINATION AND PERSEVERANCE 3 . The above q u a l i t i e s are s e l f - e x p l a n a t o r y . However i n making your assessment you should r e l a t e i t to some a c t i o n s which have shown, i n a p o s i t i v e way, t h a t the o f f i c e r cadet e i t h e r possesses or l a c k s these q u a l i t i e s . The gradings are as f o l l o w s : (a) He i s the type of o f f i c e r cadet who i s f i r s t to take c o n t r o l when others h e s i t a t e and he i s capable of s u s t a i n e d e f f o r t i n s p i t e of d i f f i c u l t i e s +2 85 (b) He o f t e n takes c o n t r o l where others merely stand by and watch. He,is not e a s i l y d i s -couraged +1 (c) He d i s p l a y s i n i t i a t i v e and makes reason-able e f f o r t s to complete any task 0 (d) He does not show any of the above q u a l i t i e s i n a p o s i t i v e way -1 (e) He l a c k s determination and when faced with d i f f i c u l t i e s he p r e f e r s to allow others t o . take the l e a d -2 SELF-CONFIDENCE. MATURITY, COOLNESS UNDER STRESS. EMOTIONAL  STABILITY 4. When c o n s i d e r i n g the above q u a l i t i e s the f o l l o w i n g p o i n t s should be noteds S e l f confidence must be founded on knowledge and must NOT be a mere d i s p l a y of showmanship M a t u r i t y should be r e l a t e d to the o f f i c e r cadet's age and stage of t r a i n i n g The cadet's a t t i t u d e to c r i t i c i s m and advice i s a good guide to h i s maturity and emotional s t a b i l i t y The gradings are as f o l l o w s : (a) He i s a mature and emotionally w e l l balanced o f f i c e r cadet who d i s p l a y s p l e n t y of s e l f confidence. He does not become unduly d i s -turbed when things go wrong +2 (b) He i s s e l f c o n f i d e n t and mature f o r h i s age. H i s s t a b i l i t y and coolness under s t r e s s should improve with f u r t h e r experience +1 86 (c) He i s a s e l f c o n f i d e n t o f f i c e r cadet with a reasonable amount of common sense 0 (d) He l a c k s common sense and i s apt to become unduly worried when d i f f i c u l t i e s a r i s e or mistakes occur -1 (e) He i s immature and l a c k s s e l f - c o n f i d e n c e or when faced with d i f f i c u l t i e s he c o l l a p s e s as a l e a d e r -2 ABILITY TO CONTROL MEN 5 . Under t h i s heading you are merely a s s e s s i n g the o f f i c e r cadet's a b i l i t y to c o n t r o l other men and to get the best out of them. You are not a s s e s s i n g h i s a b i l i t y to organize work i n the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e sense„ The gradings are as f o l l o w s ; (a) He i s an o f f i c e r cadet who has no d i f f i c u l t y i n i n s p i r i n g others and g e t t i n g them to con-form to h i s wishes. He i s able to get the best out of others by l e a d i n g r a t h e r than d r i v i n g +2 (b) Whilst he i s very capable of c o n t r o l l i n g other men be i s NOT a "born l e a d e r " and he l a c k s that l i t t l e i n s p i r a t i o n which would make him outstanding i n t h i s r e s p e c t +1 (c) When i n charge of a task he i s able to c o n t r o l those working under him 0 (d) He experiences d i f f i c u l t y i n c o n t r o l l i n g men to the extent that he p e r i o d i c a l l y l o s e s c o n t r o l -1 (e) He i s unable to c o n t r o l men. When he i s i n charge of a task others tend to take over c o n t r o l and there i s a r e s u l t a n t muddle -2 87 KNOWLEDGE (INCLUDING DEGREE OF TACTICAL ABILITY) 6, Under t h i s heading you are a s s e s s i n g the knowledge which the o f f i c e r cadet has proved he possesses by the r e s u l t s of t e s t s and examinations or by a p p l y i n g the knowledge to h i s other work. You are NOT a s s e s s i n g h i s a b i l i t y t o l e a r n ( i , e , h i s p o t e n t i a l knowledge). The assessment of h i s t a c t i c a l a b i l i t y should a l s o be based on the cadet's performance dur i n g p r a c t i c a l e x e r c i s e s . The gradings are as f o l l o w s : (a) He has a v e r y sound a l l round knowledge and d i s p l a y s sound judgment i n the a p p r e c i a t i o n of t a c t i c a l s i t u a t i o n s +2 (b) H i s knowledge i s w e l l up to the standard r e q u i r e d and he i s quick to a p p r e c i a t e a t a c t i c a l s i t u a t i o n +1 (c) He possesses the necessary knowledge r e q u i r e d of an o f f i c e r cadet at t h i s stage of t r a i n i n g and d i s p l a y s common sense i n a p p l y i n g t a c t i c a l p r i n c i p l e s 0 (d) H i s knowledge i s NOT up to the standard r e q u i r e d and he has d i f f i c u l t y i n apprec-i a t i n g t a c t i c a l problems -1 (e) H i s knowledge i s f a r below the standard r e q u i r e d and he d i s p l a y s a marked l a c k of t a c t i c a l a b i l i t y -2 ABILITY TO ORGANIZE TASKS 7 . Under t h i s heading you are a s s e s s i n g the o f f i c e r cadet's a b i l i t y to organize a task or make a p l a n . His a b i l i t y to c a r r y out that plan should NOT be considered under t h i s heading. The gradings are as follows? (a) He i s a good o r g a n i z e r and a c l e a r t h i n k e r who i s quick to a p p r e c i a t e what i s i n v o l v e d i n a task +2 (b) He i s capable of o r g a n i z i n g tasks at h i s l e v e l and of making a reasonable and compre-hensive p l a n (c) He possesses the necessary o r g a n i z i n g a b i l i t y f o r an o f f i c e r cadet a t h i s stage . of t r a i n i n g (d) He has d i f f i c u l t y i n o r g a n i z i n g work s u c c e s s f u l l y . He does NOT r e a d i l y apprec-i a t e the work i n v o l v e d i n a task and i s i n c l i n e d t o miss major p o i n t s (e) H i s e f f o r t s at o r g a n i z i n g tasks u s u a l l y meet with f a i l u r e due to h i s i n a b i l i t y to a p p r e c i a t e the work i n v o l v e d i n a task and to p l a n ahead INTELLIGENCE AND ABILITY TO LEARN 8. In a s s e s s i n g the o f f i c e r cadet's a b i l i t y to l e a r n you must c o n s i d e r the progress he has made i n i n c r e a s i n g h i s know-ledge. The standard of knowledge which he has a t t a i n e d should NOT be assessed under t h i s heading. The gradings are as f o l l o w s : (a) He i s an o f f i c e r cadet who a s s i m i l a t e s know-ledge v e r y q u i c k l y and t h e r e a f t e r a p p l i e s i t i n t e l l i g e n t l y to any a s s o c i a t e d task (b) He i s an i n t e l l i g e n t o f f i c e r cadet who a s s i m i l a t e s knowledge more q u i c k l y than most (c) He has s u f f i c i e n t i n t e l l i g e n c e to a s s i m i l a t e the r e q u i r e d knowledge from the i n s t r u c t i o n he r e c e i v e s (d) He has d i f f i c u l t y i n a s s i m i l a t i n g i n s t r u c -t i o n at the r a t e at which i t i s presented OR 89 he shows a l a c k of i n t e l l i g e n c e i n the a p p l i c -a t i o n of the knowledge he has acquired -1 (e) He cannot a s s i m i l a t e the knowledge r e q u i r e d by an o f f i c e r cadet at h i s stage of t r a i n i n g nor has he the i n t e l l i g e n c e to apply the knowledge -2 APPEARANCE BEARING 9» When a s s e s s i n g t h i s q u a l i t y you should remember that an o f f i c e r cadet i s expected to maintain a high standard of personal b e a r i n g and turnout i n m i l i t a r y uniform or c i v i l i a n c l o t h e s at a l l timeso The gradings are as f o l l o w s : (a) He takes a p r i d e i n h i s appearance and b e a r i n g , which are always of the highest p o s s i b l e standard +2 (b) He i s a smart w e l l - d r e s s e d o f f i c e r cadet at a l l times +1 (c) H i s appearance and b e a r i n g are up to the standard r e q u i r e d of an o f f i c e r cadet 0 (d) Prom time to time has to be reminded that h i s turnout and bearing are below the standard r e q u i r e d -1 (e) His appearance and b e a r i n g seldom reach the r e q u i r e d standard =-2 TACT. C0URTE3Y AND DISCRETION 10, The above q u a l i t i e s are s e l f - e x p l a n a t o r y . However when making your assessment you should t r y to r e l a t e i t to p o s i t i v e a c t s , by the o f f i c e r cadet, which have shown t h a t he e i t h e r possesses or l a c k s these q u a l i t i e s . The gradings are as f o l l o w s : (a) He i s an o f f i c e r cadet who can be r e l i e d upon 90 to be t a c t f u l , courteous and d i s c r e e t at a l l times +2 (b) He i s a courteous o f f i c e r cadet w i t h the r e q u i s i t e amounts of t a c t and d i s c r e t i o n +1 (c) He i s a p o l i t e o f f i c e r cadet who uses common sense i n h i s d e a l i n g s with others 0 (d) He i s sometimes l a c k i n g i n one or more of the above q u a l i t i e s -1 (e) He i s e i t h e r t a c t l e s s , d i s c o u r t e o u s or i n d i s c r e e t -2 PHYSICAL STAMINA AND ENERGY 11o T h i s i s an assessment o f the o f f i c e r cadet's p h y s i c a l q u a l i t i e s and should NOT be confused with h i s determination or perseverance o The gradings are as foilowes (a) He has an abundance of p h y s i c a l stamina and energy, which he whole-heartedly a p p l i e s to h i s work at a l l times +2 (b) He i s p h y s i c a l l y s t r o n g and capable of sus-t a i n e d p h y s i c a l e f f o r t +1 (c) He has the necessary p h y s i c a l stamina and energy r e q u i r e d of an o f f i c e r cadet 0 (d) He i s p h y s i c a l l y weak AND/OR u s u a l l y l e t h a r g i c i n h i s manner -1 (e) He i s NOT capable of sustained p h y s i c a l e f f o r t OR he i s NOT prepared to make f u l l use of h i s p h y s i c a l a t t r i b u t e s -2 ABILITY OP EXPRESSION ORALLY AND IN WRITING 12, When a s s e s s i n g these q u a l i t i e s you should c o n s i d e r the 91 o f f i c e r cadet's command of h i s language, the extent of h i s voc-a b u l a r y and h i s a b i l i t y to t h i n k and express h i m s e l f i n a l o g i c a l , e a s i l y understandable manner. The gradings are as f o l l o w s : (a) He i s a r e a l l y c l e a r t h i n k i n g o f f i c e r cadet who has no d i f f i c u l t y i n expressing h i m s e l f c l e a r l y both v e r b a l l y and i n w r i t i n g +2 (b) He presents h i s ideas i n a l o g i c a l , w e l l thought out manner both v e r b a l l y and i n w r i t i n g +1 (c) He i s capable of e x p r e s s i n g h i m s e l f c l e a r l y both v e r b a l l y and i n w r i t i n g 0 (d) He i s h e s i t a n t and sometimes muddled when expressing h i m s e l f v e r b a l l y OR h i s w r i t t e n work i s o f t e n u n t i d y and he appears t o have d i f f i c -u l t y ..in e x p r e s s i n g h i m s e l f c l e a r l y -1 (e) He i s unable to express h i m s e l f c l e a r l y e i t h e r v e r b a l l y o r i n w r i t i n g -2 POPULARITY AND GROUP VALUE 13. When a s s e s s i n g these q u a l i t i e s you should attempt to assess h i s c o n t r i b u t i o n to any group e f f o r t . H i s p o p u l a r i t y should be genuine p o p u l a r i t y brought about by respect f o r h i s opinions and NOT p o p u l a r i t y gained by v i r t u e of being the "clown" of the group. The gradings are as follow s ? (a) He has a h i g h sense of group l o y a l t y and would be a v a l u a b l e member of any group. The respect which others have f o r h i s opin i o n s makes him a popular member of the group +2 (b) He i s always a p a r t i c i p a n t i n group a c t i v i t i e s and i s one of the more popular members of the group +1 He makes a f a i r contribution to the effor t s of his group and i s accepted by the other members He seldom makes a r e a l l y useful contribution to his group's a c t i v i t i e s and appears to have few friends He does NOT make any r e a l contribution towards the a c t i v i t i e s of his group. He appears to be d i s l i k e d by the majority of his group APPENDIX "B" T h i s appendix contains the form used by COTC troop o f f i c e r s at the Royal Canadian School of Mechanical E n g i n e e r i n g to assess o f f i c e r cadets at the completion of each Phase of p r a c t i c a l t r a i n i n g - that i s at the end of each summero Troop o f f i c e r s i n s t r u c t and su p e r v i s e cadets d u r i n g t r a i n i n g and. have a t t h e i r d i s p o s a l the t r a i n i n g r e p o r t s of other o f f i c e r s and. NCO's with respect to each cadet. Troop o f f i c e r s are d i r e c t e d i n orders to evaluate "Personal Q u a l i t i e s " i n accordance with the d e f i n i t i o n s g iven i n the "Personal Q u a l i t y D e f i n i t i o n s (Appendix "A") of which each troop o f f i c e r has a copy. C O N F I D E N T I A L (when completed) F i r s t Report Second Report Third Report Fina l Report COTC TROOP OFFICER'S REPORT RCSME Troop Name University Date A. PERSONAL QUALITIES NOTE: You have observed the cadet at work and at play. Consider to what degree he has shown these q u a l i t i e s . Place a check mark (V) in one of the five descrip-tive spaces opposite each quality. Mark according to your convictions. Mark the good man high and the poor man low. QUALITIES CHARACTERISTIC OF "A GOOD MAN" 1. Obedience, Loyalty and Integrity 2. Motivation, Sense of Responsibility, R e l i a b i l i t y 3. I n i t i a t i v e , Determination and Perseverance 4. Self-Confidence, Maturity, Coolness Under Stress, Emotional S t a b i l i t y . 5. A b i l i t y to Control Men ' 6. Knowledge (including degree of T a c t i c a l A b i l i t y 7. A b i l i t y to Organize Tasks 8. Intelligence and A b i l i t y to learn 9. Appearance and Bearing 10. Tact, Courtesy and Discretion 11. Physical Stamina and Energy 12. A b i l i t y of Expression Orally and i n Writing 13. Popularity and Group Value en "S ffl +> -a cS c si a) •p -P rn T> a co o it ** Jj CD 3 £> O >> +3 CO •H » H -P CD c B 3 O +> CO •a o co u H -H > 3 O CT C CO B CO LEGEND A - Outstanding B - Knowledge and a b i l i t y beyond that required to meet the Course Standards C - Meets the Course Standards F - Failed to meet the Course Standards F - Poor 9 5 .APPENDIX "C" T h i s appendix contains reduced samples of the two forms which were u t i l i z e d to c o l l e c t e f f e c t i v e and i n e f f e c t -i v e i n c i d e n t s . Each form i n c l u d e s a set of d i r e c t i o n s which o u t l i n e the kind of i n f o r m a t i o n d e s i r e d . I t a l s o i n c l u d e s s e v e r a l s e l f - e x p l a n a t o r y questions designed to e l i c i t i n f o r m a t i o n r e q u i r e d f o r the f o r m u l a t i o n of C r i t i a l Requirements and the a n a l y s i s of such f a c t o r s as recency, o r i g i n of the i n c i d e n t e t c . The o r i g i n a l forms were mimeographed on &^  x 14" paper i n o r d e r t h a t adequate' apace might be allowed f o r comment, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n regard to Item 1. Form ( i ) f o r the e f f e c t i v e i n c i d e n t s was o r i g i n a l l y on pink paper and Form ( i i ) ( i n e f f e c t i v e ) was on white paper. Form ( i ) PINK CRITICAL INCIDENT TECHNIQUE Direct ions Try to remember an incident during the present summer's t r a i n i n g in which a cadet acted in such a way as to lead you to remark to yourse l f that he was being p a r t i c u l a r l y ef fect ive as an o f f i c e r cadet in the Royal Canadian Engineers. The cadet may have been yourse l f or any other cadet whom you were able to observe d i r e c t l y e i ther during t ra in ing or off duty hours. Do not mention who i t was but write below exactly what happened.that made.you.feel that he was being espec ia l ly e f f ec t ive . 1. Describe what happened: 2 . Why was th is p a r t i c u l a r l y ef fect ive? 3. When did th is happen? 4. Where did i t happen; what were the circumstances? 5. What Phase was the o f f i cer cadet? 6, What Phase are you in? 7. What univers i ty or college are you from? Form ( i i ) CRITICAL INCIDENT TECHNIQUE WHITE 97 DIRECTIONS Try to remember an incident involv ing the t r a i n i n g of o f f i c er cadets i n which a cadet acted in such a way as to lead you to remark to yourse l f or some-one else that he was being inef fect ive as an of f ioer oadet i n the RCE's . The cadet may be any cadet whom you were able to observe d i r e c t l y e i ther during t r a i n i n g or of f duty hours. Do. not mention who i t . was.but write .below.exact ly . . what happened that made you fee l he was being espec ia l ly inef fect ive 1. Describe what happened (write on baok i f needed) 2* Why was th i s inef fect ive? 3. When did i t happen? 4. Where did i t happen} what were the oircumstanoes? 5. What.phase.was.the. o f f icer , cadet? APPENDIX "D" T h i s appendix contains a f a c s i m i l e of the card to which the c r i t i c a l behaviours, obtained by use of the que s t i o n forms, were t r a n s f e r r e d . The card a l s o records the time i n t e r v a l between the r e c o l l e c t i o n and r e c o r d i n g of an i n c i d e n t and i n d i c a t e s where the i n c i d e n t took p l a c e . One card was prepared f o r each c r i t i c a l behaviour e x t r a c t e d . In those cases where more than one behaviour was contained i n a s i n g l e i n c i d e n t ("multiple i n c i d e n t s " ) a separate card was prepared f o r each of the behaviours. FACSIMILE OF CRITICAL BEHAVIOUR CARD CR# CB#: . ._ Incident Time lapse 1-3 mos 3-12 mos over 1 yr phase Where did i t happen 1 month 3 lass Rm Trg Area Prde Sq Camp gnly Off Camp Mess Barks Other 100 APPENDIX "E" INITIAL (64) CATEGORIES ISOLATED Explanatory Note The following i s a l i s t of 64 categories isolated by examination and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of obtained c r i t i c a l behav-iours . Many of the categories are quite s i m i l a r and were eventually combined i n the formulation of the f i n a l set of 33 C r i t i c a l Requirements, 1. Plans ahead 2. Demonstrates appreciation and consideration 3. Good dress, d r i l l and bearing 4. Maintains high standards under adverse conditions 5. Voluntarily assists less capable cadets or cadets i n need 6. Seeks and accepts assistance from others when the need arises 7. Increases and maintains team performance by continual encouragement and his own i n i t i a t i v e 8. Increases and maintains team performance by his own high standards (example) and supervision 9. Never relaxes his standards (maintains a high standard) 10. Demonstrates persistence and patience i n the face of d i f f i c u l t y 11. Carries out his duties (follows commands) i n the 101 case of o p p o s i t i o n .12, Uses h i s own i n i t i a t i v e to e x p l o i t n o v e l ideas and achieve s o l u t i o n s 13. Gets others to work with him 14. Prepared t o accept c o n s t r u c t i v e c r i t i c i s m and p r o f i t by i t 15. Remains calm and composed and i n c o n t r o l when under pressure 16. Capable of t a k i n g a c t i o n when a c r i s i s a r i s e s or. when confronted with an emergency 17. When placed i n charge takes complete command ( a s s e r t s h i m s e l f 18. Makes c e r t a i n job f o r which he i s r e s p o n s i b l e i s p r o p e r l y executed 19. Takes the advice of others i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n 20. Makes an e f f o r t to amend s t r a i n e d personal r e l a t i o n s 21. Takes immediate a c t i o n on l o g i c a l requests 22. E x e r c i s e s d i s c i p l i n e when the need a r i s e s 23. Breaks down o v e r a l l job and a l l o c a t e s each man s p e c i f i c tasks 24. Gives advice i n a t a c t f u l way 25. Takes over l e a d e r s h i p without c r e a t i n g resentment 26. Puts h i s l e s s o n across by good demonstration 27. Makes accurate assessments of the p r e - r e q u i s i t e s of the job or s i t u a t i o n 28. Functions w e l l as a c o o r d i n a t o r and s u p e r v i s o r 29. Leads and organizes s o c i a l a c t i v i t i e s 102 30. Appreciates the code of e t h i c s governing mess l i f e and behaviour of an o f f i c e r 31. Achieves h i s aim (gets h i s own way) without c r e a t i n g resentment 32. Delegates r e s p o n s i b i l i t y 33. Demonstrates a b i l i t y to see long range r e s u l t s of a c t i o n s 34. Supervises the job without i n t e r f e r i n g unduly 35. Has a good knowledge of the task on hand 36. E x e r c i s e s f i r m c o n t r o l without being o v e r l y aggressive 37. Formulates a plan and o u t l i n e s steps before commencing operations 38. Organizes a c t i v i t i e s on h i s own 39. P r o f i t s by experience and i n s t r u c t i o n 40. Plans ahead i n a n t i c i p a t i o n of f u t u r e problems 41. Does h i s job without being prodded or watched and without complaining 42. Formulates plans which r e c e i v e the backing of the group 43. Prepared, to make s a c r i f i c e s and put s e l f out f o r others 44. Makes an e f f o r t - t o preserve others from embrassment 45. Steps i n and. takes over when the need a r i s e s (even though not i n a u t h o r i t y ) 46. Makes suggestions to s e n i o r s when i n a p o s i t i o n to do so and when ap p r o p r i a t e to do so 47. Arranges personal a c t i v i t i e s so as not to i n t e r f e r e with t r a i n i n g 48. Makes an e f f o r t to co-operate with others and works as a member of a team 103 49. Does necessary and additional jobs without being t o l d 50. Accepts blame and admits mistakes when at fault and accepts consequences 51. W i l l i n g l y a s s i s t s others on the job 52. 3tands up f o r the rights of others 53. Does not adhere to a set plan' ( i s not bound by a set plan) but reorganizes a c t i v i t i e s and approach i f the need arises 54. Keeps everyone informed re task, they are to do and how others are progressing 55. Follows orders and abides by rules and regulations even though he may disagree 56. Gives advice and assistance when asked or when the need arises but does not try to take over 57. Accepts f u l l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r a l l tasks. Does not try to s h i f t r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to someone else 58. Is honest and t r u t h f u l 59. Gives clear and concise instructions 60. Good personal habits, manners and hygiene .61. Demands no more than he himself i s prepared to give 62, Demonstrates good sportsmanship 63. Does not indulge himself because of his position 641. Is considerate of others 104 APPENDIX "F" Explanatory Note The 64 c a t e g o r i e s l i s t e d i n Appendix "E" were combined on the b a s i s of s i m i l a r i t y . Appendix "P" shows the categ-o r i e s which were combined under w r i t t e n summary statements ( C r i t i c a l Requirements) to d e s c r i b e the g e n e r a l types of behaviour appearing i n the c a t e g o r i e s . CONSTITUENT ORIGIN OF 35 CRITICAL REQUIREMENTS 1. (1) Plans ahead (10) Plans ahead i n a n t i c i p a t i o n of f u t u r e problems (53) Is not bound by a set plan but reo r g a n i z e s a c t i v i t i e s and approaches i f the need a r i s e s (37) ' Formulates a plan , o u t l i n e s steps before commencing operations (33) Demonstrates a b i l i t y to see long range r e s u l t s of a c t i o n s PLANS FLEXIBLY TO ANTICIPATE PROBLEMS 2. (2) Demonstrates a p p r e c i a t i o n and c o n s i d e r a t i o n (44) Makes an e f f o r t to preserve others from embarrassment (64) Is considerate of others (20) Makes an e f f o r t to amend s t r a i n e d p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s FACILITATES COOPERATION BY APPRECIATING THE FEELINGS OF OTHERS 105 3. (24) Gives advice in a t a c t f u l way (25) Takes over leadership without creating resentment (31) Achieves his aim without creating resentment LMDS TACTFULLY : ACHIEVES HIS AIM WITHOUT CREATING RESENTMENT (3) Good dress and bearing (60) Good personal habits, manners and hygiene MAINTAINS A HIGH STANDARD OP APPEARANCE : DEMONSTRATES GOOD PERSONAL HABITS, MANNERS AND HYGIENE (4) Maintains high standards under adverse conditions (9) Never relaxes his standards MAINTAINS CONSISTENTLY HIGH STANDARDS REGARDLESS OP CONDITIONS 6. (5) Voluntarily assists less capable cadets or cadets in need (51) Wi l l i n g l y a s s i s t s others on the job VOLUNTARILY ASSISTS OTHERS IN THEIR WORK 7. (6) Seeks and accepts assistance from others when the need arises (13) Gets others to work with him (19) Takes the advice of others into consideration (42) Formulates plans which receive the backing of the group 106 7. cont'd ( 2 1 ) Takes immediate a c t i o n on l o g i c a l requests OBTAINS THE COOPERATION OP THE GROUP BY ACCEPTING HELP PROM IT (7) Increases and maintains team performance by c o n t i n u a l encouragement, s u p e r v i s i o n and own i n i t i a t i v e (8) Increases and maintains team performance by own high standards MAINTAINS AND INCREASES TEAM PERFORMANCE BY ENCOURAGEMENT, SUPERVISION AND OWN HIGH STANDARDS 9. * (12) Uses h i s own i n i t i a t i v e to e x p l o i t novel ideas and achieve s o l u t i o n s THINKS UP NEW IDEAS ... PUTS HIS IDEAS INTO PRACTICE * This category i n i t i a l l y was one C r i t i c a l Requirement. On re-examination i t was separated i n t o two C r i t i c a l Requirements 10. PUTS HIS IDEAS INTO PRACTICE 11. (14) Prepared to accept c o n s t r u c t i v e c r i t i c i s m and p r o f i t by i t (39) P r o f i t s by experience and i n s t r u c t i o n (50) Accepts blame, admits mistakes when at f a u l t and", accepts consequences ADMITS MISTAKES, ACCEPTS CRITICISM .AND INSTRUCTION AND • PROFITS BY THE EXPERIENCE 107 12. (15) Remains calm, composed and i n c o n t r o l when under pressure REMAINS CALM AND RETAINS CONTROL UNDER PRESSURE 13. ( l l ) C a r r i e s out h i s d u t i e s i n the face of o p p o s i t i o n CARRIES OUT HIS DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES IN THE PACE OP OPPOSITION 14. (45) Steps i n and. takes over when the need a r i s e s STEPS IN AND TAKES OVER WHEN NEED ARISES 15. (16) Capable of t a k i n g a c t i o n when a c r i s i s a r i s e s or when confronted by an emergency TAKES PROMPT AND EFFECTIVE ACTION IN A DANGEROUS EMERGENCY 16. (17) When placed i n charge takes complete command and a s s e r t s h i m s e l f (22) E x e r c i s e s d i s c i p l i n e when need a r i s e s (36) E x e r c i s e s f i r m c o n t r o l without being o v e r l y aggressive (28) Functions w e l l as a c o o r d i n a t o r and s u p e r v i s o r (34) Supervises job without i n t e r f e r i n g unduly WHEN PLACED IN CHARGE ASSERTS HIMSELF AND MAINTAINS CONTROL WITHOUT BEING UNPLEASANTLY AGGRESSIVE OR INTERFERING 17. . . . . (18) Makes c e r t a i n job f o r which he i s r e s p o n s i b l e i s pr o p e r l y executed CHECKS COMPLETENESS AND CORRECTNESS OF WORK FOR WHICH HIS TEAM IS RESPONSIBLE 108 18. (57) Accepts f u l l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r a l l tasks (Does not t r y to shoulder r e s p o n s i b i l i t y ) ACCEPTS PULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR ALL ASSIGNED TASKS 19. (43) Prepared to make s a c r i f i c e s and put h i m s e l f out f o r others (52) Stands up f o r r i g h t s o f others (62) Demonstrates good sportsmanship PREPARED TO MAKE SACRIFICES AND PUT HIMSELF OUT FOR OTHERS 20. (23) Breaks down o v e r a l l jobs and a l l o c a t e s each man s p e c i f i c tasks (27) Makes accurate a-ssessments o f the p r e - r e q u i s i t e s of the job or s i t u a t i o n (32) Delegates r e s p o n s i b i l i t y DELEGATES RESPONSIBILITY ON THE BASIS OF CAREFUL MATCHING OF MEN TO JOBS 21. (26) Puts h i s l e s s o n across by good demonstration (59) Gives c l e a r and con c i s e i n s t r u c t i o n s GIVES CLEAR AND CONCISE INSTRUCTIONS, DEMONSTRATING WHEN APPROPRIATE 22. (35) Has a good knowledge of the task on hand KNOWS THE JOB TO WHICH HE IS ASSIGNED 109 23. (54) Keeps everyone informed reference task they are to do and how others are progressing PROVIDING OTHERS WITH NEEDED INFORMATION TO DO THE JOB 24. (5) Gives advice and assistance when asked or when the need arises but does not t r y to take over GIVES ASSISTANCE WHEN ASKED OR REQUIRED WITHOUT TRYING TO TAKE OVER (29) Leads and organizes s o c i a l a c t i v i t i e s (38) Organizes a c t i v i t i e s on his own ORGANIZES AND LEADS RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES 26. (30) Appreciates code of ethics governing mess l i f e and the behaviour of an o f f i c e r generally BEHAVES IN ACCORDANCE WITH RECOGNISED RULES OF CONDUCT FOR OFFICERS 27. (41) Does job without being prodded and without com-plaining (49) Does necessary and additional jobs without being t o l d IS 3ELF-FR0PELLED IN CARRYING OUT ASSIGNMENTS 28. (46) Makes suggestions to seniors when i n a position to do so and when appropriate to do so MAKES SUGGESTIONS TO SENIORS WHEN IN A POSITION TO DO SO AND WHEN APPROPRIATE TO DO SO 110 29, (48) Makes an e f f o r t to co-operate with others and to work as a member of a team MAKES AN EFFORT TO CO-OPERATE WITH OTHERS AND WORK AS A MEMBER OF A TEAM 30, (17) Arranges personal a c t i v i t i e s so as not to i n t e r -f e r e with t r a i n i n g (63) Does not indu l g e because of h i s p o s i t i o n DOES NOT USE RANK OR POSITION FOR PRIVATE ADVANTAGE OR PERSONAL CONVENIENCE 31. (55) Follows orders and abides by r u l e s and r e g u l -a t i o n s even though he may d i s a g r e e COMPLIES WITH RULES AND ORDERS EVEN THOUGH HE DISAGREES (58) Is honest and t r u t h f u l TELLS THE TRUTH AND ACTS HONESTLY 33. . (61) Demands no more than he h i m s e l f i s prepared to giv e DEMANDS NO MORE THAN HE HIMSELF IS PREPARED TO GIVE I l l APPENDIX "G" This appendix shows the d i s t r i b u t i o n by area of o r i g i n of incidents reported by 65 Instructors and 127 Cadets, Each incident question sheet required a report of "Where did i t happen?". These were categorized into seven s p e c i f i c areas plus "other" and frequencies are shown f o r Instructors (I) and Cadets (C) i n each of these eight areas. 1 1 2 AREA OF ORIGIN OF CRITICAL INCIDENTS CRITICAL REQUIREMENT NO. See Table II WHERE INCIDENT OCCUI {RED Class Room Training j Area Parade Square Camp Generally Off Camp Barracks Mess Others I C I C I C I C I C I C I c I C 1 1 1 11 13 0 4 5 1 0 2 1 6 3 3 3 2 2 3 1 1 6 4 1 3 3 1 2 4 1 1 1 1 4 2 1 1 2 1 5 2 1 3 3 4 1 5 2 2 1 1 3 2 6 1 1 14 4 2 1 4 4 7 3 5 3 1 1 8 1 5 3 2 1 1 2 1 4 9 1 7 1 1 2 10 3 5 2 1 1 1 11 1 4 2 1 5 4 4 4 2 2 4 1 12 1 1 10 4 1 6 2 1 1 1 1 13 1 •1-14 1 3 6 3 1 1 2 1 3 1 2 15 5 12 2 2 16 11 7 1 3 8 2 2 3 17 3 2 1 1 1 2 18 1 2 1 1 1 19 1 5 2 2 18 11 6 20 9 20 1 1 4 1 21 - 5 1 22 1 7 1 3 3 23 1 1 24 2 2 1 25 1 2 2 1 26 1 1 1 3 5 9 27 1 15 3 4 5 1 28 1 1 29 2 2 4 6 1 1 2 4 2 1 1 5 30 2 1 31 1 2 S 8 1 1 1 3 8 1 4 3 4 32 2 I 1 2 4 3 1 33 i ! 2 4 APPENDIX "H" In t h i s appendix the time i n t e r v a l s between the occurrence and the r e c o l l e c t i o n of the C r i t i c a l Behaviours c o n s t i t u t i n g each C r i t i c a l Requirement are given. Pour c a t e g o r i e s of recency are employed i n t h i s t a b u l a t i o n : (a) Under one month, (b) one to three months, (c) three to twelve months, and (d) over one year. In each of the above c a t e g o r i e s the the f r e q u e n c i e s are shown f o r I n s t r u c t o r s (I) and Cadets (C). 114 RECENCY OE BEHAVIOURS CRITICAL REQUIRE-MENT NO. see Table I I TIME INTERVAL Under 1 Month 1 to 3 Months 3 to 12 Months Over 1 Year I C I C I C I C 1 1 10 1 17 18 1 7 2 9 8 2 1 1 3 1 1 4 4 4 1 1 4 1 5 3 8 14 1 4 6 13 13 3 2 7 4 6 3 8 6 1 6 7 9 3 5 3 1 10 2 2 5 3 11 7 1 6 17 1 12 5 1 10 9 4 13 1 1 14 11 7 3 2 1 15 8 8 5 1 16 9 12 13 1 2 17 1 3 5 2 18 1 4 1 19 33 11 1 20 10 10 4 8 2 1 21 ' 4 2 22 5 4 4 1 23 2 24 2 1 1 1 25 2 1 3 26 5 1 4 7 3 27 10 1 11 4 1 1 28 2 29 1 10 1 7 9 2 30 1 1 2 31 9 15 9 2 2 32 1 2 8 2 33 4 1 1 115 APPENDIX "I The question sheets r e p o r t i n g the C r i t i c a l I n c i d e n t s (Appendix "C") asked (question 5): "What Phase was the o f f i c e r cadet?" T h i s r e f e r r e d to the cadet whose behav-i o u r c o n s t i t u t e d the C r i t i c a l Incident„ Prom the data so c o l l e c t e d the t a b u l a t i o n i n t h i s appendix was prepared showing the d i s t r i b u t i o n of i n c i d e n t s f o r each C r i t i c a l Requirement i n terms of the Phase of t r a i n i n g i n which the cadet concerned was then i n v o l v e d . 116 PHASE OP TRAINING OP CADETS INVOLVED IN CRITICAL INCIDENTS CRITICAL REQUIREMENT NO. PHASE (see Table I I ) F i r s t Second T h i r d 1 . 28 21 5 2 15 5 1 3 8 3 4 7 5 18 8 3 6 23 8 7 8 4 1 8 14 7 9 5 6 1 10 8 4 1 11 21 11 1 12 17 9 3 13 1 1 14 16 7 1 15 8 12 16 19 15 3 17 8 1 2 18 3 3 19 40 5 20 13 24 1 21 5 1 22 9 5 1 23 1 1 24 2 3 25 5 1 26 10 8 2 27 11 18 28 1 1 29 12 15 3 30 2 2 31 26 8 3 32 11 1 1 33 2 4 . TOTALS : 377 221 34 APPENDIX " J " This appendix contains a f a c s i m i l e of the peer r a t i n g forms which were u t i l i z e d to o b t a i n two kinds of peer r a t i n g s : (a) f u t u r e success as an o f f i c e r , (b) " l i k e b e s t " . Each form i s preceded by a set of i n s t r u c t i o n s which d e s c r i b e i n d e t a i l the i n f o r m a t i o n d e s i r e d . ( i ) 118 Date Troop L i s t i n order the f i v e men i n your troop who, i n your o p i n i o n , h o l d g r e a t e s t promise as f u t u r e o f f i c e r s . The man you con-s i d e r most promising w i l l be No. 1 and so on through No. 5, You may l i s t y o u r s e l f i f you b e l i e v e you should be l i s t e d . Most Promising - No. 1 No. 2 No. 3 No. 4 No. 5 L i s t i n order the f i v e men i n your troop who, i n your o p i n i o n , hold the l e a s t promise, as future o f f i c e r s . The man you con-s i d e r l e a s t promising w i l l be No. 5, the next lowest i n t h i s r e s p e c t w i l l be No. 4 and so on through No. 1. Do t h i s r e g a r d l e s s of how promising or how poor a cadet i s — i n t h i s r a t i n g you are not c a l l i n g him competent or even u n s a t i s f a c t o r y , you are merely i n d i c a t i n g that he i s not as promising as the others i n the troop. Comments or reasons are d e s i r e d f o r your choice of each of the l e a s t promising men. Name Comments No, 1 No, 2 No, 3 No. 4 Least Promising No. 5 Sign your name here ( i i ) 119 Date Troop L i s t i n order the f i v e men i n your troop whom you l i k e best, i . e . the f i v e men whom you f i n d e a s i e s t to l i v e w ith. The man you l i k e most w i l l be No. 1 and so on through No. 5 Li k e most - No. 1 No. 2 No. 3. No. 4 No. 5 L i s t i n order the f i v e men i n your tro o p whom you l i k e l e a s t , i . e . l i s t the f i v e men whom you f i n d hardest to l i v e with. The man you l i k e l e a s t w i l l be No. 5, the man next lowest i n t h i s respect w i l l be No. 5, and so on through No. 1. No. 1 No. 2 No. 3. No. 4. Like l e a s t — No. 5 Sign your name here 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0106144/manifest

Comment

Related Items