Suchergebnisse

Chapter 22 in Measuring Up: Assessment Issues for Teachers, Counselors, and Administrators ; The military is not just a job it's hundreds of jobs, with plenty of positions to boot. In terms of providing education, training, and employment, the military is unparalleled. The army, navy, marine corps,and air force enlist about 200,000 new recruits and commission more than 16,000 officers annually for active duty. These newcomers top off an incumbent strength of almost 1.4 million active members.Although most of the almost 900,000 selected reservists have had active duty experience, well more than 50,000 come in fresh from civilian life (Department of Defense, 2000).

1 Introduction - Unveiling the Human Terrain System / Montgomery McFate & Janice H. Laurence 1. - 2 Mind the Gap: Bridging the Military/Academic Divide / Montgomery McFate 45. - 3 An Anthropologist at War in Afghanistan / Ted Callahan 91. - 4 What Do You Bring to the Fight? A Year in Iraq as an Embedded Social Scientist / Katherine Blue Carroll 119. - 5 Playing Spades in Al Anbar: A Female Social Scientist among Marines and Special Forces / Jennifer A. Clark 141. - 6 The Four Pillars of Integration: How to Make Social Science Work in a War Zone / Kathleen Reedy 167. - 7 Realizing the Promise of Applied Social Science for Military Operations / James Dorough-Lewis, Jr. 187. - 8 Allied Civilian Enablers and the Helmand Surge / Leslie Adrienne Payne 213. - 9 Assessing the Human Terrain Teams: No White Hats or Black Hats Please / Carolyn Fluehr-Lobhan & George R. Lucas, Jr. 237. - 10 Tangi Valley and the Limitations of Applied Anthropology in Afghanistan / Brian G. Brereton 265. - 11 The Human Terrain System: Some Lessons Learned and the Way Forward / Janice H. Laurence 291

This document includes the full text of the report. It is preceded by a summary and a 2020 update by author Mark J. Eitelberg. ; Excerpt from Summary: America's military officers, leaders of nearly two-million uniformed warriors and technicians, managers of multi-billion dollar budgets, have been described in the popular press as "the mind and soul of the vast machine that is the chief guardian of the nation and the democracies of the West." They are called "brass"—three-hundred thousand men and women who have pledged "life, fortune, and sacred honor" in service to their country, trained in the management of violence, holding a mighty key to the success or failure of the nation's defense. Who are the people who occupy such an unusual position of influence over our lives, and how were they chosen for the task? What tests or measures of ability are used for selection? How do officers fit into the general stream of American life—before, during, and after their time in service? These are all important questions that have somehow managed to escape public scrutiny. In Becoming Brass, Eitelberg, Laurence, and Brown explore the answers to these questions, looking specifically at the following: the demographic characteristics of officers and their comparative "quality," as measured by scores on the SAT; current trends and prospects in officer recruiting and the possible influence of testing on the future composition of the officer corps; and the major routes by which individuals become officers, paying special attention to the role of standardized tests in the process. In addition, the authors attempt to weigh the benefits and burdens of military service for officers—opportunities gained and lost—demonstrating the unique nature of the military as an institution and the profession of arms as a way of life. Through the aid of a new and unique data base (linking Department of Defense personnel files with historical records maintained by the Educational Testing Service), Eitelberg and his associates were able to analyze the SAT scores of about 56 percent of all officers commissioned from 1975 through 1985. Comparisons between the scores of officers and those of the general population indicate that the scores of officers are considerably higher. By converting SAT point scores to percentile scores, the authors were able to further study the comparative performance of officers on the test. Of particular interest, about 75 percent of Army officers commissioned from 1975 through 1985 scored above the 50th percentile, in addition to 78 percent of Marine Corps officers, 83 percent of Air Force officers, and 90 percent of those in the Navy. ; Prepared for the National Commission on Testing and Public Policy, University of California at Berkeley

Final Report ; In 1980, the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the U.S. military departments, in cooperation with the Department of Labor, sponsored a large-scale research project to assess the vocational aptitudes of American youth. The joint effort, known as the "Profile of American Youth," marked the first time a nationally representative sample of young women and men completed a military qualification test or a vocational aptitude test of any kind. This monograph describes the results of a study that uses "Profile of American Youth" data to estimate the numbers and proportions of American youth who would be expected to qualify for military enlistment under existing standards. Additionally, the authors calculate the military "participation rates" of American youth using enlistment eligibility rates for the general population combined with information on enlistment behavior. The present study provides the defense community with accurate information on the fitness of American youth to serve in the military; it also helps to show, in statistical terms, the impact of aptitude standards on the employment opportunities of young men and women from varied demographic backgrounds. The final section of the study explores the broader implications of the results for the future of the armed forces and society. Of special interest, the monograph includes several appendices: a chronology of aptitude standards used by each military service from the 1940s and 1950s to present (1983); aptitude trends of military examinees; and projected qualification outcomes under various alternative standards. ; This report was prepared under the Navy Manpower R&L Program of the Office of Naval Research under Contract N00014-82-K-0637 ; Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense ; Directorate for Accession Policy ; Monitored by the Office of Naval Research ; N00014-82-K-0637 ; Approved for public release, distribution unlimited

In 1980, the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Military Services, in cooperation with the Department of Labor, sponsored a large-scale research project to assess the vocational aptitudes of American youth. A national probability sample of approximately 12,000 young men and women, selected from participants in the National Longitudinal Survey (NLS) of Youth Labor Force Behavior, was given the military's enlistment and job placement test, the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB). This research endeavor, known as the "Profile of American Youth," marked the first time a military qualification test, or any vocational aptitude test, had been given to a nationally representative sample. The Profile Study thus offered a rare opportunity to evaluate the cross-sectional character of military enlistees based on a national measure of vocational test performance. Screening for Service describes the results of a research effort that evolved from the Profile Study. Since the Profile Study sample was nationally representative, and it incorporated the scores of contemporary youth on a version of the ASVAB parallel to that currently used to screen military applicants, it was possible to estimate the numbers and proportions of American youth expected to qualify for military enlistment under existing standards. The military "participation rates" of American youth could also be calculated using enlistment eligibility rates of the general population in combination with information on enlistment behavior. ; Research was supported by the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Manpower, Installations, and Logistics), under agreement with the Navy Personnel Research and Development Center and the Naval Postgraduate School. ; Approved for public release, distribution unlimited