-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
psychometric tests
- Thread starter ste
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
laws67
Member
Hi, I am led to believe there is a company called the Rail Operations Group that allow you do take the tests privately. You would have to check out their website or call them to find out about costs ect. As for their reputation, I know nothing, maybe others on here can help.
Apply for a job with a TOC is by far the best way and the tests will be free.
What difference does that make? Tell your mate not to waste his money lining some companies pockets to gain a possible test pass which MAY increase his chances of getting a job as a driver despite most TOCs not seeing it as any advantage and not giving any kind if priority to those with private passes.
Trust me, I spent a never of years in a TOCs HR department and private passes make little difference...
Beveridges
Established Member
I always remember doing my MDD Interview years ago and the Interview wasn't going very well, probably "average" at best, until I mentioned that I'd already got a private Psycho test pass which suddenly turned it into a good Interview & then I believe that got me the job!
Beveridges
Established Member
True in the Interview sense.
But even if that is the case, you have more chance of passing the tests if you book them privately. Once you have booked your tests (usually at least a month in advanced), you have a date to work towards. You know how long you've got to practice and prepare.
If you relied on the TOC's sending you to the psycho test, you could unexpectedly get a letter telling you that you need to attend the assessment centre in 3 days! I have known this to happen. It may catch you unprepared.
Another advantage of booking the tests privately is that if you fail the first time, you get to see all the other stages of the assessment and have a go at them. If you fail when a TOC sends you, you will be sent home if you fail at the first stage, and you will never see the other stages and only have one chance left to pass the lot. This will include these "unknown" stages that you have never even seen! Not a good situation to find yourself in.
But even if that is the case, you have more chance of passing the tests if you book them privately. Once you have booked your tests (usually at least a month in advanced), you have a date to work towards. You know how long you've got to practice and prepare.
If you relied on the TOC's sending you to the psycho test, you could unexpectedly get a letter telling you that you need to attend the assessment centre in 3 days! I have known this to happen. It may catch you unprepared.
Another advantage of booking the tests privately is that if you fail the first time, you get to see all the other stages of the assessment and have a go at them. If you fail when a TOC sends you, you will be sent home if you fail at the first stage, and you will never see the other stages and only have one chance left to pass the lot. This will include these "unknown" stages that you have never even seen! Not a good situation to find yourself in.
Last edited:
laws67
Member
Hi STE, I have tried to help you!!. Rail operations Group, they have a website. If you want to do it privately than access that and get the info you need to take it from there.
I 'failed' my first assessment and passed the second. I was told (unofficially) I hadn't really failed the 1st but the TOC were allowed to use the assessments as a filtering process. In other words- they're trying to reduce 30 people at 9am down to 5 people by 1 pm. You've more chance of passing if the examiner has no motivation to fail you. Simple as. I'm doubtful if that'll help you get a job though (hasn't done me much good, so far).
Thats rubbish, there is a set mark and if you get above the mark then you pass, if you get under the mark then you fail!
If somebody had told me "unofficially" I would have been straight round to see a solicitor, there is no way anyone would say that.
Think you may have the wrong end of the stick. 'Examinors' rarely even work for the TOC unless they're one of the few to do it in house. It's a national standard, some TOCs have higher, but there is no discretion when it comes to the national pass/fail.
Beveridges
Established Member
Yes it's 100% consistent what counts as a pass or fail nationally. The only exception is the structured interview, which is the assessor's opinion of you! A flawed part of the psycho process if ever there was one!!
The old tests were easy except the CBI. I've never done the new ones but they sound harder. Anyone who wanted to go driving should have done it before 2013 as it was easier back then.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Apparantly, the reactions test has changed beyond recognition. The old reactions test simulator is now obsolete and AFAIK no one has yet made a practice aid for the new tests.
The old tests were easy except the CBI. I've never done the new ones but they sound harder. Anyone who wanted to go driving should have done it before 2013 as it was easier back then.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Apparantly, the reactions test has changed beyond recognition. The old reactions test simulator is now obsolete and AFAIK no one has yet made a practice aid for the new tests.
Last edited:
Indeed the new tests have changed greatly and as a result the old reactions test is a monstrous waste of time and effort. However, as someone who did both assessments I can safely say that the new system tests 'driver required' skills far better than the old system!
I wouldn't say it's flawed provided the person is trained to know what to look for, how else can an interview be assessed? I know for sure that what you say counts, their perception of you will influence but not make their decision!
I just completed and passed the new system so maybe I am biased but I felt suitably assessed and as if the assessments were seriously assessing my abilities, had I failed I honestly would have accepted it as me not having the right skills.
Last edited:
FlashingYellows
Member
- Joined
- 19 Dec 2013
- Messages
- 53
I'm not sure I agree with that, there seems to be a lot more people passing the newer tests. Also, I believe the acceptable mark has now dropped until they can work out what is a good score, in the old style tests just passing was not good enough.
With the old style tests a pass would usually mean you got the job as not as many people were getting through, looking at recent threads I'm not sure that will be the case, you could have a situation where there are more people passing than jobs available.
I would definitely say that now is the best time to take the tests. Until they can work out what is a high score, a pass is a pass.
I took my tests yesterday and have passed, pending the result from the MMI interview. They are definitely not easy and I would say that they definitely test your ability to become a driver. I asked the examiner whether we got feedback on marks and she said clearly that because the tests are so new, we wouldn't. A pass is a pass, simple. I am on the fence over the MMI as I had already had my DM interview, which was more relevant and more like an interview rather than an interrogation. Personally, if all TOC's did it that way, you could dispense with the MMI I think, as you have already been assessed on you verbal comms and work history etc.
With regard to it being easier to pass, I simply cannot agree. The sheer number of people passing has more to do with the increase in people taking the tests due to the recent increase in vacancies. The new tests pass rate will have been based on previous data on the old tests to give it a measured effectiveness, although I agree, some TOC's may have had a higher standard. But the tests are independent and should be transparent, therefore, TOC's shouldn't really be using that as a cherry picking tool. In the long run, it is better for everyone. The fact that some TOC's still test before interview, means that a great number of people will be tested who won't make it through the interview. Seems to be a costly way of doing things. Personally, I would have thought a higher percentage of people don't get past the DM Interview than the tests.
With regard to it being easier to pass, I simply cannot agree. The sheer number of people passing has more to do with the increase in people taking the tests due to the recent increase in vacancies. The new tests pass rate will have been based on previous data on the old tests to give it a measured effectiveness, although I agree, some TOC's may have had a higher standard. But the tests are independent and should be transparent, therefore, TOC's shouldn't really be using that as a cherry picking tool. In the long run, it is better for everyone. The fact that some TOC's still test before interview, means that a great number of people will be tested who won't make it through the interview. Seems to be a costly way of doing things. Personally, I would have thought a higher percentage of people don't get past the DM Interview than the tests.
None of that is even close to true. The pass marks are well outlined - this new process has been coming for 5 years. The pass mark cannot simply be "changed" as a fail on day 1 of the new system cannot be deemed a pass on day 200.
Last edited:
FlashingYellows
Member
- Joined
- 19 Dec 2013
- Messages
- 53
The pass marks were always well outlined under the old tests, some TOCs would not take a borderline pass or pass, you would have to achieve a good pass. With the new tests and as has been confirmed here a pass is now a pass.
So my point is that it seems easier to pass the new tests to the TOCs current standard at the moment than it did the old, threads here and the amount of people passing would confirm this, baring in mind that this forum is only a snapshot of those that have recently taken the tests and posted here, there must be many more out there who have done similar.
Maybe it is that all the people now attending are brilliant and well done to those through and awaiting and good luck on the call. My point was on the surface more are getting through and in the current numbers a pass may not definitely secure you a job as it more or less did under the older tests, simply because less people were passing and the TOCs could choose only the highest pass marks.
Choose to disagree with me by all means, but do a little research on these helpful pages before implying that I am making things up.
Sorry I just can't take anyone serious who thinks that passing the old system secured you a job before the interview. Have you sat both? I have, unless you can come up with some numbers then I can't buy it. I've seen more MMI failure threads than CBI threads, but either way.
It can't "seem" easier unless you've done both? I said it wasn't true, not that it was made up. Believe me, I've done more than enough research to get a drivers job that I am waiting to start.
When I did stage 1 assessments of the new system I was the only one of 9 to pass.
2 of us passed the MMI, 6 failed
Final interview, no idea, but I've yet to meet anyone starting in Nov with me.
To be fair "there must be more out there" isn't informed research is it?
Loosing the safety net of a "borderline pass" doesn't strike me as easier either?
Last edited:
I think that the 'Minimum' pass mark (ie the lowest mark required to be classed as a pass) is probably about the same.
As mentioned above, because these tests are very new there are not enough results yet to enable the assessors / TOC's to grade these results further.
So where previously a TOC chose to select only those with 'Good' passes and reject those with 'Borderline' passes this can no longer be the case until a sufficient number of candiate results have been obtained to dermine what is actually a 'Good' pass etc..
I'm sure the TOC's will have other criteria available to enable them to grade candidates though. Maybe they use the MMI score to do this?
As mentioned above, because these tests are very new there are not enough results yet to enable the assessors / TOC's to grade these results further.
So where previously a TOC chose to select only those with 'Good' passes and reject those with 'Borderline' passes this can no longer be the case until a sufficient number of candiate results have been obtained to dermine what is actually a 'Good' pass etc..
I'm sure the TOC's will have other criteria available to enable them to grade candidates though. Maybe they use the MMI score to do this?
The old tests data will remain a gauge as they've been in use for years while the new tests are all computer graded. No interpretation needed. So there isn't a need for a "picture" to be created to get an idea of what a good pass is.
When I was told my results from the computer tests it was simply a word document with various graphs and a simple table similar to this
WAFV: Pass
ATAVT: Pass
2 HAND: Pass
That was it, no interpretation, just a blunt pass of fail.
Last edited:
That's not what the OPC Assessor told me at all.
She specifically said that there was no way to grade the new tests for the reasons I gave above.
So for the time being you may be offered a position with a TOC with a pass mark that would have previously been classed as only 'Borderline' which some TOC's rejected.
Last edited:
FlashingYellows
Member
- Joined
- 19 Dec 2013
- Messages
- 53
Thank you, I was writing in English then...
I appreciate that someone who has been through both styles of testing is more qualified to comment on the differences. However, as per my posts and the one quoted, there could be some passes now that would have previously been borderline passes and hence a fail to certain TOCs standards, so having the "safety net" of a pass being a pass and no borderlines could make a huge difference to getting a job.
Again, well done to all those through and I certainly wouldn't label the testing as easy or easier than the last tests, just the scoring system now used could be more beneficial to those being tested now as mentioned in my original post on this thread to say I disagreed that it was easier to get through the old tests.
Beveridges
Established Member
Who on Earth gets a "good pass" in everything ??
No one I know of!
You used to be able to afford to score a few "borderlines" in the Structured Interview criteria however you were allowed up to 3 (I think) luckily I only had 2 !
I got Pass in everything else and Good Pass on the Reactions back in 2008 because I found that easy after playing videogames obsessively for hours on end, years on end.
Last edited:
Fair enough if that's what you heard! Just glad it is done with! Look out for people being passed randomly then...? If there is no way to grade them..?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I guess we will never know! Assessment and recruitment is a mystery in itself!
Last edited:
FlashingYellows
Member
- Joined
- 19 Dec 2013
- Messages
- 53
True. As before, well done on getting through and good luck with your career on the railways.
lol, I agree.
True. As before, well done on getting through and good luck with your career on the railways.
I think I misread your initial point, my bad! Thanks!!
- Status