Selection Tests Changing..

[Beveridges]

I'm already in the job thanks

Anyway I think you misunderstand... im saying looking at a computer screen for 3 hours with little or no change in variables (no station stop/starts, no restrictive signalling, no change in speed, no line curvature or change in environment, no P-way to whistle up for, AWS horns, no real change in braking or throttle control, no cup of tea to swig, no lineside debris, furniture or infrastructure to look at, no change in weather, no change in light conditions, no other trains passing you by, no breeze from the window, no diagram to glance at etc etc) must be torture.

Yes completely agree but one thing for sure, if you can pass that horrendous test it will definetely prove you can concentrate more so than the Group Boredom test does.

I don't know what you drive or where GB but I think you'll agree there's little driving in the industry that'd be that sterile/clinical.

Also if you go 3mph under the speed limit in real life once in 3 hours does it really matter that much?

Over the speed limit by 3mph yes that would be a bit more serious (I've done it myself a few times though admittedly) but under 3mph now that is just rediculous.

 

[GB]

I'm already in the job thanks

I was meaning more in general terms rather than specifically yourself

Anyway I think you misunderstand... im saying looking at a computer screen for 3 hours with little or no change in variables (no station stop/starts, no restrictive signalling, no change in speed, no line curvature or change in environment, no P-way to whistle up for, AWS horns, no real change in braking or throttle control, no cup of tea to swig, no lineside debris, furniture or infrastructure to look at, no change in weather, no change in light conditions, no other trains passing you by, no breeze from the window, no diagram to glance at etc etc) must be torture.

While those are valid points we don't know what details this simulator would actually include.

On the face of things 3mph under doesn't sound like a big deal, but if you are continually doing it and losing time then depending on your management you can expect questions to be asked.

 

[BravoGolfMike]

I think people are getting hung up on the idea of 3mph under here, the issue isn't whether 3mph under would cause you to lose time (it won't and who cares if it did,) but whether you can stay awake and alert enough, possibly with distractions, to keep your speed to a consistent 60mph. If it was a test of not going 3 mph above 60 then you could just hum along at 50 and be safe in the knowledge that you won't hit the magic 63. There has to be a lower limit in order to fully test the concentration level.

 

[Silv1983]

I was meaning more in general terms rather than specifically yourself

Well you did quote me!

 

[Dave1987]

I a serious note guys I would be very intrigued as to what they are changing the tests to if they are. Certainly the new guys and girls who have recently passed out for GA seem very switched on and suited to the role. I thought that the current selection proceedure was very good at finding people who weren't suited to the driving role. Certainly if it was made harder it would reduce the number of candidates passing but is that neccessarily a good thing. Like has already been said the structured interview certainly finds out if candidates have the neccessary life experience. I don't see why OPC would need to make it harder.

 

[W230]

Yes completely agree but one thing for sure, if you can pass that horrendous test it will definetely prove you can concentrate more so than the Group Boredom test does.

How about counting out loud backwards from 10,000?!

I'm sure there are plenty of tests that could be devised that would require greater concentration than the GB but I'm confused as to why the GB is seen as such a flawed test? It was pretty clear at my assessment day that it was good for filtering out unsuitable applicants (ie. those that had difficulty concentrating). While the importance of maintaining concentration cannot be understated, I can't see that this sort of simulator would be the best way to solve it and would be amazed if it was done like this. I thought the whole point of the SCAAT, which is used in conjuction with the GB by some TOCs, was to address some of the flaws with the GB?

 

[E&W Lucas]

I a serious note guys I would be very intrigued as to what they are changing the tests to if they are. Certainly the new guys and girls who have recently passed out for GA seem very switched on and suited to the role. I thought that the current selection proceedure was very good at finding people who weren't suited to the driving role. Certainly if it was made harder it would reduce the number of candidates passing but is that neccessarily a good thing. Like has already been said the structured interview certainly finds out if candidates have the neccessary life experience. I don't see why OPC would need to make it harder.

Concern about the number passing it who fail/ drop out of the training (about 10% in my experience, and that still represents a serious waste of money), or who have problems soon after. Not a question of making them "harder"; these are aptitude tests. The idea was to update them, and make them more specific.

 

[Beveridges]

Maybe the Group Boredom/SCAAT test is seen as flawed for two reasons:

1) They only test whether you can concentrate hard for 10 minutes. Not if you can concentrate for hours on end.

2) They can both be practiced by downloading a simple program that is exactly the same as the real thing. With a few practice attempts, you can "learn" these tests and do them without hardly needing to even think.





The Structured Interview is also flawed for 3 reasons:

1) It is just one person - the assessor - who makes an opinion of you and decides if your suitable or not. If he does not like you, he can get rid of you no matter what you do.

2) The psychometric tests should be about measuring ability, not life experience. How can you have a test that only gives you 2 maximum attempts if it is testing life experience? If you failed the tests twice at 21 due to not having the experience required to pass the SI, you would banned for life!

3) The test centers are supposed to be there to be standardised and fair across the country. One person's answers may have been a pass with one assessor but a fail with a stricter assessor. You should not have an Interview in a supposedly standardised assessment.






Mechanical comprehension - this test is the most flawed of the lot. I cannot see how this has any relevance to the job. When I do fault finding on trains (very often in my role with it being MDD) - I do not see how knowledge of pulleys, chopping trees down, flag poles, bell cranks, planes taking off & all the other crap on MT4 has anything to do with it whatsoever. To be fair at least some TOC's have got rid of it now.

 

[Jph140]

Word I had was if you have already passed they are wiped and not current.. I passed all my elements today btw

not true of SWT, passed mine in January and was told tests are changing and will be more difficult. Was told this would not affect my pass whatsoever.

 

[GB]

Maybe the Group Boredom/SCAAT test is seen as flawed for two reasons:

1) They only test whether you can concentrate hard for 10 minutes. Not if you can concentrate for hours on end.

The human brain cannot cope with the amount of concentration needed for GB for much more than what is already required for the test. 10-15 minutes solid concentration seems fine for the test imo.

2) They can both be practiced by downloading a simple program that is exactly the same as the real thing. With a few practice attempts, you can "learn" these tests and do them without hardly needing to even think.

What do you mean by "learning"? While you may get a better understanding of what is required or familiarise yourself what the groups of 4 look like, you still need the same level of concentration as the pattens/rows are still random.

I do agree with some of your points regarding the CBI.

 

[Beveridges]

What do you mean by "learning"? While you may get a better understanding of what is required or familiarise yourself what the groups of 4 look like, you still need the same level of concentration as the pattens/rows are still random.

Once you learn what 3 dots, 4 dots & 5 dots look like without having to count them, the amount of concentration needed becomes a lot less.
With enough practice you get into a habbit of just automatically checking 4-dots and ignoring 3-dots and 5-dots without even thinking about it and can do the test without that much concentration as long as you dont "switch off" completely from the task.