[LMB] OT: testing

POUNCER altpouncer at yahoo.com
Fri, 1 Feb 2002 07:14:07 -0800 (PST)


Steve Knott <Steve.Knott at daedalic.com> wrote:
> PT tests are a complex issue with a lot of negatives and
> few positives:  They are not work specialty related ...
> They are aimed at a general level of fitness 
> They are bureaucratically derived compromizes and 
> thus tho they make a  certain amount of sense they 
> are not fair or realistic or really
> applicable to most daily jobs 

It's striking that this thread on physical condition
(PT) testing is simultaneous with the thread on
general education assessment testing (TASS, SAT).
Presumably one could focus purely on exercises
and training intended to boost one's push-up
score and still neglect to condition for the overall
upperbody strength that the push-up test is intended
to be a predictive/indicative measure for. 
Drill-sergeant'ing to the test, as it were... 

It's also striking the military, in my experience,
does NOT do so.  They run several dozen
calesthenic type exercises all the time --
including sprints and longer-than-tested endurance
runs. But the test is limited.

That sergeants don't "teach to the test" the way
teachers are supposedly compelled to, seems
to be a feature of the respective cultures.
Missions may fail and lives may be lost if
the soldiers aren't in shape.  But if the kids
can't read or calculate ... "they'll get another 
chance next year." 

I'm no doubt missing something here...  Maybe
sergeants are much better paid, or more widely
and highly esteemed by the culture as a whole,
than are teachers? 





__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions! 
http://auctions.yahoo.com