importance of vocation-related testing.
RESPOND TO-2-CLASSMATES:
#-1——–KEVIN K.
Good Morning Esteemed Colleagues and Dr. Terzino,
Week 6 and final discussion forum already! Where has the time gone? Today I will be sharing some arguments for the importance of vocation-related testing. As part of this post, I will be discussing when vocational testing should be used and potential pitfalls in regard to these types of assessments. I will also delve into best practices when considering vocation-related testing.
Vocational testing is something that nearly every adult has encountered – and most likely, has encountered several times over a lifetime. The main construct behind vocational testing is typically to determine not only a potential employees fit in to the organization, but once hired, will determine the degree of success the employee is experiencing. Like personality tests, vocational tests seek to determine how a person aligns to various situations. Unlike personality tests, vocational assessments are heavily regulated by laws designed primarily to protect the subject, and as a result, can create ethical issues.
The importance of vocational testing cannot be underemphasized. US companies spend billions of dollars per year assessing job applicants (Talent Acquisition, n.d.). Companies use a variety of assessments to determine who will win that coveted job at Big Time Corporation. Typical of those assessments are interviews, work sample tests, and simulations (Reynolds & Livingston, 2013). Other techniques that may not be used as frequently include personality tests, assessment centers and integrity tests (to include lie detectors) (Reynolds & Livingston, 2013). The decision as to which assessment to use largely depends on the job at stake. As an example, my daughter recently applied for a job at the local ice cream place (She just got the job yesterday!). Her assessment process was basically asking “when can you start?”. I guess the qualifications were a living, breathing human being. On the other hand, the assessment process to become an FBI agent is typically quite detailed with family interviews, background checks, medical examinations and integrity assessments (FBIagentedu.org, n.d.).
Since employment and vocation assessment is so regulated by the government, there are many potential pitfalls that can be experienced by the potential employer. Those pitfalls may include legal issues such as the risk of discrimination and adverse impact (Reynolds & Livingston, 2013). Other potential pitfalls may include the cost to assess, the time it takes for the assessment, and the employee perception of the process (Reynolds & Livingston, 2013). If a potential employee does not agree with the assessment, the company runs the risk of losing a potentially good candidate.
The number one best practice in vocational assessment is to be consistent. When assessing a job candidate, or an incumbent employee, it is important to use uniform assessment criteria that is applied equally to everyone. Second, any assessment must be demonstrably related to the job. As an example, going back to my daughter’s situation, if she were assessed on her ability to fire a gun, she would fail miserably. However, in the FBI candidate’s case, this is a very viable attribute in which to assess.
REFERENCES
FBI Requirements (n.d.) Retrieved from https://www.fbiagentedu.org/fbi-requirements/ (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.. Retrieved June 12, 2018.
Reynolds, C. R., & Livingston, R. B. (2013). Mastering modern psychological testing: Theory & methods. Pearson Higher Ed. ISBN-10: 020548350X • ISBN-13: 9780205483501
Talent Acquisition (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.bersin.com/talent-acquisition/ (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site., June 12, 2018.
Reply Reply to Comment
—————————————————————————————————–#-2—–DAWN A.
The idea of having testing that can help in particular forms of proceedings is often a relief for those involved with court issues. Forensic psychology is the use of psychological principles, techniques, as well as procedures within the understanding of the law to help in legal forms of proceedings and sometimes, legislative processes. This form of psychology is also used within legal mediation and arbitration proceedings as well (Reynolds & Livingston, 2013).
The use of forensic testing is to help determine several different factors that may be in questions for different court cases. Sometimes the forensic testing is used to determine whether the individual is competent to stand trial, whether a juvenile should be held to the adult criminal court level, using mitigation, to determine if the individual has the moral ability to be held for the crime committed and sometimes the insanity forms of pleadings to name a few (American Psychological Association, 1999). The idea of the forensic testing will often include the use of assessments, as this is how the psychologist will determine the levels the individual will be able to understand in order to evaluate the case, as a whole.
The assessments often also determine the state of mind the individual is currently in and how objective the data will be for the reports given. The ethical standards can be difficult to assess here, as the attorneys often understand, as the testing process moves forward, how to coach their clients, in order to help them get a better evaluation base given to the courts. The purpose for the forensic assessment again is to provide objective data, however sometimes the data is not valid due to the information within the testing being given to the individual from their counsel before hand, so they know how to answer particular aspects of the assessment and testing itself (Reynolds & Livingston, 2013).
The expert testimony is not always admissible within the courts as there is a threshold that is required and the reasoning is determined as far as reliability and the logics involved. If there are any errors noted within the scoring, changes within the administration of the testing itself or testing alterations, the results can be deemed invalid and not accepted by the courts. The best practices for forensic testing would be to make sure and have the evaluator and the treating clinician not be one in the same. The different levels of the forensic testing and assessing process should be done by different individuals in order to keep the process valid, due to this form of testing having so many levels, in most cases (Reynolds & Livingston, 2013). Keeping in mind that those who are administering the process also need to be held to standard and code is also vital within this form of testing as well, as the courts and legal issues are most of the base here.
American Psychological Association. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. American Education Research , pp. 1-5.
Reynolds, C., & Livingston, R. (2013). Mastering modern psychological testing: Theory & methods. Pearson Higher Education.
Reply Reply to Comment