Discussion 8

Howdy all! It's been a while since I sent out an update, so it felt like time...

New Members

We have five new members this time around, bringing our total to 49! C'mon, #50! Maybe we can give that person an award. Anyway, here are the new members:

Aileen Grizard, Food and Ag
Kristie Joyce, Water Resources
Hilary Tuttle, SPB
Janet Gregory, Energy Commission
Karen Van Egdon, Energy Commission

Welcome, all of you! Don't be shy.

Information

1. Katy Fodchuk at SPB referred me to a website that has some very useful classification information and job descriptions. You can add it to your "comparison specification" database; my guess is there are many sites like this floating around that would help us all. It's attached to UC San Diego and can be found at http://blink.ucsd.edu/Blink/External/Topics/Policy/0,1162,856,00.html 

2. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has been given their SEVENTH time extension for defining what "applicant" means per the Uniform Guidelines. The current "deadline" is September 30, 2003. Maybe while they're defining applicant they can define "deadline"?

3. Those of you whom attended today's Test Talk heard about the survey SPB is giving out, seeking feedback about the Test Talk sessions. Shelley Langan forwarded it to me for distribution, so if you haven't filled one out yet, please do! It's attached to this e-mail in MS Word format.

4. New members may be thinking to themselves, "Boy, I wish I could read ALL of Bryan's job analysis updates!" Well, you may soon be able to. Karl Jaeger at SPB is attempting to put them on the web in some format, so let's all cross our fingers and hope that happens. We may eventually get to the point where we use a web-based discussion group rather than e-mail (bear with us as we attempt to enter the 1990's).

5. To those of you that have used, or plan on using, the Excel spreadsheets I sent out, a word of caution: When you paste the numbers from this file to your calculation spreadsheet, make sure to "Paste Special" and paste only the values. Otherwise, Excel has a habit of pasting the formula.

Issues

I only have one issue this time around, just something to think about and discuss amongst ourselves: To what extent are our selection mechanisms REALLY matching our job analysis data? For example, if you identify "analytical ability" during a job analysis, is it realistic to claim that you're accurately tapping this ability through an oral interview? For that matter, to what extent are oral interviews, work samples, low fidelity exams, and supplemental applications simply insufficient in terms of measuring particular KSAs? What selection mechanisms are best for particular KSAs? (and wouldn't it be great if O*NET suggested a mechanism for each KSA?) If we require 30 items to tap a knowledge domain on a written test, why is it okay to have only one question on a QAP relating to this knowledge, yet make a similar argument? Just some thoughts.

======

That's all for now, folks! If anybody has questions or experiences they'd like to share, by all means. The more we know, the better!

Hope everyone is doing well.

Bryan Baldwin
DOJ