4 ms·

Not being allowed to re-enter the program is just insane.

perihelions 2y ago
Isn't it a reasonable filter? I'd (naively) assume that all things being equal, a person who passes a test on the first attempt, is more likely to have a higher innate ability than one who doesn't. Is this wrong?
- UltraSane 2y ago
  Imagine if they only let people take the bar exam once.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- michaelt 2y ago
  That depends on the test, and the training surrounding it. If I'm hiring for a job where there's a strict requirement to be 6 feet tall and there's nothing candidates can do to get taller - then once you've measured under 6 feet there's no point in re-testing you. If I'm hiring for a job where there's a strict requirement that you be able to lift a 90 lbs weight, a lot of people will fail - but if they hit the gym, in a month or two they'll be able to pass easily. If I'm hiring for a job where there's a strict requirement that you be able to lift a 90 lbs weight, but before the test every applicant goes through a 6 month strength training program, so we test them at absolute peak strength? Re-testing would be a waste of time, except in a few cases like if someone had a loved one die just before the final test. If I'm hiring for a job with a written test, the test draws a random selection of questions from a question bank, and some questions are much easier than others? There might be a substantial random element to the results. If re-testing people produces substantially different scores, probably that indicates I need to improve the design of my test.
- cutemonster 2y ago
  Yes, wrong I think. People's performance varies from day to day, and if doing the test just once, then some people will pass it because of good luck shape that day, although another day they would have failed. When constantly predictable high performance is important, it makes sense to do the test on a bunch of different occasions, and look at the overall result (like, lowest, median and average scores). And it'd be ok to do a bit worse on one occasion, as long as you were always above the minimum. Rather than in effect randomly picking just one test result. Looking at the results from many tests, reduces false negatives, but also false positives. (And of course if studying and practice matters, getting to re-take the test some years later: yes of course, but possibly the test should then be a little bit longer.)
fernandopj 2y ago
Indeed. Imagine if prospect lawyers were prevented from retaking the bar exam.
- RandomBacon 2y ago
  ATC doesn't get to redo traffic flying in the air.
pirate787 2y ago
The program needs to have high standards and I imagine some of the reasons for failing are related to ability under pressure.
- UltraSane 2y ago
  Imagine if they only let people take the bar exam once.
  - RandomBacon 2y ago
    While missing a comma can have great impact, it isn't the same as missing traffic, and ATC doesn't have the luxury of rough drafts.
    - UltraSane 2y ago
      How does not letting people retry even once produce more competent air traffic controllers?
      - RandomBacon 2y ago
        They get multiple chances to "retry" in the FAA academy. It isn't one pass/fail test; they practice a lot and take multiple tests. They can fail the first few tests as long as they average out to a 70% or greater.
kemayo 2y ago
Particularly not for the last reason mentioned -- declining an offered position because it's not in a place you want to live.
- smcin 2y ago
  Agreed. Imagine if tech hiring worked like that. Entry-level positions could be moved to WV or the Dakotas, optimize for low salary and cost-of-living and ignore retention/burnout/washout rates since you figure they're going to be high anyway. FYI the states(/districts) with lowest ATC pay are DC, IA, MS, MT, SD, VT, WV : See third plot: "Annual mean wage for air traffic controllers, by state, May 2023" and lots of other useful stats in https://www.bls.gov/oes/2023/may/oes532021.htm https://www.bls.gov/oes/2023/may/oes532021.htm

Isn't it a reasonable filter? I'd (naively) assume that all things being equal, a person who passes a test on the first attempt, is more likely to have a higher innate ability than one who doesn't. Is this wrong?

UltraSane 2y ago
Imagine if they only let people take the bar exam once.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
michaelt 2y ago
That depends on the test, and the training surrounding it. If I'm hiring for a job where there's a strict requirement to be 6 feet tall and there's nothing candidates can do to get taller - then once you've measured under 6 feet there's no point in re-testing you. If I'm hiring for a job where there's a strict requirement that you be able to lift a 90 lbs weight, a lot of people will fail - but if they hit the gym, in a month or two they'll be able to pass easily. If I'm hiring for a job where there's a strict requirement that you be able to lift a 90 lbs weight, but before the test every applicant goes through a 6 month strength training program, so we test them at absolute peak strength? Re-testing would be a waste of time, except in a few cases like if someone had a loved one die just before the final test. If I'm hiring for a job with a written test, the test draws a random selection of questions from a question bank, and some questions are much easier than others? There might be a substantial random element to the results. If re-testing people produces substantially different scores, probably that indicates I need to improve the design of my test.
cutemonster 2y ago
Yes, wrong I think. People's performance varies from day to day, and if doing the test just once, then some people will pass it because of good luck shape that day, although another day they would have failed. When constantly predictable high performance is important, it makes sense to do the test on a bunch of different occasions, and look at the overall result (like, lowest, median and average scores). And it'd be ok to do a bit worse on one occasion, as long as you were always above the minimum. Rather than in effect randomly picking just one test result. Looking at the results from many tests, reduces false negatives, but also false positives. (And of course if studying and practice matters, getting to re-take the test some years later: yes of course, but possibly the test should then be a little bit longer.)

fernandopj 2y ago

Indeed. Imagine if prospect lawyers were prevented from retaking the bar exam.

RandomBacon 2y ago
ATC doesn't get to redo traffic flying in the air.

pirate787 2y ago

The program needs to have high standards and I imagine some of the reasons for failing are related to ability under pressure.

UltraSane 2y ago
Imagine if they only let people take the bar exam once.
- RandomBacon 2y ago
  While missing a comma can have great impact, it isn't the same as missing traffic, and ATC doesn't have the luxury of rough drafts.
  - UltraSane 2y ago
    How does not letting people retry even once produce more competent air traffic controllers?
    - RandomBacon 2y ago
      They get multiple chances to "retry" in the FAA academy. It isn't one pass/fail test; they practice a lot and take multiple tests. They can fail the first few tests as long as they average out to a 70% or greater.

kemayo 2y ago

Particularly not for the last reason mentioned -- declining an offered position because it's not in a place you want to live.

smcin 2y ago
Agreed. Imagine if tech hiring worked like that. Entry-level positions could be moved to WV or the Dakotas, optimize for low salary and cost-of-living and ignore retention/burnout/washout rates since you figure they're going to be high anyway. FYI the states(/districts) with lowest ATC pay are DC, IA, MS, MT, SD, VT, WV : See third plot: "Annual mean wage for air traffic controllers, by state, May 2023" and lots of other useful stats in https://www.bls.gov/oes/2023/may/oes532021.htm https://www.bls.gov/oes/2023/may/oes532021.htm