AT-SAT Scores

MrBucket

Well-Known Member
This is my new favorite thing to quote.

"To further address the potential problem of adverse impact, FAA officials decided to abandon a strict “top-down” approach to hiring and, instead, use a category ranking method. This approach is a form of “score banding”that can be justified on the basis of ignoring score differences that are due to an estimate of the applicant’s true ability.
Score banding, although somewhat controversial among selection scientists, “will almost always produce less adverse impact than strict rank ordering as it ignores score differences likely to be statistically insignificant. Applicants who achieve a qualifying minimum score are divided into two groups: those scoring 85 and above(termed “well qualified”) and those scoring from 70 to 84.9 (termed “qualified”). Those in the “well-qualified” group will be offered employment before anyone in the “qualified” group. "
Seems like people who get 100's are getting a raw deal because of this.
 

K-Dog

New Member
This is my new favorite thing to quote.

Seems like people who get 100's are getting a raw deal because of this.
Really no more so than someone who gets a 95, and then gets someone scoring 86 hired before them. I mean, when you were in school a B student was always as good as an A student right? The letters are just formalities.:sarcasm:
 

BoomerSooner77

New Member
Wouldn't it be funny if they found out the 100s were caused by a programming glitch and they rescended those offers and made you start over with the ATSAT? :laff:
 

MrBucket

Well-Known Member
Wouldn't it be funny if they found out the 100s were caused by a programming glitch and they rescended those offers and made you start over with the ATSAT? :laff:
Or if you answered a set of 5 questions with the correct combination of answers you automatically get a 100. BADBC=100!
 

saxplayer72586

New Member
*I posted this in another forum but along the lines of getting a 100% I thought it would fit in here too...*

Ok I'm gonna take this opportunity to "stir the pot" a little :D

In this fantasy world of atc forums... I think we can all agree that a LOT of people have been rocking the ATSAT with 100%'s... while it's not at all my prerogative to be judgmental towards any single member, I do wonder to myself... how many of the ATC forum members totally BS their scores? While most of them are probably legit... I can't help but think of that Brad Paisley song "So much cooler online"...

(edited for us... sing along)

Oh, online, I aced my AT-SAT
Well qualified, make sure you know that,
Cause even on my first day, I could handle IFR,
with 30 pilots at one time,

I'm so much cooler online :)

Vindictive? Crass? Bitter? Maybe a little bit of them all... all I know is that after my piss-poor ATSAT showing (83.2), if I don't get hired by the FAA, I'm seriously contemplating opening up a real letter factory... maybe with campbell's soup company... sadly... children everywhere will be sorely upset when they can only make words like "BAD", "CAB", and "ADD". Yeah... alphabet soup land is gonna get pretty flippin' boring my friends...

Nextly, I hope that someday the FAA can put the ATSAT into practical use... maybe start making controllers talk to pilot's while only using analogies...

"Cessna 421, Approach, Benign is to night, as viscosity is to..."

Or maybe while a controller is trying to assist with an engine out... a little voice will come over the radio saying "All radio communications have been suspended until you can tell me how this triangle with 5 million stripes going 3 different ways would translate if it were to translate like the given example of the circle with 3 millions stripes going 5 ways... sorry, sir, your answer is incorrect, your engine-out aircraft has now exploded because of your ineptitude... have a nice day"

Point being, ATC is a highly stressful job that not everyone is cut out for. But to base even the chance to be trained as one off a score... I think is a little bogus. I hope they dig into the applications to try and give each applicant the whole-person concept as opposed to just a number and a score... but hey... it is the gov't we're dealing with here... they're the double edged sword that we love to hate yet hate to leave...

Clear skies and tailwinds, all
 

K-Dog

New Member
Wouldn't it be funny if they found out the 100s were caused by a programming glitch and they rescended those offers and made you start over with the ATSAT? :laff:

I know huh? I guess I should have answered more questions wrong and gotten like, say a 90% so my score wouldn't be a glitch.:whatever:
 

justme62

New Member
Really no more so than someone who gets a 95, and then gets someone scoring 86 hired before them. I mean, when you were in school a B student was always as good as an A student right? The letters are just formalities.:sarcasm:
Just because one person is great at the analogies (or great at guessing?) doesn't mean they would be any better suited to control air traffic than someone who bombed that portion. What does it have to do with ATC anyway? :confused:

The entrance exam into the military is called the ASVAB. After you get your score, there are sub scores. In order to get into ATC in the Army you have to have a GT (general technical) score of 110 or higher. I think the highest is 130? (mine was 124) We would get some guys in the unit from the schoolhouse with GT scores of 110 and they were great soldiers and great controllers, and then there were some that came in with a higher score and just thought their #### didn't stink. They were cocky and arrogant about a test that didn't really matter, and yet they sucked on the mic. Sure they could pass a test about gears and simple math questions but they sure as heck couldn't get the big picture of the airspace in order to pass their training tests.

Test scores are not everything. A 100 will not make you into a great controller, and a 70 will not destine you to being a mediocre controller, or a failure.
 

MrBucket

Well-Known Member
Just because one person is great at the analogies (or great at guessing?) doesn't mean they would be any better suited to control air traffic than someone who bombed that portion. What does it have to do with ATC anyway? :confused:

The entrance exam into the military is called the ASVAB. After you get your score, there are sub scores. In order to get into ATC in the Army you have to have a GT (general technical) score of 110 or higher. I think the highest is 130? (mine was 124) We would get some guys in the unit from the schoolhouse with GT scores of 110 and they were great soldiers and great controllers, and then there were some that came in with a higher score and just thought their #### didn't stink. They were cocky and arrogant about a test that didn't really matter, and yet they sucked on the mic. Sure they could pass a test about gears and simple math questions but they sure as heck couldn't get the big picture of the airspace in order to pass their training tests.

Test scores are not everything. A 100 will not make you into a great controller, and a 70 will not destine you to being a mediocre controller, or a failure.
Such is why they use they use 3 categories instead of going by score.
F, Q and WQ. The difference between a 93 and a 95 is probably very insignificant.
 

K-Dog

New Member
Just because one person is great at the analogies (or great at guessing?) doesn't mean they would be any better suited to control air traffic than someone who bombed that portion. What does it have to do with ATC anyway? :confused:

The entrance exam into the military is called the ASVAB. After you get your score, there are sub scores. In order to get into ATC in the Army you have to have a GT (general technical) score of 110 or higher. I think the highest is 130? (mine was 124) We would get some guys in the unit from the schoolhouse with GT scores of 110 and they were great soldiers and great controllers, and then there were some that came in with a higher score and just thought their #### didn't stink. They were cocky and arrogant about a test that didn't really matter, and yet they sucked on the mic. Sure they could pass a test about gears and simple math questions but they sure as heck couldn't get the big picture of the airspace in order to pass their training tests.

Test scores are not everything. A 100 will not make you into a great controller, and a 70 will not destine you to being a mediocre controller, or a failure.
I agree with you that a test score may be insignificant, however a poor test score could be symptomatic of a larger problem, especially when the test consists of questions that an above average 8th grader would be able to answer without hesitation. Also, a high test score could show a capacity for learning. I am not saying that a 70 means that someone would be a bad controller, or 100 means a great controller. There are plenty of geniuses out there who when put into a stressful situation where they need to react quickly will just freeze.

However, there have to be lines drawn somewhere and generalizations can't be made without the probability that someone won't fit into that generalization. So it is safe to assume that someone who scores a hundred will have the probability of learning at a more advanced pace than someone who scores a 70. Especially since the test is totally based on aptitude and requires no previous knowledge, other than a limited vocabulary and basic math skills.

To say someone who scores 100 would automatically be a great controller would be putting too much emphasis on one little test. However to say that someone who scores a 70 is just as likely to be a good controller as someone who scores 100 is to downplay this profession and the intelligence of those who work traffic on a daily basis, as every test, no matter how insignificant, plays to the test takers intelligence in some capacity.

And I don't really think they are trying to see if you are good at analogies, but whether or not you have sound reasoning abilities. If you read the rules before the analogies portion it was actually quite simple. If you can't look at a screen and see a pattern...it may be more difficult for you to memorize flight routes...then again, maybe not. There are exceptions to every rule:buck:
 

JB_113

New Member
You guys do realize that anyone with a military background receives an additional 10 bonus points to whatever they score, don't you?
 

GeorgeM

New Member
You guys do realize that anyone with a military background receives an additional 10 bonus points to whatever they score, don't you?
Actually, it's five points (unless you're a disabled vet, then it's 10), and it doesn't attach to the AT-SAT score. It's added to the overall weight of the application (education, experience, scores, ...). All government jobs have a veterans' preference of five points.
 
Top