I am not offbase. Everyone kept saying I was 'cocky' and 'pretended to know more than I actually do.' How is her quote not being cocky? There is no way that someone who scored a lower score on an aptitude test against other people can seriously expect to finish training 'faster than 95% of the other trainees.' If you were that potentially intelligent in the air traffic control field, wouldn't you have scored higher on the aptitude test? I know the AT SAT isn't exactly what a controller does, but if you were smart enough to finish faster than 95% of the other trainees, you would have had a better AT SAT score than a 83.8%.
Albert Einstein didn't have a third grade education. He graduated from ETH Zurich, the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology. The equivalent of MIT here in the United States. I think that is much better than a third grade education.
Bill Gates and Michael Dell saw a 'moment' when they could take advantage of their skills in a certain field and use it to found successful businesses. They used their college educations to better themselves in their field of expertise. College is about learning and figuring out a way to use what you know best to better yourself.
The AT SAT is that 'moment' to show how much of an aptitude you have to learn and potentially perform in the air traffic field. You can't seriously expect to finish faster than 95% of the other trainees, if you scored less on the AT SAT, when others showed a greater ability to learn and potentially perform in the air traffic field.
Robert, you're missing the point here. Her comment began with "I am very intelligent and I know I will get through my training faster than 95% of the other ATC trainees." There are a few inferences you're making here...1.) You're assuming that she expects she will get to train first because she's "intelligent"; 2.) You're assuming that there's a direct correlation between an AT-SAT score and a person's ability to grasp real life traffic control; 3.) You're assuming that someone who scores higher on the AT-SAT will
automatically make a better controller than someone with a lower score. That last assumption is the one that has me extrememly worried about the basis of your argument...you imply that by her scoring an 83.8 and "only" being in the qualified category that somehow she is inferior to someone who scored an 85 and is in the "well-qualified" category. One question answered incorrectly on a standardized test isn't going to mean she is somehow less able to direct traffic than someone like yourself. Whether you believe it or not, it appears that the FAA hires based on category only, and that the scores are essentially meaningless once given.
That being said, by reading these forums you'll know that your skill or aptitude has NOTHING to do with how fast you begin training. It is solely based on the staffing of the facility, and how fast they can move things along...as others have said in earlier posts, some go faster than others...there's no guarantee that she will even have started training in her facility when some will have completed it and become CPCs. If you're implying that you will somehow be a better controller than her because of your 100%, then you
ARE being equally as arrogant and cocky as you're saying she is, because until you've handled traffic yourself, you don't know that.
And, I admit I had my information on Einstein screwed up for some reason.
The point I was trying to make by using non-traditional examples is that standardized test scores by themselves are NOT direct predictors of future performance. They may be indicators of aptitude, but until someone tries a task, nobody knows how well they'll do in a particular field. Tom Brady was a 6th round draft pick, and he's arguably the best quarterback of our generation.
Here are the QBs taken before Brady:
•
Chad Pennington - Round 1, Pick 18
•
Giovanni Carmazzi - Round 3, Pick 65
•
Chris Redman - Round 3, Pick 75
•
Tee Martin - Round 5, Pick 163
•
Marc Bulger - Round 6, Pick 168
•
Spergon Wynn - Round 6, Pick 183
Let's remember that the NFL gives all prospetive players combine days to determine athletic ability, and a Wonderlic test to determine IQ. While those things may determine someone's "chances" of succeeding, people frequently defy odds and succeed where expected to fail or underperform.
All I'm saying is what can you hope to accomplish by picking apart her comment? Until you or she directs traffic, there can be no resolution to that issue...we won't have any empirical data to rely on, so why get worked up about it?
