Psychometric tests

Discussion in 'RMR' started by Mikespearce, Nov 9, 2007.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Hi all right does anyone know why you can take the test only twice? I passed it once then failed it the next time so iv waited a year to retake but im bricking taking it now. If i fail my gream will be over or will it??? Does this rule yu out for the army etc?
  2. Sorry meant dream.
  3. I think they should be banned from use. There is no intellectual justification for them, just management and pseudo-scientific bollocks.
  4. Ninja_Stoker

    Ninja_Stoker War Hero Moderator

    Hi Mike,

    In exceptional circumstances you maybe permitted to sit the Recruiting Test a third time.

    (Letters to HM The Boss & the Pope required)

    It's far easier if you revise, if you do not revise against the clock (as the majority don't) you will not pass no matter how many times you sit the test as we have more test versions than you are permitted to sit.

    There are some people that seem to think if they sit it often enough, without revision, they will pass. They don't.

    You may apply for all 3 Services simultaneously if you wish, but if you fail the RN test it is highly unlikely you will pass the RAF test either.

    Best of luck to you this time around - provided you practice, it is not uncommon to see applicants double their original score.
  5. Thanks for replies. Im gutted because in 2001\i passed and got a real good score but failed the prmc then retook the test and got one of the best scores or so they said in everything except the maths which i stuffed up. Just dont wanna mess it up i do shift work long shifts aswell so all my studying is when i can fit it in .
  6. Ninja_Stoker

    Ninja_Stoker War Hero Moderator

    Whilst certainly not wishing to contradict, nor enter into heated debate Harry, the test has remained pretty much unchanged since 1943 & the required score is firmly based on the individuals' intellectual ability to complete the trade training for each specific trade. The required "pass" figures are routinely altered to ensure the minimum score possible will give the widest spectrum of candidates the ability to pass training. They even use it as a coarse filter for officer recruiting with effect from September this year. In 64 years it's relevance appears to have been further endorsed, rather than found inadequate.

    Logic would dictate that if we simply accepted anyone despite their numeracy & literacy skills, or the lack of each, then we would have many more costly failures & be accused of giving false hope to those that the service were unable to train.

    The Royal Navy recruiting test recognises & accepts that many underachieve with regard nationally recognised educational qualifications & gives an academic under-achiever the ability to prove they can be trained without the need to prove their potential otherwise, unlike most civilian employers or educational institutions who insist on minimum educational qualifications before you may be employed in a particular post, or gain a university place to gain the education to earn a degree, for example.

    If there wasn't some form of testing intellectual ability, then we may as well close down the colleges of further education & universities as "There is no intellectual justification for them, just management and pseudo-scientific bollocks". Perhaps we should shut up shop & allow all those that want to join to do so or give everyone a PhD upon demand.
  7. Ninja, I agree about not getting into a heated debate if only because the subject matter is so vast. But here are a couple of thoughts.

    The date, 1943, is interesting in itself but should not surprise anybody because the kind of testing and assessment you talk about had its birth in the turn of the 19th/20th century and the eugenics movement in the USA and Britain. The 1920s and 1930s was a period when the intellectual and political elite were keen to 'democratise' society or in some way 'repair' it by scientifically seperating people and matching them to certain tasks, roles, jobs, etc. Such a historical lineage should in itself set alarm bells ringing.

    A second thought is that assessment often doesn't measure what it purports to measure. For example, rather than measuring an intellectual ability useful for being a particular tradesman many questions simply seperate people out by identifying which kids have mastered test-taking techniques. For example, as you sit the tests you might approach each question by looking for the 'trick' to answering it, perhaps figuring out that your initial answer cannot be X because that is way too easy, especially since this question is near the end and questions always get harder as you go on - so it must be this one! No, that's too hard ... It must be Z!

    Then there are issues concerning ..... blah blah ... :) .... Now add rank into the mix ie 'great scores, wrong rank' to be a Seaking pilot (but you can learn to fly the more technolgically complex and sophisticated weapons platform found in the AAC) and the seperating out of people becomes even more ... er ... suspect.

    I could go on and I'm sure you could reply to each point in turn. As I say, they're just a couple of thoughts :thanks:

    PS The beauty about being assessed for a PhD is that one has to verbally defend it in front of a panel of examiners for about three hours, which means one can clarify points, demonstrate one's knowledge and understanding, etc.

  8. This may be of some use and you can Google 250,000 links on the subject
    my last count . May your dream become reality ,
  9. I know a woman who administers these tests as part of her recruitment (civil) job.
    She is about the least logical, and least capable of lateral thinking person that I know of.
    eg. Take a bright sunny weekend day in Brighton when there is a huge event in town. Comes the comment 'Let's go and find a nice quite restaurant on the sea front and have lunch'. She also cruises Tesco car park to find a place close to the door, then wonders why she gets dents in her car.
  10. Beautiful! I like the sound of her :thumright:
  11. Ninja_Stoker

    Ninja_Stoker War Hero Moderator

    Good points Harry,

    I think were the RN test is useful is that it assesses basic reasoning, literacy, numeracy & mechanical comprehension skills which actually translate into the relevant trade to be taught in training. Different trades have differing required levels in the individual "part scores" as well as the all-up total. Those being tested are advised that the questions do not get "harder" which is true, but they move into different areas of each subject & are frequently perceived as getting easier.

    The important thing is the test, for all it's perceived faults, is purely a benchmark which identifies that we can train people in the timescale permitted , which in itself has evolved over a long process. Clearly for financial reasons we would seek to train people of similar intellectual capacity, rather than hinder the high achievers or move too fast for those that may require more in-depth tuition. The test is most certainly not an IQ Test nor a Psychometric Profiling Test to identify the personality traits & tendencies of a potential employee- the latter being employed by many companies but not this one.

    Whilst we do not have the time to conduct several hours of reasoning in which the candidate may demonstrate their ability to defend their answers in the recruiting test, we conduct a 45-60 minute interview with each candidate to assess their personal qualities and to try and ensure they are suited to the job. Sometimes we get it wrong, but collectively the success rate justifies the means.

    RN New Entry & RM Recruit training now incorporates a "Basic Skills" assessment to ensure all that pass the recruiting test have the minimum level of literacy & numeracy - those that haven't get taught.

    Anyway, an interesting subject....Taxi for Ninja![​IMG]
  12. wet_blobby

    wet_blobby War Hero Moderator

    They let me in, the tests can't be that hard. :thumright:
  13. Its just a bumma when you pass it then have to take it again because its validity has run out.
  14. What a strange idea. I wonder how long it takes for the validity of your intelligence test to run out? I suppose it must be a matter of keeping up with technological progress, or something? For example, you might pass the test, train on the Mary Rose, go to sea, swim back ashore and then join up again a couple of hundred years later during the industrial revolution! Yup, I can see how the validity of the original test might have run out in that case :dwarf:
  15. Ninja_Stoker

    Ninja_Stoker War Hero Moderator

    Nice one Harry!

    OK, test validity is 3 years. The reason? Well, often the required level of scores for each trade varies due to the changing content of the trade training.

    The other thing, for example, if you have been away from the academic environment and haven't, for example, been using mathematics on a regular basis, you can suffer from skill fade, as evidenced by the fact Mike passed it first time, then failed a second, which vindicates the need to have an expiry on test validity.

    The problem with training, is that it is based around the assumption that we all have a base level from which to start- if you drift below that level there isn't sufficient time to carry out revision training- the onus is on the individual. It is surprising the amount of individuals that score lower a second time around.

    Anyway, good luck!
  16. Better get revising then.
  17. No You Can ONLY take the test 3 times...i failed my first test and they have put me in the september one and they said in one of the Royal Navy sites it states that you can take the test 3 times with a 12 month wait between each!!

    Good Luck...X
  18. Ninja_Stoker

    Ninja_Stoker War Hero Moderator

    That's what I said, diddle I?

    Welcome anyway.
  19. Hey sorry to jump in here, I didn't want to start up a new thread for this. But I was wondering, if I fail the psychometric test this Friday, can I apply for the paras right away? although id much rather wait the 12 months as I am committed to joining the RM. This is just a query.
  20. Just revise and you will almost defiantly pass. I missed out a crap load of questions (really, take everyone's advice and practice for speed) and still got a good score.

Share This Page