July 1981 ,GOVERNMENT RItHTS IN DATA STATEMENT

ED 206 462

DOCUMENT RESUME

SE 635 499

RUMP Brown, Cheryl J.: And OthersmITLE Assessment of Numerical Skills of4Havy Enlisted

Personnel.INST/TUT/ON Naval Training Analysis and Evaluation Group,

Orlando, Fla.REPORT NO TAEG-TM-81-4.PUB DATE Jul 91ROMP- 21p.

EDRS PF/CE MFO1 /PC01 Plus Postage. (DESCR/P7OFS *Educatibnal Research: Evaluation: Learning Problems:

*Mathematics Education: *Military Personnel:*Postsecondary Education: Remedial Mathematics:*Testing

TDENT/FIERS *Mathematibs Education Research

ABSTRACTThe purpo se of this study was twofold: (1) to examine

the extent of basic numerical 'kills deficiencies in the populationof recruits bound for Apprentice Training, and (2) to examine whetherselected Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASYAB) testscores could be used to predict numerical skills performance. Thisprotect was undertaken by the Training Analysis and Evaluation Group(SAES) and Academic Remedial Training (ART), Recruit TrainingCommand, Orlando, as part of a larger project.tasked by the chef ofNaval Education and Training in the area of improving basic academic

Of 291 recruits bound fot Apprentice Training, sore than 100,failed to pass a basic test of Navy numerical skills. Deficiencieswere tr.the area of mathematics skills gather thanin the basic numeric operations. when sRlected ASYAB scores werealalyzed, an effective formula was derives to predict a numericalskills deficit. The ASVAB subtest score for Arithmetic Reasoning -

(AR), 'combined with Paragraph Comprehension (PC) and NumericalOperations '(NO) scores, was foundAo be the best predictor.(Author /MP)

11.

Js.

% AReproductions supplied by EDRS are the best,that can be made

Y * from the original document.

LU

TRAININGANALYSISANC

EVALUATION

GROUP

j

r.

TECHNICAL:'MEMORANDUM 81-4

ASSESSMENT OFNUMERIOAL SKILLSOF NAVY .ENLISTEDPERSONNEL,

FOCUS ON THE TRAINED PE RCr\I 43

S OEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONNATrONAl INSTITUTF OF EDUCATION

Ci

-1-

UJ

re-

od

APPROVED FOR PUBLIC FELEASE,DISTRIBUTION IS UNLIMITED

r

1

JULY 1041

TRAINING ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION GROUPORLANDO, FLORIDA 32213

111.

C

Technical MemoranduC81-4

ASSESSMENT OF NUMERICAL SKILLS OFNAVY ENLISTED PERSONNEL

Cheryl 3. BrownJ. Peter Kincaid

Training Analysis and Evaluation Group

1 I

LCDR Horace McMorrow

p

Academic Remedial TrainingRecruit Training Command, Orlando

July 1981

I

,GOVERNMENT RItHTS IN DATA STATEMENT

Reproduction of this publication in ole'or in part is permitted for any pu seof the United States Government.

ALFRED F. SMODE, Ph.D., Director,

Training Analysis and Evaluation Group

1

2

W. L. MALOY, Ed.D.

Deputy Chief of Naval .Education andTraining for Educational Development/

Research, Development, Test, andEvaluation . 4,

3

A

Technical Mehorandum 81-4

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors wish to thank the following pehonnel .for their help inconducting this study:

SN Raymond Hull, Acadehic Remedial' Training instructor, Recruit .

Training Command, Oylando, conducted the testing of severalhundred recruits, handscored the tests, and retrieved allASVAB and RGL scores.

t

PNCS Roland E. Porter, Jr., Personnel Sypport Activity,

Detachment, Naval Training Center, Orlando,tassisted in schedUl-inq'the administration of the Navy Numerical Skills TEst. e't

Appreciation is alsi extended to the following Training Analysis andEvaluation Group personnel who supported the projects, Mr. Larry Ford providedhelpful suggestions fqr statisticaranalysis of the 'data, and Ms. BettyPereyra assisted in data analysis.

4.

4

t

Unclassified

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (Whim D... Entered)

REPORTbOCUMENTATION PAGE READ INSTRUCTIONSBEFORE COMP!. FTTNG FORM

I REPORT NUMBER

Technical Memorandum 81-42 GOVT ACCESSION 110 3 ()RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMBER

If TITLE (andiSubfitle) N

ASSESSMENT OF NUMERICAL SKILLS OF NAVY ENLISTEDPERSONNEL .

S TYPE OF REPORT 6 PERIOD COVER

4 P RFORM1NG ORG REPORT NUMBER

7 AuTmOR(o) ' . -.

Cheryl J. Brown, J. Peter Kincaid, andllHorace McMorrow . ,

CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER(0)

,

9 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS

, Training Analysis ant Evaluation GroupOrlando, Fl 32813

10 PROGRAM ELEMENT PROJECT TASKAREA WORK UNIT NUMBERS

1

11 CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS\ 12 REPORT SATE

July 198.113 NUMBER OF PAGESlit'

.14 MONITORING AGENCY NAME 6 ADDRESS/of different from Contionfne Office)

. , ' 1

'

15 SECURITY CLASS (ol into report)

, Unclassified .

.

"14. OECL ASSIFICATION DOWNGRADINGSCNEOuLE

16 ORSTRI131.1710N STATEMENT rol Nile Report) .IN

s-Approved for public release, distribution is unlimited

. .

1.

s /

17 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT rot the 'Detract entered M Block 20 If different fete Report)

14 SUPPLEMENT ARV NOTES

/.

19 KEY WORDS (Continuo on de if ...comfy and Identify by block mein) n.

Numerical SkillsRemedial PathematicsBasic Academic SkillsApprentice Tratning

40 . ABSTRACT (Continue on .. 00000 olds If nocty and Identify by block number) ..I- The purpose of this study, was twofold. to examine the extent of basic

numerical skills deficiencies in the population of recruits bound forApprentice Thining and to examine whether selected Armed Services VocationalAptitude Battery (ASVAB) test scores could be used to predict namericalskills performance.

l' .

This project was undertake?) by the Training Analysis and Evaluation -

Group (TAEG) and Academic Remedial Training (ART), Recruit Training COmmand,

DD 1;cA):1q 1473 COITION OF I mOV 6515 oasoLert

N 0102 - r 014 6601Unclassified

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (117IFFIDI Ene.7.4)

.*

1

Section

I INTRODUCTION

Technical Memorandum 41-4

TABiE'OF CONTENTS

S

Page

3'iw

Background. 3

Purpose 4

Organization of the Report;

f 4

- .

II PROCEDURE.

AND RESULTS--7-\ 5

Navy Numerical Skills Test e 5 it

-Predictive Data s 5

Results,

5?

Descriptive Data- -Total Sample 5

Multiple Repression Analysis--Subsakple. 7

III CONCLUSIONS ANDRE6MMENDATIONS 11

ConclusionsRecommendations

REFERENCES

.1;

11

13

.0\

Section

I INTRODUCTION

Technical Memerandum $1-4

TAi.E'OF CONTENTS

S

I

PacieL

3'Cfk

Background 3

Purpose 4%

Organization of the Report;

4

II PROCEDURE AD RESULTS-7--

5

Navy Numerical Skills Test r 5 mg

Predictive Data . 5

Results?

5

Descriptive Data- -Total SampleMultiple Repression Analysis--Subseinple

CONCLUSIONS AND' RECOMMENDATIONS

5

7

11

Conclusions , 11 ,

Re) commendations 11

REFERENCES 13

I

4

1/4

11

P

.1;

a

I

I

4

Technical Memorandum' 8I -4

- LIST OF TABLES

.4

ai..-

.,

Table Page

1. Summary of Data of Total Sample of Recruits (q.293) on the( NavyNumerical.Skills Test, ASVAB Subtests and Reading .

i Grade ,Level (RGL)

Correlations 9f Navy Numerical SkillsTest Scores of' Recruit t#.293) with Their ASVAB Scores and RGL . , 7

3 Summary- of.Data of.80 Recruits on the Navy NumericajSkills, Test, ASVAB (Forms 8, 9, and 10) Subtests, andReading Grade Level (RGL)

4 v A

4 Correjations of Navy 'Numerical Skills Test Sdores of 80Recruits with Their ASVAB (Forms 8, 9, and 10) Scores''

' and RGL

5. Multiple Regression Summary Table Based 'on Data from 80Recruits Who MereAdministered ASVAB (Forms 8, 9, and 10). 9

. c

Il .

Y.

S

c

00"

Technical Memorandum

. SECTION I

INTRODUCTION ,

e ..

The increasingly complex technology associated will) the modern Navyglaces an added burden on e Naval. Educatron ,and Training Command (NAVEDTRACOM)to insure that trainees possess the skills necessary to perform in the fleet.It-is becoming increasingly apparent that ny Navy re.ruits,and "A" school .

students do qot possess the minimal level o required skills for successful.

school performance. An area of growing co ern is proficiency in basicnumeri-cal skills as a prequisite for technical training in'wch fields as nuclearpower, electricity, and electronics. Because of these concetn, a need existsfor a system to formally assess the extpnt of basic ndmerical skills deficienciesii the recruit populatioh and to planYemedial instruction as early in theNavy training program as necessary and feasible.

, t

- r-

BACKGROUND 4,

Most technical trairiing'programs,in.the Navy require at least some *sicmastery of numerical skills yet instructors often.cite lack of these skillSas a primary deficiency among. students. Sachar and Baker (1981) reportedthat instructors in electronics L'A" schools expected- students to enter theschool with an array of math skills that should have been learned Other in.high school or in preparatory Naval training programs. The instructorsperceived that many students entering the."A" schools lacked these bgic mathski1136'yet they spent a minimal amount of time reviewing and teaching, mathin the "A" school classroom (1 to 5 percent of total training time) .

Up to now, the Navy's only formal attempt to help remedy the situation,has been the math remediation program that as part of the Basic Electricityand Electronigt (BytE) School. Students scheduled to enter BE &E take adiagnostic math test. Students who have deficiencies in math are referred to

I.

indiOdualized remedial math units but are not tested on these units (Sacharand Baker, 1981).

Several "A" schoo]s are establishing th r own reniedial math programs.One such program at the Guided Missiles "A" chool at Dam Neck, Virginia,employs a locally written screening test and structional modules, both ofwhich match course objectives (Foster, 1981). rty percent of enteringstudents' receive instruction from peersi(recntly graduated students awaiting"C" Scho01). Remedigon is given prior to the start of the formal course.,School personnel are convinced, by informal observation, that the program is 4*

teducing attrition,.1

In view of a pervasive need for training-in basic numerical skills inthe Navy, the Training Analysis and Evaluation Group (TAEG) was tasked by the

,Chief -5f Naval Education and Training (CNET) to develop a Navy numericalskills workbook and as,ociated test. 4 This work was completed in cooperationwith the Chief of Naval Technical Training who contracted with Memphis State

1

FTCS G. FOster, Gtided Missiles School, Dam Neck,. VA, personal communication

2CNET ltr N-53 of 20 Dec 1978

3

949,


Unimirsity. Both the tei and Workbook, Im vin Yoyr Navy Numerical Skills,

are contained in Bowman, J s, Kaiser, Kinca d, and McDaniel (1981) (hereafter",

referred to as TAE Report o. 96). The test was designed to assess basicskills involving numerical operations as well as the application of thesebasic skills .0 Navy-related problems. The test was shown to be an effective

tool to accurately identify recruits in,Apprentice Training and AcademiaRemedial Training who needed remedial math instruction.

Atipresent, the Navy does not have a standard method for screeningrecruits who have deficiencies in basic math ;kills. The present_sudy usedthe Navy Numerical Skills Test.to assess the need for math remediation in agroup of. recruits about toenter Apprentice Training and, in addition, exploredthe feasibility of using the Armed Services Vocatioqial Aptitude Battery(ASVAB) test scores to predict math skills performance.

PURPOSE 40,

The purpose of the stilly was to estimate the extent of basic numeriacskills deficiencies an a sample of recruits about to enter Apprentice graining.A second, and equally important, purpose was to derive a forMula based onselected ASVAB test scores which could be' used to 'predict numerical skillsperformance quickly and accurately. The formula could then be used to indicate;the need for further testing oig for placing recruits in remedial math instruc--tional programs.

ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT .O

In addition to this introduction, the report contains two other sections.Section II describes the procedurtes used in the study and the results. Thereis a brief description of the Navy Numerical Skills Test and a report of theStatistical techniques used to develop a method for screening students fornumerical skills,reMediation. Section III contains conclusions and recommenda-tions which will assist the Navy in identifying recruits who need remedialmath instruction.

4 ,

I04

set


SECTION II

PROCEDURE AND RESUIS

The N4vy Numerical Skills Test was administered in January and February1981 to ecruits--230 males and 63 females--at the Recruit TrainingCommand, Orlando. The recruits were in advanced Basic Training and wereAbut to enter Apprentice Training.

The test was given without prior warning to small groups of approximately40 recruits as part of a general briefing and took 50 minutes to complete.

. ,

NAVY NUMERICAL SKILLS TEST,

. The Navy Numerical Skilds Test contains 50 items that are correlatedwith the topics and skills addressed in the remedial workbook, Im rovin YourNavy Numerical Skills. TAEG Report No. 96 provides a detailed escriptiorITthe workbook anaflif.

. . c

Two forms of the test, A and B, are available. In both forms, items 14 .

through 24 in part I of the test assess basic numerical operations of addition,subtraction,multiplication, and division. -Items 25 through 5Q in part IIare word problems which test proficiency in applying the operations to jobsituations in the Navy and financial responsibilities faced in the Navy. .o.

Form A was used in the 'present study.. tI 4

A.test score greater than 70 percent Ts recommended as a palsing score.

PREDICTIVE DATA

4 r each recruit, s{udent records were analyzed to obtain Reading Gradevel L) based on the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test, Survey'D (Gates And

acGitil le, 1965), and scores on foursubtests of the ASVAB. Scores obtainedwere f om the Arithmetid Reasoning (AR), Paragraph Comprehension.(PC), WordKnowledge (WK), and Numerical Operations (NO) subtes2ts(those thought to berelated to numerical skills). ,

. .. .

Of the total sample, 213 recruit& had ASVAB scores based on Forms 5, 6,and 7, while the remaining 8U recruits--68 males and 12 females--had ASOB'scones based on a newer version--Forms08, 9, and 30. The old and new formsare comparable except that Panagraph Comprehension is a subtest of only thenewer forms of, the ASVAB; therefore, only 80 recruits had PC scores. .

/ 11

Selected ASVAB and RGL scores obtained from student records were correlatedwith saves 6n the Navy Numerical Skills Test, From the sample of 80 recruits '

administered the new ASVAB, test scores were entered into a multiple regressionanaly s to assess the usefulnesscof those measures as predictors of numericalskill!' performance. .

. /*

RESULTS

\DESCRIPTIVE DATA--TOTAL SAMPLE. Based oh ASVAB test uores and RGLs thesample of 293 recruits who were adMinistered the Navy Numerical Skills TeA

5

.

I

,

Technical Aemorandum,81-4

are representative of the population of Navy recruits who enter ApprenticeTraining. Data collected from student records .(table 1) revealed the expectedlowered mean scores when compared to a recent Iiavmummary report.3

' 0 TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF DATA TOTAL SAMPLE OF RECRUITS (At293)

ON THE NAVY NUMERLCAL SKILLS TEST, ASVAB SUBTESTS,AND READING GRADE LEVEL (RGL)

1

".

Navy Numerical Skills Test

Par r."

P t II

0ASVAB

MEM/

Percent Scores Raw Scores

94.2 22.6

51.5 13.4 !

36.0

Standard Scores

STANDARDDEVIATION

2.1

4.6

11.5*

Arithmetic Reasoning (AR) . 48-75 7.6Paragraph Comprehension /PC)** 52.2 6.5Word Knowledge (WK) 49:7 6.5'Numerical Operations (NO) 51.1 / 8.1

1 .S..

Reading Gude Level (RGL) 9.5 2.0

*Based on percent noises**Data obtained from 80 recruits who bad been ad)ninistered the new forms of

the ASVAB--Forms 8, 9, and 10 t 4

The mean RGL was 9.5 and, as.expected,4he mean standard scores on theASVAB suWtests were slightly below the Navy medians for all recruits. OnArithmetic easoning, the mean was 48.6 compared to the Navy median of 54.6..On Paragr h Comprehension the mean was 52.2 compared ter the Haug median of53.9: 0 Word Knowledge the mean was -49.] compared to the Navy median of53.2. 0 Numerical_OpOations the mean was 51.1 compared to the Navy medianof 63.9.

-Table 1 A° shows ehe numerical stills performance of the recruits. On

the 24 items of'part I, the group's mean was 22.6 which demonstrates high

a

,3Navy medians for ASVAB - -Forms 8, 9,And 10--were obtained from the CMIRecruit Population Analysis Report, February 1981. Produced by ManagementInformation and Instruetional Systems Activity.

-6

12

"11(


,

performance on basic numerical operations. On the 26 items of parC II, the

mean -score was 13.4 which reflects a serious deficit in numerical skillsapplication. The test results indicate that Many recruits do not possesstheanalyttcal Skills necessary to solve math problems. The mean score on thewhole test was 36.0 (72.2 percent) which is barely atve the criterion scoreof 70 percent. Of the 293 recruits tested, 108 (or percent) failed toachieve a passing score.

Correlations of ASVAB scores and RGL with Navy Skills Testscores are showWih table 2. ' y

TABLE 2. CORRELATIONS OF NAVY NUMERICAL SKILLS TEST SCORES OF RECRUITS .

(N=293) WITH-THEIR ASVAB SCORES AND-RGL .

Navy NumericalSkills Test

,

ASVAB RGL

. 0 . AR : PC* WK NO 60

Part I .27 .11 .10 .24 .12

Part II .48 .31 .28 :46 - .39

Total-

.49 * .45 .26 .50 :32

*Correlations with/PC based. on a sample of 80 recruits who had beenadministered the new forms of4he ASVAB--Fbrms 8, 9, and 10

a

All Correlations were significant 4 the .05 level (r.19) except for thecorrelations of part I with PC, WKAnd RGL (Bruning and Kintz, 1968), PartI correlates only with the ASVAB tests that measure math skills, while part'..II correlates with tests that measure verbal skills as well, and also withRGL. The analytical skills needed to solve word math problems (as measuredby part II) are related to,these verbal skills.

For the sample, scores on parts I and II were correlated significantlywith each other (r - .34), and both are correlated significantly with the ,

total score. For part I and Total, r = .54, and for part 1,1 and Total, r =

.89. .

, MULTIPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS--SUBSAMPLE. Eighty recruits had ASVAB scores onForms 8, 9, and 10--the newest forms of the test battery Data from thissubsample were used to assess the usefulness of ASVAB scores and RGL aspredictors of numerical skills performance. The data showh in table 3 describethe subsample. .

7

4.3

'A


ts °

TABLE 3. SUMMARY OF DATA OF 80 RECRUITS ON THE NAVY NUMERICAL SKILLS TEST,

ASVAB (FORMS 8,9, AND 10) SUBTESTS, AND READING GRADE LEVEL (RGL)

Percent

MEAN

STANDARDDEVIATION

Scores Raw Scores

Nayy Numerical Skills Test

Part I 95.4 22.9 1.5

Part II 53.1 13.8 #4.0

Total 73.2 36.7 9.5*

ASVAB Standard Scores

Arithmetic Reasoning (AR) 50.5 7.0

Paragraph Comprehension (PC) 52.2 6.5

Word Knowledge (WK) 50,4 7.2

Numerical Operations (NO) 51.2 8.2 ,

'Reading,Grade Level (RGL) 9.6 2.0 )

..*Based on percent scores,

Scores on the,Navy Numerical Skills Test from the subsample were similar IZto those obtained from the whole sample. Thirty percent failed to achieve a

passing total score. Mean RGL andmean ASVAB scores were close to those ofthe entire sample. Correlations of Navy Numerical Skills Test scores withASVAB scores and RGL are shown in table 4.

TABLE` 4. CORRELATIONS 0WITH THEIR ASVAB

MERICAL SKILLS TEST SCORES OF 80 RECRUITSS 8, 9, AND 10) SCORES AND RGL

Niy NumericalSkills Test ASVAB RGL

AR PC WK NO

'Part I .03 .11 .00 -.01 -.13

Part II .59 :31 .]3 .30 .44

Total .57 .45 ' .26 .38 .38

8 1 4a 1


To examine the predictive ability of the ASVAB score and RGL, a forwardstepwise multiple regression analysis 4 was performed that first entered intothe regression equation that variable which explained the greatest amount ofvariance in the outcome variable (Navy Numerical Skills Test total percentscore). The three variables that were found to contribute most too the variancewere Arithmetic Reasoning (AR), Paragraph Comprehension (PC), and NumericalOperations (NO). Table 5 shows multiple R's and the cumulative percentage ofvariance explained as each variable was entered into the regression equation.A multiple R value indicates how well numerical skills scores can be predictedfrom an optimal combination of predictors

The predictor equation >hat accounts for 48 percent of the variance is:

Numerical Skills Test Score (%) = .61(AR) + .44(PC) + .27(NO) + 5.5.

This equation can serve to identify recruits who need remedial math training.It can be used to predict numericat-skills performance when ASVAB subtestscores are availdble.

TABLE 5. MULTIPLE REGRESSION SUMMARY TABLE BASED ON DATAFROM 80 RECRUITS WHO WERE ADMINISTERED ASVAB(FORMS 8' 9, and 10)

PredictorVariables

CumulativeMultiple Percentage

R Variance Explained

AR .57 32

AR & PC .66 43

3 AR & PC & NO :69 48L.

4This is a codonly used computerized statistical procedure from Nie, Hull,. Jenkins, Steinbrenner, and Bent (1975).

9/10

1

Cl

TechnicatflMeMorandum 81-4 ty

e t

SECTION III

' CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

CONCLUSIONS

The rsults of thas study agrge with results reported in TAEG Report Ng.

96. The recruits' mean Navy Numer cal Skills Test scores, RGL, and ASVABscores were very similar to means obtained from a sample of 25 recruits in

Apprentice Training who were tested in early 1980 as part of a field test of.N the remedial workbook, improving Your Navy Numeridal Skills. In the most .

recently tested sample, 37 percenT6T the reTITITIITaTTiaThe Navy NumericalSkills Test at the 70 percent eHterion level, and 81 failed at,the 80 percentlevel. These large perceetage .indicate a pressing need for early assessmentof math skill deficiencies and incorporation of remedial math instructioninto training programs.

The test results suggest that recruit's bound for Apprentice Training aredeficient in apOlying math skills which involve analytical reasoning ratherthan in the basic nupprical operations of addition, subtraction, multipli-cation, and divisibn. ,p

When selected ASVAB and RGL scores were analyzed, al effective formula'was obtained to predict numerical skills Performance. The ASVAB subtestscore on Arithmetic Reasoning (AN) is the best predictor (accounts for thegreatest portion of variance),.phd both Paragraph Comprehension (PC) andNumerical Operations (NO) scores contribute significantly to the accuracy ofthe prediction.

.

4

RECOMMENDATIONS

bsed on thefindings of the present study, the following recommendationsare provided to assist in identifying Navx.recruits who may need remedialmath instruction. The recommendations are.especially applicable when con-cerned with the population of recruits entering Appreniice Training. Basedon instructors' reports, the suggestions also have merit when consideringthose recruits bound for "A" 5chdtls.

.

1. ' The following equation, derived in this study, should be used toassess the basic numerical skills level of recruits :'

Numerical gills T#st Score (%) ''.61(AR) + .44(PC) + .27(NO) + 5.5.

If the formula yields a score of 70 or less in predicting numerical skills,thenvadminister the Navy Numerical Skills Test. If the total score on thistest is 70 percent or less, consider the recruit for remedial numerical skillsinstruction.

2. The TAEG has been recently tasked by CNET on behalf of the Chief ofNaval Technical Training (CNTECHTRA) to design and implement a CBIM system totrack ART and Job-Oriented Basic Skills (JOBS) students' activity throughouttheir training.

44-

Technical. Memorandum 81-4

The proposed CBIM sAtem will have a data base which contains student "tryrecords, entry level test results, and progress test results. The authors ofthis report recommend the math screening formula as part of the informationcontained in the system. 4 .

3. Revise the Apprentice Training and "A" schools prbgrams to includea heaviercemphasiS on numerical skills assessment and remedial training, butonly after dding a thorough needs analysis to determine the level of numericalskills training required. . .

4. Incorporate the remidial math workbook, Im rovin Your Navy NumericalSkills, into the math curricula of Apprentice Training. The W157kbook coversWial directly related to aElplication of -numerical operations in the Navy,and this study indicates this is the area where most remedial training isnecessary. .

)

.4

12

I-


REFERENCES

Bowhan, H. L., Jones, P. L., Kaiser, R. A., Kincaid, J. P., and McDaniel, W. C.Development and Evaluation bf a Remedial Skills Workbook for Navy TrainingTAEG Report No. 96,.1981. Training Eva uation Group, Orlando,FL 32813-

.

Glenview,Bruning, J. L., and Kiniz, B. L. Computational Handbook of Statistics.IL. Scott; Foresman, and Company, 1968.

Epster, G. /An Analysis.of'the Remedial Mathematics Program at NAVGMSCOUnpublilEed Fanuscriiit. AioTi1717g1. Vocational EdikatiOn StudiesMilitary Programs, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale. a

Gates, A. I. and MacGinitie, W. H. Gates-MacGinitie ReadiNew York: Teachers College Press, 3965.-

j -

Nie N. 'H., Hull, C. H., Jenkins, J. G., Steinbrenner,, K.,SPSS: Statistical Package for the Soda) Sciences.Hill Book Co., 1975.

Sachar, J. and Baker, M. S. Mathematical Requirements in Navy Class "A"Electronics Schools. NPRDC Report No. TR 81-4, 198T. Navy PersonnelResearch and D707ipment Center, San Diego, CA 52152.

L.

nq Tests; Survey D.

and Bent, D. H.New York: McGraw-

13

.

t

I

4


DISTRIBUTION LIST

Navy.

OASN (R &D, MRA&L)

CNO (0P-115, M. Malehorn; OP-987H, Dr. R. Smith; OP-987; OR-42)NOCOMPT (NCD-7)ONR (458; 455; 452, Dr. Mayas; 458, Dr. Wisher)CNM (MAT-0872, Mr. A. L. Rubinsxein4CNET (01; 02; N-5; N-911, Mr. Adkins; N-45)CNAVRES (02)COMNAVSEASYSCCM (05L1C, 05L1C2) .

COMNAVAIRSYSCOM (03, 340F, 413G)CNTECHTRA (Ole, Dr. Kerr (5 copies); N-63 (1 copy))CNATRA (Library)COMTRALANT' t-COMTRALANT (Educational Advisor)COMTRAPAC (2 copies)CO NAVPERSRANDCEN -(Library -(4 copies); 309, Dr. Baker)NAVPERSRANDCEN Liaison (021) '

Superintendent NAVPGSCOL (2124, 32)Superintendent Naval litademy Annapolis (ChOrman, Behavioral Science Dept.)CO NAVEDTRAPRODEVCEN (AH3; EAT, Dr. Smith;tTechnical Library (2 copies))CO NAVEDTRASUPPCEN NORVA (OD (2 copies); -N1111, Mr. Fazio)CO,NAVEDTRASUPPCENPAC (5 copiesICO NAVAEROMEDRSCHLAB (Chief Aviation Psych. Div%)CO FLECOMBATRACENPAC '

CO NAMTRAGRU .

CO NAVTECHTRACEN Corry Station (101B; 3330, Cryptologtc.Training Department,004, LT Camp)

CO NAVTRAEQUIPCEN (TIC (2 copies N-09 (Mr. Hohman, 1 -001, N-002)Center for Naval Analyns (2 copies)U.S: Naval Institute (CDR Owler) 1

OIC NODAC (2)CO TRITRAFAC (2 copie;)CO NAVSUBTRACENPAC (2 copies)CO FLEASWTRACENPACCO FLETRACEN SDIEGO , .

CISO, SSC GLAKESExecutive Director NAVINSTPRODEVDET -

Supply Schools Training Officer-(tode 730), MeridianDffice of Civilian Personnel, Soutbern Field Division (Jim Herndon)VT-10 (Education Specialist-)-

CO NAVSUBShOL NLON (Code 0110) 4FCO NAVTECHTRACEN Treasure Island (Technical Library)TAEG Liaison, CNET 022 (5 copies)SSPO-SP-154 (Mr. Reisenleiter.)

CO NAVGMSCOL (FTCS Foster, Mr. Ebbeling)

r

(Page 1 of 3)

19

ct

-Technical Memorandum 81-4

DISTRIBUTION LIST (dbntibued)

Air Force/

Headquarters, Air Training Command (XPTD, Dr. Schufletowski), XPTIA, Mr. Goldman,TTS, Col Powers; TTU, Dr. Driskill; TTSE, Maj, Kesterson), Randolph Air Force Base

Air Force Human Resources Laboratory, Brooks Air Force BaseAir Force Office of Sbientific Research/AR (Dr. A. R. Fregly)HeadqUarters Tactical Air Command (DOOS) Langley Air Force BaseAFMTC/X111(Capt. Englebretson), Lackland Air Force BaseHeadquarters 34 TATG/IM Little Rock Air Force BaseHeadquarters MAC/DOTF (Capt. Orler), Scott Air Force BaseDLIELC (Mr. Devine, Mr. Smilgin), Lacklan ir Force Base

Army

Headquarters, Department of the Army (DAAG-ED, Maj. Jacobs)Commandant, TRADOC (Technical Library)

ARI (Dr. Ralph R. Canter, 316C; Dr. Edgar Johnson; Mr. James Baker;Dr. H. F. O'Neil Or.; Dr. Beatrice Farr, PERI-OK)

ARI Field Unit - Fort Leavenworth- ARI (Reference Service)

. ARI Field Unit - Fort Knox (PERI-IK)_ COM USA Armament Materiel Readiness C6mmand (DRSAR-MAS)

TDI (ATTG-DOR, Dr. Spangenberg)ODCST (ATTG-OIN, Mr. Bartlett), Fort Monroe

Coast Guard

Commandant, U.S..Coast Guard Headquarters (G-P-122/42, GRT/54)

Marine Corps

CMC (OT; TRI -40, Miaj Brown)CGMCDEC (Mr. Greenup)-Director, Marine Corps InstituteCO MARCORCOMMELECSCOL (Col, Evans)

I

Othert

Military Assistant fdig Human Resources, OUSDR&E, Pentagon (CDR Paul Chaielier)Program Manager, Office of Cybernetics Technology, Defense Advanced Researph

Projects Agency

institute for Defense AndlYses (Dr. Jesse prlanskY)COM National Cryptologic School (Code E-2),Director, Center for Educational technology, FSUtenter for Needs Assessment and Planning, FSU

(Page 2 of 3)

I

29

Technical Memorandum 81-4-

A DISTRIBUTION LIST (continued)

Other (continued)

Department of Vocational- Technical Education, Rutgers UniversityDeparbmentof Psychology, Ohio UniversityHumRRO (Dr. Stichb).

Information Exchanges

DTIC (12 copies)DLSIE (Mr. James Dqwling)

r,Executive Editor,_ Psychological Abstracts, American Psychologi,cal AssociationERIC Processing and Reference Facility, Bethpsda, MD (2 copies)

/

r 4

C

1

(Page 3 of 3)

Documents

July 1981 ,GOVERNMENT RItHTS IN DATA STATEMENT