# Research on SFAS



## goon175 (Jul 17, 2012)

This is a report from the Army Research Institute, and gives a good look at "who makes it" in SFAS. The finding are pretty interesting, although predictable in my opinion.

http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA525579&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf


----------



## QC (Jul 18, 2012)

...the Grit Scale did not correlate with IQ... I may not be bright, but I can lift big weights 



Quite interesting stuff, goon. So if you are selected on your physical ability, but have scored lower in other areas, you can be compromised further down the track, i.e: language. 
Just one question, and as I'm not familiar with the munitae over in the US, but if a potential candidate has a particular skill in an area considered to be an advantage to SF, would this soldier be given a soft paddle through selection? The report noted that the physical thing can be picked up later but not intellect. Reason being as it's happened here.


----------



## Salt USMC (Jul 18, 2012)

Gentlemen I think this study should be taken down immediately!  It most definitely gives out the secret to SFAS and will allow tons of candidates to G2 their way to selection!  UNSAT!!  Look at it, it says exactly this: *If you're smart, you can ruck, and you don't quit you have a good chance of getting selected*.  This revelatory cannot be allowed to get out!!


----------



## Lefty375 (Jul 18, 2012)

Deathy McDeath said:


> Gentlemen I think this study should be taken down immediately! It most definitely gives out the secret to SFAS and will allow tons of candidates to G2 their way to selection! UNSAT!! Look at it, it says exactly this: *If you're smart, you can ruck, and you don't quit you have a good chance of getting selected*. This revelatory cannot be allowed to get out!!


 
Too late I already read it.


----------



## x SF med (Jul 20, 2012)

Newsflash...   we already kinda knew the results of this study.


----------



## Rabid Badger (Jul 20, 2012)

Deathy McDeath said:


> *If you're smart, you can ruck, and you don't quit you have a good chance of getting selected*. This revelatory cannot be allowed to get out!!


 
Forget it......the research is outdated. ;);)

Whoever wrote the ARI abstract needs a punch in the face or to not get paid. Definition of an "abstract:





> *What is an abstract?*
> An abstract is a concise *summary of a larger project* (a thesis, research report, performance, service project, etc.) that concisely describes the content and scope of the project and identifies the project’s objective, its methodology and its findings, conclusions, or intended results.


 
This is the ARI abstract:



> The U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) conducted research for more than a decade in support of U.S. Army Special Operations Forces (ARSOF) assessment, selection, and training. *This research was completed prior to the events of September 11, 2001.*


 yet the research dates don't match up throughout the document.

Here's a good quote for ya Death:


> *The belief that exceptional accomplishments can be produced by individuals that demonstrate something other than inherent ability* _*is not new*_ *(see Terman & Oden, 1947)*. (check the date and link)


 
Here's an interesting quote from ARI:



> The results show that implementing more stringent requirements using GT and Grit Scale scores would have prohibited the recruiting of almost half the Candidates who completed SFAS successfully and were selected for SF training.


 so then let's lower the recruiting standards....(That's the ARI recommendation, BTW)

aghhhh. Those candidates who read this ARI research project won't make it through SFAS. Do not read it!!

I have some disturbing ARI SFAS stories from '95-'97 that you don't wanna hear.  
I'm gonna go puke now.


----------



## surgicalcric (Jul 20, 2012)

QC said:


> ...if a potential candidate has a particular skill in an area considered to be an advantage to SF, would this soldier be given a soft paddle through selection?


 
No.


----------



## Rabid Badger (Jul 20, 2012)

QC said:


> .......... as I'm not familiar with the munitae over in the US, but if a potential candidate has a particular skill in an area considered to be an advantage to SF, would this soldier be given a soft paddle through selection?


 
to reiterate surg, a 55 gallon drum does not recognize "soft paddle" or "previous training". An artillery ammo can weighs 100lbs for each and every candidate. A 5gl water can weighs the same for everyone. A 3 wheeled jeep is a bitch to push, even for someone with a medical background, MD or PhD. Push the jeep or go home. Hump the cans or go home.

It's a 21 day kick in the balls for every candidate equally, and should stay that way.

Not meaning to patronize QC, and hoping you don't take it that way. SFAS has had it's ups and downs, this research paper is a sure downer, as the command *LOVES FUCKING ARI*, and cherishes their every report. (SWC pays ARI for their "insight))


----------



## QC (Jul 20, 2012)

No drama RB, we've I believe all lumped three wheeled jeeps, logs and the rest, but if you have a heavy weapons guy, or anyone with a defined skill & a bunch of gun toters at the end of the day, you'd look more favorably at the guy with more skills. I'm not saying the bias is overt, but bias can occur, quietly. It's a fine slice of the salami.


----------



## surgicalcric (Jul 20, 2012)

QC said:


> ... if you have a heavy weapons guy, or anyone with a defined skill & a bunch of gun toters at the end of the day, you'd look more favorably at the guy with *more skills*.


 
Define more skills: language, similar previous MOS', etc...  

We are looking for guys with skills but they must possess a certain aptitude for areas of specific emphasis.  There are plenty of guys with "more skills" that arent what we are looking for regardless of their physical performance.


----------



## QC (Jul 21, 2012)

Ok, that answers my question, "more skills" was just shorthand.


----------



## Rabid Badger (Jul 21, 2012)

PLUS......those "more skills" DO NOT APPLY at SFAS.

The "more skills" are viewed AFTER SFAS at the MOS selection when SWC determines your career path for at least the next year of the SFQC, but only then.


----------

