![]() While it’s encouraging that the Army is moving towards more data-driven solutions, even good data can be misinterpreted and applied in a manner that unintentionally hinders women. Therefore, reducing goals and incentives for all soldiers to the minimum passing score during a critical period of data collection inadvertently threatens to create a self-fulfilling prophecy of low performance and will yield artificially low “facts” about female physical capabilities. Conversely, the Golem Effect describes the opposite impact lower leader expectations result in lower subordinate performance. Studies in performance and sport psychology repeatedly attest to the important influence of high goal-setting, leader expectations, and self-efficacy in successful performance, known as the Pygmalion Effect. ![]() If the Army uses data gathered over the last six months of the ACFT 3.0’s implementation to assess the physical capabilities and predict future potential of women, it will unintentionally stifle both. The Problem with Gathering “Facts” on Women By making a few modifications to the ACFT 3.0, the next version of the test could easily meet lawmaker guidance without perpetuating a class system that keeps women at the bottom. ![]() And finally, the new ACFT policy presents the female physiology as an inherent weakness for which the Army must compensate, instead of incorporating critical fitness components for which the female physiology is often advantageous. Additionally, instead of fixing the Army’s outdated promotion system, the ACFT 3.0 keeps it segregated along gender lines, reinforcing the stigma that women cannot perform the same job as their male peers. ![]() While the Army is eager to produce a version of the test that will not disadvantage women and thereby gain Congressional approval, the ACFT 3.0 misses the mark.Įven as a temporary solution, the “bad data” that the low standards of this test are producing during a critical fact-gathering period will create lasting negative consequences for women. The new updates to this test include the option to choose either a plank or leg tuck as a core exercise, the removal of branch-specific minimum standards, and the addition of a promotion system that will assess Soldiers according to their gender. I wrote an op-ed through the Modern War Institute in February advocating against the implementation of ACFT 3.0, the latest version of the Army Combat Fitness Test (ACFT). ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |