[cryptome] Re: Wanna Be a Spy Wanna Be?: Take the MI5 Intelligence Test

  • From: Michael Shelton <iao.ms88@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 12:13:41 -0800

Dear Sirs,
  I looked at the test but did not take it yet.
   When I was still in school(UCD),I took
a course in experimental psych.Where we took tons of various tests,and
learned to design testing for certain behaviours or ideologies of
interest,without it being apparent what we are looking for.
   I have a feeling that this one from MI5
is like that,what they deduce from it isn't
reading and comprehension.Devious test
design is an art and a science(sounds familiar,eh?)and should be carefully
constructed in order to leave the cadets
totally in the dark as to the intent.
    You can always tell this from a test
that does not have a hidden agenda........
Expect to win!
Michael Shelton, I.A.O.

On 20 Jan 2015 04:24, "doug" <douglasrankine2001@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hi Ryan,
> Congratulations...:-) .
> I think you will find that it is one of those open-ended sort of
> exercises, where there are a number of different outcomes, dependent upon
> what you look at, examine, understand, assimilate, categorise and then
> memorise, before you come out with the conclusions.  The scenario also
> panders to ones prejudices...what would you do if caught up in a particular
> situation where thinking on your feet is needed, and where long a well as
> short term consequences have to be considered.
>  That is why they use a multiple choice question format. The problem with
> multiple choice format exams, is that though they are easy to mark, they
> don't have the flexibility of allowing for the development of fluid
> scenarios.  The CHIS needs to be looked at quite carefully for example.
> Most people go for the names and dates of births and car numbers and types
> of cars, before they really knuckle down to the wheres and whens. This is
> because we are brought up with the Hollywood version of the spy hero who
> has an infallible memory, is athletic, well-trained in the use of gizmos
> and is one of the good guys who gets rid of the bad guys. There is an
> element of truth in that outlook (or is it instilled set of prejudices) but
> it is only an element.
>  There is also a time factor on it.   It needs to be looked at a number of
> times, so that the examinee gets a better understanding of what is being
> asked, what to look for, how to put it together. A marriage of induction
> and deduction techniques. They do allow examinees the opportunity to take
> it a number of times, until the time is used up.
> Now, what do you think...and our colleagues think, was the purpose of the
> exercise?
> Dougie.
> On 20/01/15 07:28, Ryan Carboni wrote:
>> I got five.
>> I suspect it's impossible to get eight out of eight, or they'd have to
>> deal with people demanding high pay since they scored so high.

Other related posts: