Canadian Forces Aptitude Test (CFAT) [MERGED]

[xtreme]

I don't see why not.  Unless there are technical limitations on this site, it can easily be done on a different site.

I think it would help alot of new people considering the CF to have an idea where they may qualify before actually taking the risk of writing it and losing a chance right off the bat if they are disappointed with the results.  Because doing poorly on the CF or not qualifying for what you hoped for can be very discouraging.  Last time I wrote the CFAT was in 2002 (I passed but did not qualify for officer), it has taken me almost 5 years since then to pick myself up again and try it again.  It shot my ego quite a bit, considering my educational background is engineering.

 

[FredDaHead]

So the whole idea of this is to mollycuddle future applicants so their precious egos isn't hurt when they fall on their face and realize they're not the beautiful and unique snowflake their mom told them they were? Boo-frickin-hoo.

 

[George Wallace]

Do YOU Wonder why we have 114 Pages Here ? is the problem with so many people coming to this site and not bothering to look at what has already been posted.  So once again we have two new topics on CFAT, with all the old questions are being rehashed, all the pointers being given, including the reposting of the links to practice tests, and of course now we need to do a survey....... :

 

[tree hugger]

...but George, we can have graphs! 

 

[George Wallace]

Only if they are animated pie charts.............................

 

[tree hugger]

Golly gee - I sure hope so!  That colour coding will be fun!

 

[xtreme]

George,

I understand there are 100+ pages on this topic.  And I have done some searches and have found some stuff.  But keep in mind, there's alot of outdated information in those 100+ pages that have members whom haven't posted in a long time.  Perhaps a completely seperate section on the board for just the CFAT alone might make organization of these topics a little easier (perhaps by topic title?).  The idea is to try to help that's all.

 

[George Wallace]

There are a couple of very good topics on CFAT.  Diluting the site with hundreds of topics on the subject defeats the purpose and makes it very hard for anyone to find what they want to find, further diluting the site with more repetitious questions. 

 

[xtreme]

Freddy G,

Not sure, you sound a little bitter about that.  It's not about "mollycuddling" at all.  It's about knowing where you stand at the very present moment, so when you do take the dive into the deep end you are ready and know where to prepare.  

I have found personally that the more I practice (for speed), the more my speed improves and thus my overall score also improves.  I guess the reasoning behind that would be that I am left with more time to actually think about the problem itself, as opposed to wasting the time in mundane computation.  

My main goal is essentially to speed my mental arithimetic to the point that it is easier for me to do it all in my head than to run to a calculator or writing it down.  If I can raise it to that level, I know for most CFAT questions I can basically look at the question and know the answer.

 

[George Wallace]

Perhaps it is time to re-enforce the following:


Welcome to Army.ca. Here are some reading references that are core to how Army.ca operates. I strongly recommend you take a moment to read through these to give you a better sense for the environment here. It will help you avoid the common pitfalls which can result in miscommunication and confusion. For those that choose not to read, their actions often lead to warnings being issued or even permanent bans.

Army.ca Conduct Guidelines: MUST READ - http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/24937.0.html

MSN and ICQ "short hand" -  http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/33247.0.html

Regarding the use of "MSN speak" versus the employment of prose which is correct in grammar, spelling and punctuation, please see: http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/34015/post-260446.html#msg260446

Tone and Content on Army.ca: http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/51970.0.html

FRIENDLY ADVICE TO NEW MEMBERS - http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/24937/post-259412.html#msg259412

Recruiting FAQ - http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/21101.0.html

Army.ca Wiki Recruiting FAQ - http://army.ca/wiki/index.php/Frequently_Asked_Questions

• Canadian Forces Aptitude Test - http://army.ca/forums/threads/21101/post-103977.html#msg103977
• Fitness requirements at enrolment, see page 12 of this brochure: http://64.254.158.112/pdf/physical_fitness_en.pdf

Infantry Specific FAQ - http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/21131.0.html

Search page - http://forums.army.ca/forums/index.php?action=search;advanced

Google search of Army.ca - http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=+site%3Aarmy.ca+%22search+term%22&btnG=Search&meta= (follow the link then replace "search term" with what you are looking for)

Army.ca wiki pages - http://army.ca/wiki/index.php/Main_Page


To summarize. Welcome to Army.ca, start reading.



[Pay close attention to the points on how to use SEARCH.]

 

[neko]

And military members would want to do this because...?
And even if they did, how would they know which occupations require the highest scores?
And the highest scores in what part of the test?
And for this exercise to have any value at all the free test would have to be very similar to the CFAT.  
Which means that people who have written the CFAT would have to find a test that is very similar.
Why would they?
Why wouldn't they? Well because anyone who has written it is instructed not to tell anyone what is on it or discuss it with anyone outside of the room.  


Really the recruiters give you enough information about it. They tell you what level math to study and I don't think there's much you can do to improve ones spatial ability. If you don't do well enough the first time, study up and try again, choose a trade you did qualify for or just follow the advice of the recruiters whatever that may be.

I had a bit of a laugh when I read this, honestly why would you think that anyone should do all this for you or other potential recruits.  (rhetorical by the way)

 

[DEVES]

Xtreme,
Not A bad idea but whats the point? Just study for the test and do it. The current CFAT topic section has lots and lots of posts on the same questions. also it provides tons of information on getting prepared. Its a test to see what trades you can possibly succeed in. Just study check out other posts then go from there. Oh and if you have a question or an idea just post it in the CFAT section.

Goodday.

 

[Ex Ranger Instructor]

On the plus side for xtreme, someone sure should tell him that CFAT be damned, he qualifies to hold high-level positions in NDHQ based on his ability to find an answer in search of a problem.

Top marks for being able to come up with a cumbersome, labour-intensive procedure to solve a problem that nobody in the CF even knew we had.

 

[deedster]

Perhaps it is time to re-enforce the following:


Welcome to Army.ca. Here are some reading references that are core to how Army.ca operates. I strongly recommend you take a moment to read through these to give you a better sense for the environment here. It will help you avoid the common pitfalls which can result in miscommunication and confusion. For those that choose not to read, their actions often lead to warnings being issued or even permanent bans.

Army.ca Conduct Guidelines: MUST READ - http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/24937.0.html

MSN and ICQ "short hand" -  http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/33247.0.html

Regarding the use of "MSN speak" versus the employment of prose which is correct in grammar, spelling and punctuation, please see: http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/34015/post-260446.html#msg260446

Tone and Content on Army.ca: http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/51970.0.html

FRIENDLY ADVICE TO NEW MEMBERS - http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/24937/post-259412.html#msg259412

Recruiting FAQ - http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/21101.0.html

Army.ca Wiki Recruiting FAQ - http://army.ca/wiki/index.php/Frequently_Asked_Questions

• Canadian Forces Aptitude Test - http://army.ca/forums/threads/21101/post-103977.html#msg103977
• Fitness requirements at enrolment, see page 12 of this brochure: http://64.254.158.112/pdf/physical_fitness_en.pdf

Infantry Specific FAQ - http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/21131.0.html

Search page - http://forums.army.ca/forums/index.php?action=search;advanced

Google search of Army.ca - http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=+site%3Aarmy.ca+%22search+term%22&btnG=Search&meta= (follow the link then replace "search term" with what you are looking for)

Army.ca wiki pages - http://army.ca/wiki/index.php/Main_Page


To summarize. Welcome to Army.ca, start reading.



[Pay close attention to the points on how to use SEARCH.]

0
There it is again!  Love it  
DO IT

 

[Michael OLeary]

I got an idea, not sure if someone has done this before already.  But I think this idea may be great and we can all get together and decide how we want to do this.

Pick an IQ test, we will all agree to what IQ test should be the benchmark for our scores.  All existing members of the CF will then write this online test (preferably free).  Then in a poll on this forum, they will select out of a list what their trade/occupation/qualifcation/rank is, and connect it to what their IQ score is.  This way nobody has to reveal what their own personal score is, because the average of scores (on the poll) would yield the final score for that trade/occupation.

So if you have written the CFAT already and got the list of trades you qualify, select the "highest/hardest" most trade you qualified for as a way to "round-up."

This way, we can get a rough idea approximation the type of score you should get on this FREE iq test in order to qualify for any particular trade/profession in the CF based on the existing members.  Of course the more people (larger sample) that participate in this, the more accurate and correlated our results will be.

This would be a good way before you write your CFAT to get an idea what you might actually qualify for, based on what existing members of the CF have qualified for.

Who's in on this idea?  I think it might actually work. 

1.  Picking an IQ test won't work; general aptitude testing is more than just an IQ assessment.  That's why it's not called the CFIQT.

2.  Trying to build a scale of trade vs IQ is a faulty premise because it presumes that the list of trades is arranged solely by IQ (see point #1).

3.  CFAT results may determine the list of trades an applicant is eligible for, but a wide variety of personal factors also influence the choice(s) after that.  Trying to create a model based on an onlione IQ test won't capture those elements of personal choice.

4.  Every takes the test as a civilian applicant, rank at the time of your later measurement is immaterial.

5.  Personal development since being recruited may give a different result than the person may have achieved the day they took the CFAT.

6.  Unless someone very recently took the test, they won't remember all of the trades (or the "highest/hardest" trade) they might have qualified for.  Not everyone immediately goes to that choice, see point # 3.

7.  The CFAT and the range of trade choices (and the requirements for individual trades) has evolved over time, any sample from a number of years of testing will not provide consistent comparison data.

I think it would be a collosal waste of time and effort on the part of all potential participants, creating an unscientific collection of data with no solid evidence that it might help anyone. 

 

[neko]

My vocabulary score may be due to the fact that English is not my first language.  Which is another beef I have with the CFAT, because Verbal reasoning for the most part is not culture-fair.

You need to be fluent in either French or English to be in the military  and the CFAT can be taken in either language. Seems fair enough to me.

 

[aesop081]

My vocabulary score may be due to the fact that English is not my first language.  Which is another beef I have with the CFAT, because Verbal reasoning for the most part is not culture-fair.

Quit your damned whining about the CFAT.  English is not my first language and i did just fine. Looks to me like you speak english well enough to have no excuse.

Yet another individual going through life waving a sign saying "its not fair"

Seek life elsewhere......

 

[George Wallace]

".....it's not fair"  Are we starting to talk politics now? 

"Come on Stefan.......life is not fair."

Darn Liberals.



;D

 

[Fishbone Jones]

With everything posted here, and with all the other threads on CFAT, I see no reason to continue this thread. Normal caveats apply. If you're not ready to do the test.............we can't help you here. Go back to school, or study some more, until you think you're smart enough to be a soldier......then challenge the test. If you fail............study some more, and try again.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

OK. I'll be the bad guy. We've CFAT'd the site to death. There's pages and pages on it in past threads and archives. If you can't search and research those, for your answers, you're probably not smart enough to pass the CFAT. This thread is closed. No caveats on this one.