Evaluation of DataLounge Draft Testing Measure (New DataLounge Admissions Test): R245
The problem posed by R245, despite the item's likely capacity to indicate a respondent's worthiness in being considered for DL admission across several domains of primary and secondary interest, lacks critical information needed to provide an appropriate response, as well as to avoid suggestions of bias or ambiguity.
What is the date of the luncheon? Or, if the testing authority intends the respondent to posit a date, the item description needs to state that this is the case.
The dynamics of such a group encounter could be developed, presented and supported only by knowing when the luncheon is to have occurred. The encounter's complexities include but are not limited to such features as the following, each of which can be indicated only when timing is defined:
1. The state of interpersonal relationships between and among the participants, which of course were highly dynamic and subject to rapid alteration. The status of paired, as well as group, relationships at the time of the event would partly determine the contours of exchanges, teaming and partnering, and loci of attack. Naturally, such teaming would mostly occur early in the encounter, before accumulations of alcohol and drug intake and encounter effects would have led to the inevitable climactic cascade of free-for-all, everyone-for-herself savagery.
2. The current degree and combinative impact of substance dependence and usage. Apart from the inherent and obvious relevance of this information, the test item specifically addresses it, which would increase respondents' reflexive inclusion of it.
3. The state of psychological well-being, distress or pathology, independent of and/or informed by current substance use and abuse patterns.
4. The position of each participant on her or his career track, which strongly correlate with individual strengths, weaknesses, and lines of attack and defense.
5. The state of personal lives (e.g. sex lives, marriages/partnering, place of residence, interior decorating projects, weight, recency of holidays)
6. Whether or not participants would be alive at the time of the event. Placement of the luncheon in a limbo of non-specific timing would tend to add an element of fantasy inimical to the desired force and froth of the group exchange.
EVALUATORS' RECOMMENDATION: The evaluation team, with agreement from the Instrumentation Committee, the Admissions Board and a plurality of Directors, recommends that a date and time of THURSDAY, MAY 3, 1962, AT 1:00 PM be specified in the test item for the group reservation, in order to facilitate equitable assessment.
Without absurdly accounting for optimal probabilities of availability among the putative participants on this date, and permitting respondents to apply creativity as to location and timeliness of arrivals, this date offers a reasonably level playing field among the parties involved. Mr. Laurent's I CAN GET IT FOR YOU WHOLESALE would have had a month to build cachet for him at this stage of his career. Ms. Bankhead's lull would be somewhat mitigated by her two appearances in the US Steel Hour's HEDDA GABLER. Her Serene Highness would be basking in the reflected glow of White House brilliance. Mr. Williams would have claimed his last Tony Award on April 29 for NIGHT OF THE IGUANA. Mr. Vidal, also enjoying the White House connection, would have been entering the serious portion of his writing career with ROMULUS. And Miss Parker, while in substantive decline, would have been reconciled with her husband for a year and at least working with him on a few projects.
The evaluators, hoping to assist the DL in its mission, welcome any questions or corrections.