Wow. I am almost speechless. Am I alone in finding this unbelievable? Lets be objective about this "Personal Potential Index."
First, a large, powerful, "non-profit" organization creates a Six-Factor Model of personality based on 24 likert-scale items. This equals four questions per trait.
Is there any empirical evidence on this measure? What are the questions? What does the internal consistency look like? How do scores compare with other measures of personality? Do the ratings correlate with graduate level performance of any kind? Are there actually six disctinct personality constructs being measured? Let's compare this to the more heavily researched Five-Factor-Model developed by Costa and McCrae. A model developed for assessing "normal" personality traits (compare to PAI, MMPI, Rorscach). In its most brief form (NEO-FFI), the model uses 60 likert-scale items. This equals twelve questions per facet. I could go on and on.....
Second, lets look at the responders. Professors are still being used. They will act as "collateral informants" in the assessment of new, unspecified, and vague personality constructs like "knowledge and creativity, communication skills, teamwork, resilience, planning and organization, and ethics and integrity....[plus an] overall rating." How is this information better than an individually tailored letter of recommendation. Please explain......
Last. if there is someone out there in favor of assessing "personal potential" in this way, anyone at all, please provide some information on this measure in support of your position. That is, if its not top-secret and unavailable to the community. Will these questions change month to month? Is it a Computerized Adaptive Test? Here I imagine a professor endorsing a five for the following question: "Does the student show up to meetings late and appear unconcerned?" To adapt, it then jumps straight into childhood: "Did the student torture animals as a child?" Such measure would prove incredibly effective in identifying sociopaths among us.......
