PROBLEMS IN AIR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT: 

III. IMPLICATIONS OF AGE FOR TRAINING AND JOB 

PERFORMANCE OF AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS 

DAVID K. TRITES. PH.D. • 

BART B. COBB, JR., M.S. 

•Chief, Selection Section 

Psychology Branch 

62-3 

FEDERAL AVIATION AGENCY 

CIVIL AEROMEDICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE 

AERONAUTICAL CENTER 

OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA 

February 1962 
PROBLEMS IN AIR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT: 

III. IMPLICATIONS OF AGE FOR TRAINING AND JOB 

PERFORMANCE OF AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS 

DAVID K. TRITES, PH.D. 

BART B. COBB, JR., M.S. 

Abstract 

The relationships between chronological age upon entry into A TC training and school 

and job performance were examined in five samples of air traffic controller trainees. The 

data confirm conclusively the existence of an inverse relationship such that the older trainees 

have significantly less chance than their younger classmates of either completing training or 

being considered a satisfactory controller. Based upon the results of this investigation it is 

recommended that a maximum age limit bt> established for entry into ATC training. 

The relationship between the age of air traffic controller trainees, A TC school success and, 

subsequently, job performance has been a topic 

of concern to FAA officials for some years. As 

part of two more extensive investigations ( 2, 3) 

of air traffic controllers, the Civil Aeromedical 

Research Institute has recently complete9 a 

study of the relationships between trainingentry-age and school and job performance. The 

present paper describes the results of these 

investigations with respect to age. 

PROCEDURE 

Samples 

Five samples of A TC trainees were utilized -

three for investigation of job performance and 

two for school performance. Since separate 

training programs are conducted at the FAA 

Aeronautical Center at Oklahoma City for 

trainees assigned to Air Route Traffic Control 

Centers ( Enroute) and for those assigned to 

Terminal areas, and because of apparent and 

significant differences in the input age distributions to the two courses, these two types 

of trainees were treated separately where 

appropriate. 

Sample 1: Trainees entering the A TC Euroutc 

training course at the Aeronautical Center in 

August, 1960, through April, 1961, constitute 

the first sample. Of the 361 students in 16 

classes, 281 successfully completed the training 

course and 80 failed. The few men who withdrew for personal reasons, such as health or 

illness in their families, were excluded from all 

aspects of the study. 

Sample 2: This sample overlaps Sample 1. 

It is composed of all Enroute trainees of the 

August, 1960, through January, 1961 classes. 

Of the 217 trainees in these 10 classes, 172 successfully completed the training course and 45 

failed. In September, 1961, job performance 

information and other criterion data, to be described subsequently, were requested and received from the FAA field facilities to which 

course graduates had been assigned. Data 

were obtained for all 164 graduates. 

Sample .3: Trainees entering the ATC Terminal training course at the Aeronautical Center 

in September, 1960, through April, 1961, form 

the third sample. Of 157 students in 13 

classes, 146 successfully completed the training 

course and 11 failed. The few men who withdrew for personal reasons were excluded from 

all analyses. 

-1-
Sample 4: As Sample 2 overlaps Sample 1, 

this fourth sample overlaps Sample 3. It is 

composed of all Terminal course trainees in the 

September, 1960, through January, 1961, classes. 

Of 102 students in 7 classes, 96 graduated and 

6 failed. Followup information was obtained 

for this sample at the same time as it was collected for Sample 2. 

Sample .5: In 1956, representatives of the 

Aeronautical Center of the Civil Aeronautics 

Administration (now the Federal Aviation 

Agency Aeronautical Center) contacted the 

Personnel Laboratory of the United States Air 

Force to discuss procedures for the selection of 

air traffic management personnel. A joint research project was arranged and experimental 

testing of 197 A TC trainees was begun later in 

the year at the Aeronautical Center in Oklahoma City. The results of an earlier analysis of 

the data collected in this project have been reported by Brokaw ( 1). 

In December, 1960, Regional Offices of the 

FAA were able to supply current FAA facility 

addresses, or other information, on all but 10 

of the original 197 subjects. Of the remaining 

187 subjects, 16 had failed the training course 

and left the FAA early in 1957, 15 who had 

passed the training course had left the FAA, 2 

were deceased, replies were not received for 2, 

and 3 were with the FAA but no other information was available. This left 149 subjects (including 4 training course failures still with the 

FAA) for whom relatively complete criterion 

data were obtained. 

Criterion Data 

For Samples 1 and 3, information contained 

in the ATC School's Evaluation of Performance 

Form was used to compute a combined Academic plus Laboratory Grade Average and to 

determine each student's Pass-Fail status. More 

complete descriptions of these criterion measures are contained in Table 1. 

For the individuals in Samples 2, 4, and 5, a 

letter describing the research project and data 

collection forms were sent to the Chiefs of the 

facilities to which the trainees had been assigned upon completion of their training course. 

For each of these subjects at his facility, the 

Chief was asked to supply promotional and job 

information, medical history information, and 

an indication of any disciplinary actions taken 

as a result of violations of air traffic rules or 

procedures. In addition, each Chief was asked 

to have four supervisors rate each subject using 

a job performance evaluation form. The form 

contained items related to job performance, 

ability as a controller, judgment, and personality characteristics. 

Inasmuch as Samples 2 and 4 represented 

a type of subject group distinctly different from 

the individuals in Sample . 5, the letters sent to 

each facility Chief and the data collection forms 

were somewhat different in the two instances. 

Appendix A contains the materials sent to each 

facility in September, 1961, for the subjects in 

Samples 2 and 4. Appendix B contains similar 

materials sent to each facility in December, 

1960, for subjects in Sample 5. 

Information received for the three followup 

samples was used to synthesize two global criterion measures: (a) Average supervisor 

rating; and, (b) satisfactory vs. unsatisfactory 

(marginal) controller. The definitions of these 

criteria for Samples 2 and 4 differ somewhat 

from their definitions for Sample 5. Descriptions of the criteria are contained in Table 1. 

Ages of the subjects upon entry into training 

were determined from the A TC school records 

and plotted against the criterion measures for 

the various samples. To illustrate relationships, 

cumulative percentage curves of age, starting 

with the oldest trainees, were computed for 

various criterion subgroups, or bar graphs showing the criterion subgroup composition of 

various age ranges were developed. 

The significance of differences between cumulative percentage curves for subgroups was 

determined either by fractionating the subgroups at the age closest to the median age for 

combined subgroups and computing a chisquare for the resulting two-by-two table, or 

by dichotomizing the combined subgroups at 

an age which divided the distribution into 75 

and 25 per cent segments and computing a 

chi-square for this two-by-two table. 

In a few instances product-moment correlation coefficients were computed to indicate the 

relationship between age and various criterion 

measures; and where appropriate, t-tests were 

computed to determine the .significance of differences between subgroup means. 

-2-
TABLE 1 

Description of Criterion Variables 

Applicable to 

Sample Description 

1-5 

1-4 

2 and 4 

5 

2 and 4 

5 

Pass vs. Fail: Students successfully completing the ATC enroute training 

course were considered as Pass, those who did not successfully complete the 

course were considered as Fail. Students whose withdrawal from the course 

was necessitated by illness, death in the family, and so on, have been 

deleted from the sample. 

Academic-Laboratory Grade Average: This was the mean (or average) of two 

separate averages for each student - one based on the total number of 

academic examination grades, and the other based on all laboratory performance grades. Fractional values were eliminated by rounding all scores. 

Incomplete test records of students eliminated or withdrawn from the course 

were treated in a similar manner, but the averages were usually based on 

fewer numbers of grades. · 

Average Supervisor Rating: A numerical transformation of ratings collected 

from 1 to 4 supervisors on a form containing 15 items concerning work 

habits, ability, on-the-job training performance, judgment and reasoning, 

emotional stability, and relationships with others. (See Appendix A). 

Average Supenrisor Rating: A numerical transformation of ratings collected 

from 1 to 4 supervisors of each individual on a form <:ontaining 14 items 

concerning work habits, ability, judgment and reasoning, emotional stability, 

and relationships with others. (See Appendix B). Using individuals with 2 or 

more forms, a corrected split-half reliability of .75 was obtained for the 

derived scores. 

Satisfactory vs. Unsatisfactory (Marginal) Controller: A satisfactory controller is one who is still with the FAA and not in any ,{)f 'the . followin~ 

categories of unsatisfactory cor.trollers. 

Unsafe: An individual was placed in this criterion category if one, or more, 

of his supervisors answered, "Yes" to the question, "Do the controller activities of this individual ever have an undesirable effect on air traffic safety?" 

Unwanted: An individual was placed in this criterion category if he was 

not in the Unsafe category and if one, or more, of his supervisors answered 

"No" to the question, "If you were a Facility Chief, would you want this 

individual on your staff as an active controller?" 

Separated: A graduate of the ATC training program who is no lon~er 

with the FAA. 

Low 25% of Supervisor Ratings: An individual in the lowest 25 per cent of 

the distribution of Average Supervisor Ratings of those still with the FAA. 

Satisfactory vs. Marginal (Unsatisfactory) Controller: A satisfactory controller is one who is still with the FAA and uot in any nf th<• following 

categories of marginal controllers: 

Violator: Anyone who was reported by a Facility Chid as having been 

cited for violations of air traffic rules or procedures. (This could not lX' 

used as a criterion for Samples 2 and 4 since individuals in those samples 

had not had sufficient time on the joh to commit violations). 

Low 25% of Supervisor Ratings: An individual in the lowest 25 per cent 

of the distribution of Average Supervisor Ratings of those still with 

the FAA. 

-3-
I 

Training: 

Age Sample 1 

Group Pass Fail 

21-26 170 27 

27-32 70 17 

33-38 19 10 39-45 22 26 

Totals 281 80 

TABLE 2 

Frequency Distribution by Age Groups of Training and Job Performance 

Classifications of Personnel in Various Samples 

Enroute Terminal 

Follow-up: Sample 2 Training: Follow-up: Sample 4 

Pass Ss Who are: 0 Fail in Sample 3 Pass Ss Who are: 0 

Sat. Sep. Unsafe Unwant. Training Pass Fail Sat. Sep. Unsafe Unwant. 

63 10 14 9 13 90 3 37 5 12 6 

14 3 12 9 8 40 3 14 2 7 1 

7 1 3 1 5 11 3 1 2 3 1 

3 6 3 6 19 5 2 3 

87 20 32 25 45 146 11 55 9 22 8 

---·- - - ------ - -----

0 Eight trainees in Follow-up Sample 2 (all in the 21-26 Age Group) and two trainees in Follow-up Sample 4 (all in the 21

training course are in the bottom 25 per cent of the Supervisors' Ratings but are not considered as Unsafe or Unwanted. 
RESULTS 

Frequency polygons of the training-entry ages 

are plotted in Figure 1 for all the Enroute 

trainees in Sample 1 and all Terminal trainees 

in Sample 3. Although both curves reflect the 

highly skewed nature of the distribution of 

entry ages, there is a distinct bimodality apparent in the curve for the Enroute trainees. 

This latter curve has a secondary peak at the 

40 year point and differs significantly ( P < .05) 

from the age curve for the terminal trainees. 

Significance of the difference between these 

curves for the Enroute and Terminal trainees 

was determined by computing a chi-square for 

the two-by-four contingency table comparing 

the frequencies in the age groups 21-26, 27-32, 

33-38, and 39-45. The basic data for this comparison are contained in Table 2- together with 

the frequencies of subjects in various age groups 

and criterion categories for all samples of the 

study. 

> 

u 

z 

w 

:::;) 

0 

65 

60 

50 

40 

~ 30 

"-

20 

10 

• /\ 

I \ 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

0 ~ 20 

ENROUTE -

TERMINAL •--• 

1\~ e, I v 

I '\ Ji\ \ ~~ I 1•\ lZ: -~~ •-•,; ''\ ·-· 

25 30 35 40 45 

AGE 

Figure 1 - Age distribution of trainees entering 16 enroute (N = 361) and 13 terminal (N = 157) training course 

classes in 1960-61 

The reason for the difference between age 

distributions of the two types of trainees is not 

immediately apparent. It does, however, emphasize the fact that in many types of statistical analyses the Enroute and Terminal groups 

should be treated separately since they may 

represent two distinctly different populations. 

Cumulative percentage curves of age for 

students failing the training course and for 

those who passed with academic plus laboratory 

grades in the upper and lower parts of the distribution for pass cases only are presented in 

Figure 2 for Enroute students of Sample 1 and 

in Figure 3 for Terminal students of Sample 3. 

The curves show the percentage of each of the 

subgroups of trainees at, or older, than any 

particular age. 

To test the significance of the differences between the curves for the pass subjects in Figure 

2, the data were dichotomized at an age which 

100 

80 

~ 60 w 

u 

a: 

w 

G. 40 

20 

0 

20 

''\ 

\\ 

~. "' \' \ '. \ \ \, ... , .. .c'.q ' '• , (o ·-~ '. 1 

\ •• '-'~.-9 c. I ''. .. "''-= 

\ ' o O,c- •-... .o.qs O,o,o 1\ -.. _ S 

~.-9 i"e'-': .~ -. ..... o O,c- \ I .o.qss -..._ ~-

~-~~ ... 25 30 35 40 45 

AGE 

Figure 2 - Sixteen (1960-61) enroute training course classes 

- Cumulative per cent curves of age for students failing 

(N = 80) the training course and for those who passed with 

academic + laboratory grades in the lower 22% (N = 62) or 

the upper 78% (N = 219) of distribution representing pass 

cases only 

-5-
divided the distributions into approximate 75 

and 25 per cent segments and a chi-square 

computed for the two-by-two table. The difference was significant at less than the .05 level. 

A similar chi-square test of the difference between the curves for pass subjects in Figure 3 

was also significant at less than the .05 level. 

100 

80 

..... 60 z 

1&.1 

(.) 

a: 

1&.1 

a. 40 

\~. 

\\ 

\ 

" 

"' "· ... 

-.._ \ 

\ \, '.<a~~ \ !!J, ~ \ .. , ~ .,1 ...... ~,.,~ 

_ '-..o .;o ' \ O..c-..0 "•, 

~., ~ \ ..,~ ., 

20 

0 

20 25 

,>, • IS' t'----.. J) • 

:t \ 

O..c- ~'!, ..0 -,..;;; -

i.J'.J' ~ ""-1--. 

30 35 40 

AGE 

.\ 

\ 

45 

Figure 3 - Thirteen (1960-61) terminal training course 

Classes - Cumulative per cent curves of age for students 

who f8il.ed (N = 11) the training and for those who passed with academic + laboratory grades in the lower 21% 

(N = 31) or the upper 79% (N = 115) of the distribution 

representing pass cases only 

The significance of the differences between 

the curves for failure were tested in the same 

way against the pooled data for the pass subjects in each sample separately. For Sample 1, 

a median age cut was used, and for Sample 2, 

a 75-25 per cent cut. Again the differences 

were found to be significant at less than the 

.05 level in both samples. 

Correlation coefficients were also computed 

to give an index of the relationship between 

age and success or failure in the course and 

between age and the academic plus laboratory 

grades for pass subjects only. Because the present study was abstracted from more extensive 

investigations, the correlation coefficients were 

not available for Sample 1 considered in its 

entirety. For this sample, correlations were 

computed for two subgroups- one composed 

of five of the eight 1960 classes, the other for 

all eight 1961 classes. For Sample 3, correlations were available for the entire sample. The 

coefficients of correlation are reported in Table 

.3. In all but one instance, the correlations were 

significant at less than the .01 level and indicate 

that the older trainees are more likely to fail the 

training course or to have lower academic plus 

laboratory grades than their younger classmates. 

The one coefficient which was not statistically significant was for the pass subjects of 

Sample 3. This attenuation of the relationship between age and the academic plus laboratory grades may be due to several factors. For 

example, when compared with Sample 1, 

Sample 3 has a relatively smaller number of 

older trainees; there may be differences in the 

grading practices of the two courses; or there 

may be aptitude differences between the students entering the two types of training. The 

latter possibility does not seem very likely, 

however, since scores on the aptitude test battery described by Cobb ( 2) do not reveal any 

major differences between Enroute and Terminal trainees. In any event, the negative relationship between age and training school performance is well substantiated. Its attenuation 

in the case of the Terminal students requires 

further study. 

Turning now to the follow-up samples, cumulative percentage curves of age for satisfactory and unsatisfactory (marginal) plus separated controllers•. are presented in Figure 

4 for the Enroute subjects of Sample 2 and in 

Figure 5 for the Terminal subjects of Sample 4. 

For the purposes of this study, marginal controllers in Samples 2 and 4 have been defined 

as graduates of the training course who are 

0 It is not really appropriate to refer to subjects in 

Samples 2 and 4 as controllers since most of them were 

not fully qualified and were still undergoing on-the-job 

training. However, for ease of reference they have been 

C<Illed controllers. 

-6-
TABLE 3 

Correlations of Age with Academic plus Laboratory Grade Average 

and Pass vs. Fail Status of Subjects in Samples 1 and 3 

Sample 1 Sample 3 

Pass Only All Subjects 

1960 Group 1961 Group 1960 Group 1961 Group Pass Only All Subjects 

Criterion r

1 N r N r N r N r N r N 

Academic + Lab 

Grade -35° 0 95 22° 0 145 -38° 0 126 -31° 0 183 -09 146 -24° 0 158" 

Pass vs. Fail ' --26 ° 0 124 -24 ° 0 183 -28° 0 157 

1 Decimal points have been omitted. 00 Significant at less than the .01 level. 

• One subject inadvertently included in this correlation should have been excluded because, for personal reasons, he 

did not graduate with his class. 

' Point-biserial correlations. 

100 r-ed,t---.----~------.,-----r-----r-. 

80 r----\ft-+------+------~-----4~----~ ~ 

0 

20 

I I I I 

25 

I I I 

30 

AG~ 

.... ~ 

I I I 'T- -~---~ 

35 40 45 

Figure 4- Follow-up of ten ( 1960-61) enroute training 

classes - Cumulative per cent curves of age for satisfactory 

( N = 87 ) and marginal ( N = 65 ) plus separated ( N = 20 ) 

controllers 

100 

80 

... 60 z 

1&.1 

(.) 

0: 

1&.1 

D. 40 

20 

0 

., 

\ 

\ 

I 

I 

\ \~ ._\~cy~ '<~( 

·,~ w 

f--IS' ,.,,.. '• ' ~ (C'.o 

".s-~ •, ~ 'f~ 'f. \ 'f,._ " \ ~ "o~ J-

', 

........ ~ r-.. 

--~ - ........ -...... 

20 25 35 40 45 

AGE 

Figure 5- Follow-up of seven ( 1960-61) terminal training 

course classes - Cumulative per cent curves of age for satisfactory ( N = 55 ) and 'marginal ( N = 32 ) plus separated 

( N = 9 ) controllers 

-7-
still with the FAA but who were: (a) Considered by one or more supervisors as having an 

undesirable (unsafe) effect on air traffic safety; 

or (b) rated by one or more supervisors as 

being unwanted at a facility at which the supervisor might become a Chief; or (c) in the bottom 25 percent of the distribution of average 

supervisor ratings. In most instances unsafe 

and unwanted controllers were also in the bottom 25 percent of the average supervisor 

ratings. Separated subjects were those who 

completed the training course but have since 

left the FAA, and satisfactory subjects were 

all other course graduates not falling into the 

preceding groups. 

Age related differences between the satisfactory and marginal plus separated controller 

groups are once more apparent in the figures, 

and again more pronounced for the Enroute 

group of Figure 4 than for the Terminal group 

of Figure 5. Chi-square tests of the differences 

between the curves in each figure were significant at less than the .05 level in the case of 

Figure 4 and between the .05 and .06 level for 

Figure 5, when the Enroute and Terminal 

groups were dichotomized at their respective 

median ages. 

As another index of the relationship between 

age and job performance, correlations were 

computed for age vs. average supervisor rating 

for Samples 2 and 4 separately. The coefficient 

for Sample 2 was -.28 (P < .01) and for Sample 4, -.05 (not significantly different from 

zero). Thus, the more pronounced relationships between age and other school and job 

performance measures for Enroute trainees and 

controllers continue to be exhibited in the data. 

However, in all comparisons the same negative 

trends have been found for the Terminal trainees and controllers. Consequently, it is safe to 

conclude that for both the Enroute and the 

Terminal types of work older men have less 

chance of succeeding either in school or on 

the job. 

The training outcome and follow-up data of 

Sample 5 showed the same trends as the other 

samples. Figure 6 contains cumulative percentage curves for training course failures, marginal 

\'~, eor---~~----4------+----~----~ 

\\ i\ 

AGE 

Figure 6- Follow-up of ATC training classes of 1956 

- Cum u I at i v e per cent curves of age for satisfactory 

(N = 91) and marginal (N =54) controllers and training 

course failures (N = 20) 

controllers, and successful controllers. For this 

sample, a marginal controller has been defined as: ( a) A controller who has been cited . 

for violations of air traffic rules and procedures 

and is either still with the FAA ( N = 23) or is 

no longer with the FAA ( N = 3); or (b) a controller still with the FAA who is in the bottom 

25 per cent of the average · supervisor ratings 

( N = 28). A fail ( N = 20) is a training course 

failure in 1956, and a satisfactory controller 

( N = 91) is one still with the FAA and not 

considered marginal. 0 

0 Three men in the satisfactory controller group and one 

in the marginal controller group were assigned to Flight 

Service Stations and should not have been considered fullv 

qualified and active controllers. All other satisfactor),· 

and marginal controllers were considered fully qualified. 

-8-
Chi-square tests of the differences between 

satisfactory vs. marginal and satisfactory vs. 

fail were significant at less than the .05 level 

using a median age cut for the former and at 

less than the .01 level with an approximate 

75-25 per cent age cut for the latter. Further 

evidence of the negative relationship between 

age at entry into training and job performance 

five years after course completion was the 

correlation of -.23 ( P < .01) between age and 

the average supervisor ratings. 

DISCUSSION 

From the results of the preceding analyses 

the only conclusion possible is that a strong 

negative relationship exists between age at 

entry into ATC training and subsequent school 

and job performance. The magnitude of this 

relationship is further illustrated in Figures 7 

and 8. 

Both figures were developed by establishing 

four subgroups of nearly equal age range for 

Sample 2 combined with Sample 4 and for 

Sample 5 by itself. The percentage of various 

criterion classifications of individuals in the 

four age groups was then determined and 

AGE GROUP 21-26 27-32 33-38 39-45 

-FAIL 

~ 

SEPARATED 

~ 

UNSAFE 

~ 

UNWANTED 

~~@1~1@1m~J LOW 25% 

15% 

SATISFACTORY 

TOTAL N 181 70 27 41 

Figure 7 - Per cent within age groups of satisfactory 

controllers vs. various types of unsatisfactory trainees and 

controllers from 10 enroute and 7 terminal ATC training 

classes of 1960-61 

plotted in Figure 7 for Sample 2 plus Sample 4, 

and in Figure 8 for Sample 5. Because the 

follow-up questionnaires used for Samples 2 

and 4 differed from those used for Sample 5, 

the categorizations in the two figures were 

somewhat different. The definitions of the 

categories are those previously given. 

In Figure 7 the regular increase in the failure 

percentages and the regular decrease in the 

percentages of satisfactory individuals are well 

illustrated as one progresses from the youngest 

to the oldest age group. The pattern of the 

other types of marginal controller is not as 

apparent. The largest total percentage of marginal controllers is in the 27-.32 year old group 

which also contains the largest percentage of 

those individuals considered unsafe. On the 

other hand, the largest percentage of separated 

individuals is in the oldest age group. In any 

event, the total percentage of marginal controllers in each of the four age ranges, when 

coupled with the percentage of failures, is such 

that the chances for an individual being considered a satisfactory controller are approximately 1 in 5 if he is 33 years of age or older 

upon entering training; whereas the chances are 

approximately 1 in 2 if he is younger than the 

age of 33. 

AGE GROUP 

-FAIL 

VIOLATOR 

l·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·~ .......... 

·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.· 

LOW 25% 

SATISFACTORY 

TOTAL N 

21-26 27-32 33-38 39-45 

114 32 14 5 

Figure 8 - Per cent within age groups of satisfactory controllers vs. various types of unsatisfactory trainees and 

controllers from the follow-up of the A TC training classes 

of 1956 

-9-
The data presented in Figure 8 for the 5 year 

follow-up sample are remarkably similar to 

those in Figure 7- especially with respect to 

the failure percentages in the lowest age ranges. 

Unfortunately, there was not as large a group of 

older trainees in Sample 5 as in Samples 2 and 

4. This created a relatively unstable base on 

which to compute percentages in the two oldest 

age ranges. Nonetheless, the same picture is 

found in this sample as in the others. The 

chances for an individual to be considered a 

satisfactory controller if he is 33 years of age 

or older at the time he enters training are approximately 1 in 4; whereas if he · is less than 

33 y ears old the chances are 1 in 2. 

The reasons underlying the n~gative relationships between age at entry into training and 

school and job performance have not been considered in this report. The purpose herein has 

been to describe the relationships and not attempt to probe beneath their surface to determine the true, casual factors which are embodied in chonological age. This latter analysis 

must await the collection of more data. 

Wha~ever the nature of the . casual factors associated with chronological age and underlying 

the relationships of this study, there is no doubt 

that the number of potential training failures 

can be reduced and undesirable controllers 

eliminated by specifying a maximum age for 

entry into air traffic controller training. In the 

best interests of air safety and financial economy, establishment of an upper age limit is 

recommended. 

Acknowledgments 

So many individuals and groups contributed 

to this study, it is impossible to express our 

appreciation to each by name, but the authors 

especially wish to thank: All the Facility Chiefs 

and controllers whose evaluations contributed 

much of the basic data for this study; the programmers and personnel of the data processing 

group at the Aeronautical Center who provided 

many of the required statistical analyses; the 

artists and photographers whose charts and 

graphs should make this report more understan,dable; and, finally, Mr. R. S .. Beebe and 

mesdames Mary Ellen Allen, Betty Peal, Bernice Parduhn, and Catherine Sublett whose assistance in all parts of the project contributed 

significantly to its completion. 

REFERENCES 

1. Brokaw, L. D. School and job validation of selection 

measures for air traffic control trainees. W ADC-TN59-39, Pers. Laboratory WADD, USAF, Lackland AFB, 

Texas. 

2. Cobb, B. B. Problems in air traffic management: II. 

Prediction of success in air traffic controller school. 

Rept. 62-2, Civ. Aeromed. Res. Inst., FAA, Oklahoma 

City, Oklahoma, 1962. 

3. Trites, D. K. Problems in air traffic management: I. 

Longitudinal prediction of effectiveness of air traffic 

controllers. Rept. 61-1, Civ. Aeromed. Res. Inst., FAA, 

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 1961. 

-10-

"U.S.GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1990·761 · 020 / 0 1174 
CIVIL AEROMEDICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE 

Appendix A 

FEDERAL AVIATION AGENCY 

Special Research Project Box 1 082, AM-907 

FORM A: PERSONAL HISTORY Okahoma City, Oklahoma 

NAM~------------------------------------------FACILITY----------------------------------------------------------

TO THE CHIEF CONTROLLER: PLEASE COMPLETE THIS FORM FOR THE MAN WHOSE NAME APPEARS ABOVE AND RETURN IT TO THE 

CIVIL AEROMEDICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE IN THE ATTACHED ENVELOPE. 

DATE I GS GRADE DATE GS GRADE 

I. CURRENT JOB: <GIVE TITLE OR I 4. PROMOTED TO JOURNEYMAN CON. 

STATUS> .. TROLLER 

2 . RECOMMENDED FOR PROMOTION TO I !S . CENTER AREA RATtNG RECEIVED 

JOURNEYMAN CONTROLLER . I 

FIRST ASSIGNED TO ACTING JOURNEY· I e. TOWER JUNIOR RATING RECEIVED 3 . 

MAN CONTROLLER DUTIES UNAS· 7 . TOWER SENIOR RATING RECEIVED SISTED . 

8 . IF PROMOTED ABOVE THE FIRST LEVEL OF JOURNEYMAN CONTROLLER. LIST TITLES AND EFFECTIVE DATES OF PROMOTIONS: 

8. IF TRANSFERRED. INDICATE REASON AND WHERE TRANSFERRED: 

18!S7 _____ , 18!S8-----: 19!S9 _____ , 1960 _____ , 

10. LIST THE NUMBER OF HOURS OF SICK LEAVE TAKEN IN THE FOLLOWING YEARS: 1961-----: 1962-----: 1963-----: 1964-----· 

II. IN THE FOLLOWING LIST, CHECK THE ITEMS THAT THE INDIVIDUAL HAS BEEN TREATED FOR, SUFFERED FROM , OR COMPLAINED OF: 

ULCERs..__ HIGH BLOOD PRESSURE- DIZZINEss..__ HEART AILMENT5....._ EMOTIONAL PROBLEMS <MAJOR OR MINOR>- ASTHMAHAY FEVER- FREQUENT HEADACHEs..__ NONE OF THESE- OTHER <PLEASE DESCRIBE BRIEFLY>--------------

12. IF ANY DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS HAVE BEEN TAKEN AGAINST THIS CONTROLLER AS A RESULT OF VIOLATIONS OF AIR TRAFFIC RULES 

OR PROCEDURES, PLEASE LIST DATE AND TYPE <LETTER OF REPRIMAND, SUSPENSION FROM PAY STATUS, ETC. l 

13. COMPLETE THIS FORM WHETHER OR NOT THE EMPLOYEE IS STILL WITH THE FAA. IF NO LONGER WITH THE FAA, GIVE REASON FOR 

LEAVING THE SERVICE AND DATE OF TERMINATION, IF KNOWN. 

14. IF INDIVIDUAL HAS RESIGNED, OR TERMINATED. WAS HIS PERFORMANCE OF OPERATIONAL DUTIES SATISFACTORY? YES- NO--

OAT~------------------------------------ SIGNATURE OF CHIEF CONTROLLER 

CJF MORE ROOM IS NEEDED FOR ANY ITEM, PLEASE USE BACK OF SHEET> 
FORM B: PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Appendix A (Cont.) 

NAME--------------------------------------------------FACILITY--------------------------------------------

TO THE RATER1 PLEASE EVALUATE THE EMPLOYEE WHOSE NAME APPEARS ABOVE. RATE THE ITEMS INDEPENDENTLY AND WITHOUT 

PRIOR DISCUSSION WITH ANY OTHER PERSONNEL WHO MAY ALSO BE RATING HIM. IF YOU ARE ASKED TO RATE MORE THAN ONE EM• 

PLOYEE, RATE EACH ITEM FOR ALL EMPLOYEES BEING EVALUATED BEFORE CONSIDERING THE NEXT ITEM. FOR EXAMPLE, RATE ALL 

EMPLOYEES ON "STEADY ATTENTION TO WORK AND CONDUCT'' BEFORE RAT.ING THEM ON "ABILITY TO ORGANIZE WORK AND MAKE 

MOST EFFECTIVE USE OF TIME, EQUIPMENT, AND INFORMATION CURRENTLY AVAILABLE." PLEASE PLACE A CHECK-MARK IN THE 

APPROPRI ... TE BOX. OPPOSITE EACH STATii.MENT. COMP\..ETE ITEMS I • 12 AND ITEMS 11 • 17 FOR ALL EMPLOYEES BEING RATED. 

COMPLETE ITEMS 13 • 111 ONLY FOR EMPLOYEES IN TRAINING STATUS. 

E•Excellent1 VG-Very Goocl1 G-Geocl1 lf·P'•II'I U·Unaatlafactory 

I VG G .. u 

1. STEADY ATTENTION TO WORK AND CONDUCT 

2. ABILITY TO ORGANIZE WORK AND MAKE MOST EI"I"ECTIVE USE 01" TIME, EQUIPMENT, 

AMp INI"ORMATION CURRENTLY AVAILABLE 

I. DEMONSTRATED ATTITUDE AND CHARACTER 

... "ATE 01" CONTINUED IMPROVEMENT 

L ABILITY TO UNDERSTAND AND APPLY CONTROLLER P"OCEDURES 

.. ABILITY TO MAKE DECISIONS "EQUIRED BY HIS POSITION 

7. DISPLAY 01" GOOD JUDGMENT 

.. EMOTIONAL STA.ILITY UNDE" PRUIU"E 

•• DEMC)NSTRATED APTITUDE I"OR AI" TRAI"I"IC CONTROL ACTIVITIES 

10. POTENTIAL 1"0" CONTINUED EMOTIONAL STA.ILITY IN AIR TRAI"I"IC CONT .. OL 

ACTIVITIES 

"· A•tLITY TO GET ALONG WELL WITH OTHE"i 

12. A.ILITY TO WO"K COOJtE .. ATIVELY WITH OTHE"S 

(C:..plete Mly fw tNinaaa) 

IS. P"ESENT Jtt: .. I'O .. MANCE 01' OJT DUTIES 

(C:..plete Mly fer tNI•Ha) 

14. POTENTIAL A•ILITY TO PE .. I'O"M JOU .. NEYMAN DUTIES 

(C:..plate ... 1,. fw tral-•) 

, .. II' T"AINEE HAS "ESIGNED, HOW SATISI'ACTO"Y WAS HIS PE .. I"ORMANCE 

01' OJtERATIONAL DUTIES 

11. DO THE CONTROLLE" ACTIVITIESOI" THIS INDIVIDUAL EVE" HAVE AN UNDESIRABLE EI"I"ECT ON AI" TRAI"I"IC SAI"ETY? 

YES--- NO __ __ 

17. II' YOU WE"E A I'ACILITY CHIEI', WOULD YOU WANT THIS INDIVIDUAL ON YOUR STAI"I" AS AN ACTIVE CONTROLLER? YES----

NO---- II' NO, PLEASE CHECit A.T LEAST ONE "EASON: UNSAI"E --- 1 HARD TO GET ALONG WITH---~ BETTER AS 

A SUPE .. VISO" 0" IN A STAI"I" POSITION----I UNSATISI"ACTORY PERI"ORMANCE ----1 PHYSICAL LIMITATIONS--- 1 

NONE 01' THESE 

"EMARICII 

DATE----------~---------------------

SIGNATURE AND TITLE 01" RATER 
Appendix B 

CIVIL AEROMEDICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE FEDERAL A VIA liON AGENCY 

Special Research Protect 

FORM A: PERSONAL HISTORY 

Box 1082, AM-907 

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 

NAME __ ........................................................................ ---~ACILITY __ .................................................................................................... ___ 

TO THE CHIEF CONTROLLERs PLEASE COMPLETE THIS FORM FOR THE MAN WHOSE NAME APPEARS ABOVE AND RETURN IT TO THE 

CIVIL AEROMEDICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE IN THE ATTACHED ENVELOPE, 

DATE GS GRADE DATE OS GRADE 

1, RECOMMENDED FOR PROMOTION TO 3. PROMOTED TO JOURNEYMAN CQN· 

JOUR,NEYMAN CONTROLLER , , •••• , TROLLER • , , • , , , • , , , • , , , • , , , 

2. ~IRST ASSIGNED TO ACTING JOURNEY 4. CENTER AREA RATING RECEIVED. , 

MAN CONTROLLER DUTIES UNA$-

SISTED , , , •• , , •••• , , • , , , • , , , , 5. TOWER JUNIOR RATING RECEIVED. , 

8. TOWER SENIOR RATING RECEIVED., 

. 7. I~ PROMOTED ABOVE THE FIRST LEVEL OF JOURNEYMAN CONTROLLER, LIST TITLES AND EFFECTIVE OATES OF PROMOTIONS: 

8, I~ TRANSFERRED, INDICATE REASON: PROMOTION; BECAUSE 0~ PROBLEMS AT HIS FACILITY; OTHER (EXPLAIN), 

I. LIST THE NUMBER OF HOURS OF SICK LEAVE TAKEN IN THE FOLLOWING YEARS: 1157 __ ; 1158 _____ ; 1151----; 11110--, 

10. IN THE FOLLOWING LIST, CHECK THE ITEMS THAT THE INDIVIDUAL HAS BEEN TREATED FOR, SUFFERED FROM, OR COMPLAINED OF: 

ULCERS- HIGH BLOOD PRESSURE_ DIZZINESS_ HEART AILMENTS_ EMOTIONAL PROBLEMS (MAJOR OR MINOR)_ASTHMA __ 

HAY ~EVER -~REQUENT HEADACHES~ 

11. IF ANY DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS HAVE BEEN TAKEN AGAINST THIS CONTROLLER AS A RESULT OF VIOLATIONS OF AIR TRAFFIC RULES 

OR PROCEDURES, PLEASE LIST DATE AND TYPE (LETTER OF REPRIMAND, SUSPENSION FROM PAY STATUS, ETC.) 

12. COMPLETE THIS FORM WHETHER OR NOT THE EMPLOYEE IS STILL WITH THE FAA. IF NO LONGER WITH THE FAA, GIVE REASON FOR 

LEAVING THE SERVICE, 

DATE ____________________________________ __ 

SIGNATURE OF CHIEF CONTROLLER 

(If more room is needed for any item, please use back of sheer) 
FORM 8: PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Appendix B (Cont.) 

NAME _____________________________________________________ FACILITY ____________ ~~-------------------------------

TO THE RATER: PLEASE EVALUATE THE EMPLOYEE WHOSE NA.~E APPEARS ABOVE. RATE THE ITEMS INDEPENDENTLY AND WITHOUT 

PRIOR DISCUSSION WITH ANY OTHER PERSONNEL WHO MAY ALSO BE RATING HIM. IF YOU ARE ASKED TO RATE MORE THAN ONE EMPLOYEE, 

RATE EACH ITEM FOR ALL EMPLOYEES 'BEING EVALUATED BEFORE CONSIDERING THE NEXT ITEM. FOR EXAMPLE, RATE ALL EMPLOY· 

EES ON "STEADY ATTENTION TO WORK AND CONDUCT" BEFORE RATING THEM ON "ABILITY TO ORGANIZE WORK AND MAKE MOST EFFECTIVE USE OF TIME, EQUIPMENT, AND INFORMATION CURRENTLY AVAILABLE." PLEASE PLACE A CHECK-MARK IN THE APPROPRIATE 

BOX OPPOSITE EACH STATEMENT. 

E-Excellent; VG-Very Good; G-Good• F-Folr; U-Unsotlsfactory 

E VG G F u 

STEADY ATTENTION TO WORK AND CONDUCT 

ABILITY TO ORGANIZE WORK AND MAKE MOST EFFECTIVE USE OF TIME, EQUIPMENT, AND 

INFORMATION CURRENTLY AVAILABLE 

DEMONSTRATED ATTITUDE AND CHARACTER 

RATE OF CONTINUED IMPROVEMENT 

ABILITY TO UNDERSTAND AND APPLY CONTROLLER PROCEDURES 

ABILITY TO MAKE DECISIONS REQUIRED BY HIS POSITION 

DISPLAY OF GOOD JUDGMENT 

EMOTIONAL STABILITY UNDER PRESSURE 

DEMONSTRATED APTITUDE FOR AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL ACTIVITIES 

POTENTIAL ABILITY 

POTENTIAL FOR CONTINUED EMOTIONAL STABILITY IN AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL 

ACTIVITIES 

ABILITY TO GET ALONG WELL WITH OTHERS 

ABILITY TO WORK COOPERATIVELY WITH OTHERS 

REMARKS: 

DATE:--------------------------------------- SIGNATURE AND TITLE OF RATER