The ACT design for this program was based on the idea that there are common aspects of the mathematical skill levels of certain "jobs" across the workplace. ACT trained staff examine the mathematical skills that are required in particular jobs at actual sites, such as CSR-2. Then, by looking at all of the skills that are essential to that job, the ACT staff assigns a "level" to the particular job classification. After that, the ACT skills test can be given to people in those jobs that have been "classified". The skills test is graded and individuals are given their personal level of expertise. If an employee is at a skill level 4 in a job that requires level 5 skills, then the employee can study the ACT level 5 book, and learn that material in order to move their personal experitse up to level 5.

In the theory, this is a great system. It does have some problems, however. The first problem is that when a job is evaluated, the ACT staff have to give it a level high enough so that the most complex mathematical skill required in the job is covered by the ACT book at that level. In particular, a job might have 95% of its required skills at level 3. However, if the other 5% of the skills, maybe only one skill, is not covered until the ACT Level 5 book, then then job needs to be given a Level 5 rating. This means that a person with Level 3 expertise can do virtually all of the mathematical work required in the job. However, because the job had to be given a Level 5 rating, the person is now being asked to learn all of the material in both Level 4 and Level 5 in order to pick up that last little bit of expertise.

This problem is complicated by the fact that there are many additional skills that are introduced at each ACT level. Therefore, the person who is being asked to move up to level 5 will not only learn the last little bit of material that is really needed for the job, but also, that person will be learning all of the additional material introduced in levels 4 and 5.

A different difficulty related to the ACT system comes from the sensitivity and accuracy of the evaluation test given to access employee levels of expertise. In many cases, people will get problems correct without feeling confident that they really understand how to do the problem. Employees given an expertise level of 4 may not really believe that they are capable of really doing level 4 mathematics. However, according to the ACT design, those same people will be expected to start in a level 5 book. For staff already nervous about doing anything in math, it is painful to be forced to move ahead without the confidence that you really are an expert in what ACT says you can do. People need to be in a position where they can build upon internally recognized competence.

Another shortcoming in the ACT design is that it assumes a commonality of skills across a wide range of employment situations. ACT does not want to create one set of books for people at one company, and another set of books for people at another company, and so on. ACT was forced to try to find "common skills" that run across jobs at all kinds of companies across the country. For the most part, ACT seems to have had some success with this. However, there are some skills that ACT had to put into each level that are not common to every job rated at that level. Thus, ACT includes the calculation of circumference and area of circles in Level 5. It is entirely possible for a job where one never computes circumferences of circles to be rated at level 5. Such a job may well be rated at level 5 because the job requires an employee to solve problems with rates and proportions, which is a differnt level 5 topic. Nonetheless, an employee who is working on level 5 will be expected to master the skills of finding circumference, even though that item never happend in the real-job-world for that employee.

The consequence of all of this is that students need to be allowed to start at a level where they are comfortable. Furthermore, we need to recognize tht some of the material will not be related in any way, shape, or form to the real world experience of these students at work. And, we need to confirm student concerns about this misalignment. Finally, we need to recognize that we and the students have two goals. First, they really do need to acquire the expertise that is needed to make their jobs easier and more successful. And, second, they really do need to learn enough of the other material to pass the post test at the end of the booklet.