A PRACTICAL COMBINATION OF EMPLOYMENT METHODS 349 
First, it may be asserted that the tests mentioned are 
not psychological tests at all and need not be given 
by a psychologist. In so far as psychology is considered 
as something apart from actual work, the tests are not 
psychological. However, if they have been worked out 
by means of the careful technique and experimentation 
peculiar to the psychological method, they are very dis 
tinctly psychological, and unless they have been worked 
out in this careful fashion, they will represent only an 
other wrinkle of the human equation. It is also true 
that tests need not be given by the psychologist, but may 
be given by a technical expert. However, before the 
technical expert can give these tests with any degree of 
uniformity and accuracy, they must be properly formu 
lated and standardized, and this is exactly the work which 
only the psychologist is able to do. In fact, one of the 
great virtues of the psychological method, as has already 
been stated, is its ability to work out standard tests and 
standard directions for giving them in such a way that 
the actual giving of the tests and recording the results 
can be done by others who are less expert. The procedure 
of giving tests described in the Appendix is such that, 
under proper supervision, a high-school graduate of little 
more than ordinary intelligence can learn in about two 
weeks how to give and correct the tests. There were fre 
quent changes in the staff of examiners giving these tests, 
but the uniformity of the tests themselves, the directions, 
and the method of computing the results preserved the 
process of selection against all changes in personnel. 
It may also be objected that the interview described 
is entirely too long and too intricate for ordinary prac 
tice. The ordinary practice, however, is something which 
most employers wish to get rid of, because qualified