Dana Broach, PhD, is a research psychologist at the FAA Civil Aerospace Medical Institute (CAMI). His most recent claim to fame is his validation study on the effectiveness of Biographical Questionnaires to determine the suitability of a job applicant for the career as an air traffic controller. He also was lead signatory on a recent validation study on the effectiveness of the AT-SAT as a predictor of applicant suitability for a career as an air traffic controller. Apparently he feels strongly both ways. Wonder how he feels now that the BQ has been such a miserable failure.

Word is out that Dana is beginning another study to review the validity of the Outtz Barrier Analysis that was previously rejected by the FAA in its entirety.

So the question before us is which Dana Broach will show up? Will it be the independent, highly-respected research scientist that reads the tea leaves and simply reports what he sees? Or will it be the Dana Broach that is responding to pressure from someone in the Training/OHR/Civil Rights office to deliver findings that support Outtz’ flawed Barrier Analysis?  We will soon find out.

Whichever direction Broach takes, he should be reminded that the future of nearly 5,000 CTI graduates hangs in the balance. To that end, the colleges and universities who have educated these young people are keenly interested in the integrity of this new Broach study. We wonder if any PhDs from the affected schools out there will conduct a peer review of any study that Broach puts his name on. The only thing Dr. Broach has to do to pass muster with his peers is to provide all the empirical evidence that he uses in this next study.

Message to Dr. Broach. If you are under pressure from a higher authority to fake up some “empirical data” to alter the outcome of the study, then it's quite likely a much higher authority, such as Congress/OIG/Media, etc., will want to look very closely at your research and methods. You might consider conducting your research to the highest levels of integrity to ensure that your findings are “robust” and defensible. It is all about ethical standards. You probably should consider passing this need for ethical requirements to Pinocchio Joe Teixeira, David Boone (smile Dave- you’ve been exposed) and the rest of the cohort group behind this scheme.

More to follow including… “newsflash” private industry favorites Joe T and the gang have "allegedly" been working with.

It’s all about the money. Right Pinocchijoe?