0
0
0
The Army Standard for APFT is 180 (60 in each event)
Airborne Units the standard is usually 210 (70 in each event).
If you score a 181 in a regular unit or a 211 in an Airborne unit (or any unit who holds to higher standards) would that mean you would receive an excellence(exceeds standard) or would you still rate your NCO Success(meets standards) in physical fitness?
(for discussion sake, APFT is the determining factor and your NCO is squared away on military bearing )
NCOER
APFT
Rank
Posted 12 y ago
Responses: 14
8
8
0
I can agree with what has been said, but i might add that (as an NCO
with a Perm Profile). The Physical Fitness block should not just be my
own PT. If i have soldiers and i am getting 90+ in each event and my
soldiers are only getting 70-80 in each event have i met the standards
or have i exceeded the standard?
That being said I do not believe that your personal score should be used as a bullet for an NCOER. My ability to get 90+ does not make me a better or worse NCO. Where the ability to create a PT program to reduce the number of personnel on the Overweight program, or a program that raises your entire teams/squad/platoons overall score, should be used to determine Excellence vs Meets the standards.
Again these are just my two cents.
with a Perm Profile). The Physical Fitness block should not just be my
own PT. If i have soldiers and i am getting 90+ in each event and my
soldiers are only getting 70-80 in each event have i met the standards
or have i exceeded the standard?
That being said I do not believe that your personal score should be used as a bullet for an NCOER. My ability to get 90+ does not make me a better or worse NCO. Where the ability to create a PT program to reduce the number of personnel on the Overweight program, or a program that raises your entire teams/squad/platoons overall score, should be used to determine Excellence vs Meets the standards.
Again these are just my two cents.
(8)
(0)
SSG Oliver Mathews
So PT makes you able to lead? or being able to lead makes you do better at PT?
Kinda lost. Just because a NCO can get a 270 plus doesnt mean he can lead his soldiers effectivly.
Case: A unit is deployed and a soldier has an issue with being overweight. Soldiers' NCO goes to the Gym once or twice a day; maintains a 300 average, and posts pictures of himself shirtless everyday online cause he is "That sexy"
Soldier hits a record weight of 300 plus... (his NCOs PT score) and the soldier is shunned for being lazy and fat. His NCO is sent to the promotion Board. Upon return from the deployment Soldier is kicked out of the Army. The NCO was promoted.
Point. Who is at fault? The NCO who "Set the Example" or the soldier who failed to follow in the NCOs footsteps?
Opinion: I think its the NCO who set the example but did not LEAD the soldier to the gym. Did not Motivate the solder to be better. But did set the example of what an NCO should be.
What good is setting an example if you cant follow the basic principles of being an NCO Motivate soldiers to be better, Train them how to be better, and Mentor them so that when its their turn they do it right. That is what a good leader does.
(3)
(0)
TSgt (Join to see)
SGT Mathews:
While at OCS, the cadre (including the BN CDR) put it right out there that: Running = Leadership = Running. That is why required graduation events are: 3, 4, 5 mile timed runs, completing the BN run, and 5, 7, 10 mile ruck marches (25% - 30% of your body weight).
Do I agree with this? No. Not just because my knees didn't cooperate, but because being a PT-Stud does not make you a better (or even good) leader. Should a leader always be out front and be performing better than his/her troops? Absolutely. BUT that should NOT be either the only qualification for leadership or eclipse other critical leadership traits/skills.
As for the original question, the NCOER is each NCO's "report card" and it describes not only leadership, but personal accomplishments. So, yes, scoring 90+ in each APFT event should be considered an "Excellence." In my current unit, the BN CSM has stated that a 270+ is an "Excellence" on the NCOER. Your unit's mileage may vary.
(0)
(0)
SSG Oliver Mathews
what if you are really really good at PT but have no Military Bearing at all?
C. Physical Fitness and Military Bearing. There is then a section within the C that is dedicated to the APFT. Stating that the soldier exceeded the standards with one bullet doesn't mean that C is Excellence overall. I mean what if you are really really good at PT but have no Military Bearing at all?
I am not saying what is right nor wrong, I am stating my opinion. I am not stating that it should not be a contributing factor to an Excellence but if being a PT stud is the only reason to quantify the Excellence then maybe the focus of the command is slightly off.
C. Physical Fitness and Military Bearing. There is then a section within the C that is dedicated to the APFT. Stating that the soldier exceeded the standards with one bullet doesn't mean that C is Excellence overall. I mean what if you are really really good at PT but have no Military Bearing at all?
I am not saying what is right nor wrong, I am stating my opinion. I am not stating that it should not be a contributing factor to an Excellence but if being a PT stud is the only reason to quantify the Excellence then maybe the focus of the command is slightly off.
(0)
(0)
SSG Oliver Mathews
CSM breeding, j understand where I think you are going with this... I respect that anyone with dedication can get a 300+ on their pt test hell I can get a 200 (no sit ups) if I work hard for a month. does it hurt? yup did it change the quality of leader that I am? nope... I just hurt more. ... i have been tryong to write more but icant CSM I'll finish this when I get off leave... responding on my phone is a pain in the 4th pocontact.
(0)
(0)
6
6
0
Your question is if a score of one point over the bare minimum constitutes excellence. That leaves a 180-point spread (0-179) for Needs Improvement, a 120-point spread (181-300) for excellence, and a 1-point spread (180) for Success. This contradicts the spirit and intention of the rating. Would you also recommend a 1/1 senior rating for someone who just barely met the minimum job performance standard for a year? Remember, a strong Success is better than a weak Excellence, and a strong 2/1 or 2/2 is better than a weak 1/1. All that inflated ratings do is ruin the integrity of the promotion system and cast doubt on your judgement as a rater/supervisor.
I agree with the previous posters that a record APFT score of 270 is the accepted threshold for excellence. Additionally, if the NCO was on a permanent profile and scored at least a 90 in his or her graded events (as opposed to go/no-go events), I would argue that a rater could rate the NCO as excellent in that block.
(6)
(0)
2
2
0
270 or above in my expercience every where i have been i order to recieve an excellence bullet.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
The criteria is subjective. Going from a 180 to a 220 could be considered worthy of an excellence. Or perhaps you have a 180 but you keep winning 1st place at Marathons or powerlifting competitions or combatives competitions? Or vice versa, you score a 300 every PT test, but you've failed out of every run and ruck march you've been on?
There is no magic x +y= excellence formula. It's all on the raters perspective.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
270, 90 in each event isthe min for an excellent bullet. Corresponds to the PT patch.<br>
(2)
(0)
SFC Michael Hasbun
Are we ignoring the "Bearing" half of that section completely? Perhaps this individual has a 200 PT score, but is a Tomb Guard? Or is a recognized military historian and gifted orator? Clearly that is exceptional bearing. When did Physical Fitness, which is only half of the rated criteria, become the all encompassing factor? Have we not missed half of the point?
(0)
(0)
CW2 (Join to see)
SSG Hasbun, the original question pointed out that the bearing aspect was covered. This was just in regards to PT specifically. But to your point, the way the Army rating system works has the ratings based on your current duties and responsibilities as compared to others doing the same thing. Being a Tomb Guard doesn't rate you against the 99% of the Army that will never have the opportunity to do that. I myself don't meet the height requirements. So I wouldn't say that being a Tomb Guard while it's part of your duty description rates an excellence, but it definitely will help you stand out at a promotion board even if it's just a success. Personally, I'd put the military historian and gifted orator piece in the competence block as it's more about self-improvement than military bearing.
As was stated in another response though, Army ratings are highly subjective. Now if we adopted a rating system similar to the Marine FITREP then it would provide a better gauge. Raters and Senior Raters would have rater profiles comprised of all the individuals they have rated in the past. This gives the rated individual and promotion boards a good idea of how that rater thinks and how the rated individual stacks up against all others that rater has rated. As it stands, the subjectivity from rater to rater tends to skew the numbers as some people think the smallest thing rates an excellence while others have very high standards and strict criteria that must be met in order to garner such a rating.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
Everywhere I have been you need a 270 or above to get an excellent bullet.
(1)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
As a senior NCO and writer of many NCOER's, I believe you can rate someone an excellence if their score is lower than 270, but for me it would take a lot to get there. A 270 score with 90 in each event is the only regulatory excellence. If you have another strong bullet if could make an excellence. We should not get caught up in whether someone exceeds the minimum. Scoring between 180 and 270 is success. Doing so plus standing out amongst your peers could qualify, but that is, and should be, highly subjective.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
Another Excellent Rating is if an NCO makes a significant improvement in their APFT score. For example: An NCO who goes from a 230 score to a 270 score is signficant.
o improved APFT score by 40 points going from 230 to 270 in a 6 month period (or something similar)
o improved APFT score by 40 points going from 230 to 270 in a 6 month period (or something similar)
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Great question and the debate rolls on, on the NEW OER, I encourage raters to place the actual score on the OER, which is not required, merely it says just pass or fail. The officers tend to ask why the score is on the OER, it is pressure to do a little better. NCO's are not the only ones under scrutiny for a low or average APFT. There is this little part of the 3 "C"s called commitment and unless under a PULSHES code of permanent, one should try to do their absolute best. It is merely one indicator.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Another Good Topic. I would say as leader you goal should never success, it should to do your very best and excel at every measurable metric. PT and marksmanship are readily available and important metrics. I would say as Leader, and former Commander, your goal should be to max the APFT; mine always was... while by the time I retired (13) I felt like I was dragging a trailer, or gravity was increasing, I never scored below a 290 on the APFT; 300 should be goal for leaders. As a Rater, and Senior Rater, PT was something I paid attention to. Not the be all end all, but it matters. But, to your question, by definition, success is passing. But, I was never looking to be surrounded by leaders how thought mere success was good enough.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
The old rule applies, You can add to a standard, you cannot take away from. I'm not sure what the guideline is for each unit. I would think that they would or could differentiate. But, the problem being, is Units with higher standards, want their NCO's to meet the Higher Standard because it's that NCO's job to motivate his/her subordinates to meet that higher standard. This in turn. Meets another standard for NCO Leadership, Never Ask of your soldiers what you yourself are not willing to do. So, if you're asking your soldiers to exceed the Army standard, and meet the Unit standard, you, yourself need to do the same thing. It's like the 101st doesn't want none Air Assault qualified NCO's in leadership positions. Because, NCO's on Ft Campbell have to get their soldiers to go to Air Assault School, even though the school itself is optional. A none Air Assault qualified NCO leading people and asking his/her soldiers to go to Air Assault school would remove credibility from the NCO.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google