Should a minimum ASVAB score be required to be an NCO?

SGT Suraj Dave — Sat, 22 Mar 2014 23:59:12 -0400

I think it is very necessary.

As a young 19 year old PFC, I had a real tough time listening to an NCO who could not spell simple words, do simple math, or understand simple logic. I always had to second guess myself following this NCO's orders, wondering if this leader even thought the scenario through he/she was sending us to? Would we be reprimanded by another NCO? Just be wasting our time? End up looking stupid ourselves? Taking this NCO's training seriously was even tougher, because in the various minds of the lower enlisted soldiers, this NCO was an idiot. In addition to just losing confidence in our NCO, we also lost our confidence in the promotion system.

Now I am not saying we need to be geniuses, or anything ... but I think being proficient at high school level English and math would be beneficial. Keep current ASVAB scores for MOS's as they are, but make a pre-req for a certain score before going to a promotion board (Which will be the same across all MOS's, but naturally in certain MOS's, the fact you qualified for the MOS in general would mean you already meet that pre-req). Those who do not meet the score, take FAST class until they make it, or they never get to lead soldiers.

What do you think?

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Mar 23 at 2014 12:05 AM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Sun, 23 Mar 2014 00:05:45 -0400

I agree with you completely.

...Added afterwards...

Traditionally I do like to give my line of reasoning, but on this one I felt it should be self evident.

I believe the most important asset we can have as an Army is an NCO corps full of intelligent, competent individuals who are capable of critical thinking, systemic analysis, and deductive reasoning. Of course there are many intangibles that lend themselves to success, but they are impractical to test for.

Any effort towards those ends have my support. Obviously ASVAB scores aren't perfect, but it's better than nothing. In the absence of objective testing for competence in a multitude of areas, it's all we've got..

Response by SSG (ret) William Martin made Mar 23 at 2014 1:39 AM

SSG (ret) William Martin — Sun, 23 Mar 2014 01:39:35 -0400

SGT Dave, I have met some really smart soldiers and NCOs who were great leaders but their GT scores were below 110. Mine is a 109 but don't let that full you. The ASVAB is only for job placement and while it tests basic high school education, whether its a high or low GT score, you will get your toolboxes with a GT score 110 or higher yet they lack social or people skills in order to properly communicate with others.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 23 at 2014 6:45 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 23 Mar 2014 06:45:08 -0400

Yeah.. this whole ASVAB thing in my opinion really sucks. I can't tell you how many people that I have meet in my career who had over a 110 gt score and did not know much of anything. It sucks that you have to have a 110 to do almost anything now a day in the Army. My GT score is less that a 100 but I was still able to go to Drill Sergeant School and I know for a fact im in the top 10% of all Drill Sergeants in the Battalion, and I went to Master Fitness which was a 110 GT score requirement and I passed it without any problems. When you taken a test over 10 years ago and have flawless NCOER's with multiple deployments then I can't understand how that GT score would hurt you as a leader. Just my opinion. And to those who say go to fast class... yeah not happened for me in the last 10 years. Maybe one day though but someone has to train the joes.

Response by SGT William B. made Mar 23 at 2014 9:26 AM

SGT William B. — Sun, 23 Mar 2014 09:26:35 -0400

I disagree with this completely, because frankly, there are plenty of soldiers with college degrees, high GT scores, etc. in higher positions that are absolute bags of crap that really just learned to manipulate the system better than the others. Being smarter than your peers does not necessarily equate to being someone that has a higher potential for good, morally-sound leadership.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 23 at 2014 9:31 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 23 Mar 2014 09:31:17 -0400

A more likely suggestion would be to require annual retesting for asvab. Why am I still being held to a standard based upon a test I took 10 years ago?

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 23 at 2014 1:07 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 23 Mar 2014 13:07:36 -0400

Part of being an NCO is not necessarily how intelligent you are, but rather how well you are able to lead others. There is a reason that all military writing should be proofread, because not everyone can be an English major. With that being said I do not see having a good ASVAB score will guarantee that an individual is able to spell well, or if that person even has common sense, of which there is still no test for. I think you might have just had that one person who slipped through the cracks. Unfortunately there will never be a 100% perfect way to determine if anyone will be a good NCO.

Response by SGT James Elphick made Mar 23 at 2014 1:15 PM

SGT James Elphick — Sun, 23 Mar 2014 13:15:49 -0400

I do think the promotion to NCO should be more rigorous but I don't think the ASVAB is necessarily the way to go. I think a written exam of some sort as part of the promotion process would be beneficial. It should probably be MOS specific but also cover general knowledge and broad army topics. However, I don't think a test should be the end all for promotion because as we stated throughout this post we have all seen good leaders with far from perfect intelligence and bad leaders who could be Ph.D's. Testing is a good idea but it is only part of the equation

Response by 1SG Steven Stankovich made Mar 23 at 2014 1:18 PM

1SG Steven Stankovich — Sun, 23 Mar 2014 13:18:46 -0400

What would be your suggested minimum GT score to become an NCO? Would there be any kind of waiver for that? Maybe something along the lines of having an AA or a BA, or maybe achieving DHG or CL at WLC?

Response by SGT Suraj Dave made Mar 23 at 2014 4:43 PM

SGT Suraj Dave — Sun, 23 Mar 2014 16:43:24 -0400

The problem here, I am noticing, is when I brought up basic math, English and logic ... I heard a couple mentions of a 'College Degree' or 'English Major'. You do not need to take a single college level course to be proficient at basic math, English, and logical skills.

I joined the Army as a 19 year old PFC in 2009, barely a high school graduate (I mean I had a 1.9 GPA in High school), I bought a $20 book called "ASVAB for Dummies". I studied it for 3-5 days, then scored a 120 GT. (I never took the ASVAB before studying, so I don't know what I would have score without studying). FAST class exists, and it does work.

Maybe my generation, was a bit different then other generations, but the way I and my fellow soldiers saw it, if a leader has proved to us time and time again that they are uneducated, we were very hesitant to follow their orders. I just cant trust a leader to keep me alive, when I truly believe they are an idiot. I used the word idiot on purpose, as I see some of you pointed it out. The fact that a leader may not be as intelligent as me is not an issue, though they may not be as intelligent as me, they have more experience. I am talking about a leader who is unintelligent, to U.S. society standards.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 23 at 2014 11:13 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 23 Mar 2014 23:13:42 -0400

I hear what you are saying and I feel like it goes triple for Officers. I have sat through briefs where my only thought is: I cannot believe some college, somewhere signed off on a four-year degree. Or where their English skills are so weak, I assume they must be a math whiz to have pulled off a 110 GT score.

But rather than testing, my feelings are covered in this thread about bringing back the SPC 5, 6, 7 ranks rather than promoting everyone to SGT. There are people who are really good at their jobs, like their jobs, and would be a train wreck leading troops (or, here's a novel idea: what if we just don't promote unqualified people?) https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/bring-back-the-specialist-rank

On the officer side, we just have to do a better job of weeding people out in their accession points and OBCs. I think as manning requirements tighten, the rigor will return.

RallyPoint | Bring back the Specialist rank?

When I joined the Army we Specialist 4-6 (SP7 had just been discontinued).  It provided those Soldiers who had technical expertise and experience the opportunity to progress and earn mo...

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 23 at 2014 11:36 PM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 23 Mar 2014 23:36:07 -0400

One of the best leaders I ever had, barely had a grasp on the English language. He was Haitian, English was his third language. I hated to see people treat him as a subpar NCO because they incorrectly judged him as stupid. Could he write a thesis statement? Nope. Could he give a great speech? Not a chance (in English, anyway). Was he great at math? Hell no.

Could he lead soldiers and get the job done better then 99% of his peers? You bet your ass.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 23 at 2014 11:39 PM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 23 Mar 2014 23:39:41 -0400

If the army wants better educated and useful soldiers/NCOs, they need to bring back MOS proficiency testing. The ASVAB is largely irrelevant, and serves no purpose in day to day army, or troop leading. A high ASVAB or GT score doesn't get you anywhere, nor should it.

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 24 at 2014 12:28 AM

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 24 Mar 2014 00:28:46 -0400

I think a presentation of some sort should be created and given in a controlled environment, to ensure the soon-to-be NCO has the ability to stand up and present themselves and knowledge to people. I think the ASVAB/GT score should absolutely play a role in selection for Senior NCOs. When a 1SG can't even relay his or the Commander's intent to his subordinates, he sets the tone for his entire tenure. And it does, indeed, make younger Soldiers/NCOs lose faith in the system. I think this has played a large part in why we lose so many quality NCOs before they reach SFC/MSG/1SG... It's all a waiting game and you WILL end up working for idiots! The qualifications for joining our Army should only get more stringent, to combat this issue in future generations.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 24 at 2014 7:08 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 24 Mar 2014 07:08:36 -0400

I don't agree with the minimum ASVAB score to be an NCO. Where would you draw the line there are many MOS that require above 95 just to be MOS qualified. What we should do is place more emphasis on the NCO schools WLC, ALC, SLC. Maybe set up a different point structure for promotion for graduating these courses.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 24 at 2014 10:01 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 24 Mar 2014 10:01:40 -0400

To attend military schools I agree to have over 110 GT score. I have had plenty of soldiers who lack common sense but can read and study there required warrior task and skill levels but when it came to actually conducting there battle drills they couldn't perform what they just talked me through. I want soldier who has common sense as well as book smart. Makes it easier to train them and for them to retain the information.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 24 at 2014 2:44 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 24 Mar 2014 14:44:49 -0400

I agree with everyone's comments into this topic but I want to take this to a different avenue. I believe as leaders we must accept what we lack and what we are good at and go from there. I am a person that will admit I don't know something and learn rather than says I know it and look like *** later. I will always help my leaders, peers and subordinates whenever I see they need help or ask for my opinion.

Response by SSG Randall P. made Mar 24 at 2014 4:00 PM

SSG Randall P. — Mon, 24 Mar 2014 16:00:36 -0400

SGT Dave,

I can't spell very well at all, and my grammar and punctuation half the time is wrong. I am, however working at it. Though I do understand what you are saying I do not feel that the ability to spell the words shoot move and communicate immediately dictate how I will train a soldier to shoot move and communicate.

In my honest and I'm sure easily misconstrued opinion the issue was you when you were a PFC. You respond to a different type of leader. Examples of this may be, some soldiers need someone to challenge their ability to pick things up and move them, others require a more intellectual approach, as it sounds you needed as a PFC. Again this is just an opinion, not an attack.

Response by Sgt Matthew Bill made Mar 24 at 2014 6:35 PM

Sgt Matthew Bill — Mon, 24 Mar 2014 18:35:17 -0400

I dont believe that an NCO promotion should rely on your asvab score. When we talk about the asvab, most people only take once, when they enlist. So much knowledge is gained since that initial test, that its only just a score. ALso, the ASVAB is only designed as a test of general things, such as mechanics, english, math, etc. This has no bearing on how great of a leader you can be, let alone how much knowledge you can have in your field and how well you excell at your job. The ASVAB is useless for promotion of anykind, except civilian to recruit.

Response by SSgt Dan Montague made Mar 24 at 2014 8:38 PM

SSgt Dan Montague — Mon, 24 Mar 2014 20:38:36 -0400

I have seen this many times as well. However, I think basing a promotion off of a ASVAB score would be wrong. The test score only shows the book knowledge of the person. If it was based off the score, it would also limit a person to 4 years of service unless they were able to take it again and score higher. The promotions process has been messed up for a while. I feel once you are eligible for Cpl, it should be strictly based on your mos performance, leadership ability, record of over all performance and esprit de corps. Any man or woman can be molded into good leaders if they are willing to learn and make mistakes.

What it comes down to is, I don't care if they can spell or write an essay. Can they lead Marines into battle and perform their job proficiently.

Response by CW2 Geoff Lachance made Mar 24 at 2014 8:40 PM

CW2 Geoff Lachance — Mon, 24 Mar 2014 20:40:21 -0400

ASVAB is a test to get you into the military. Once in - your performance of duty, EER's and satisfactory completion of NCO schools should be all that is necessary.

Response by SFC Jason B. made Mar 25 at 2014 5:55 AM

SFC Jason B. — Tue, 25 Mar 2014 05:55:13 -0400

There used to be a test required called the TABE (Table of Adult Basic Education) before you could attend WLC (PLDC then) If you didn't meet the minimum level then there was tutoring at the Ed-center till you could pass. There were TABE requirements for each level of NCOES but if you passed it once you didn't have to take it again.

The ASVAB is an aptitude test not a skills test. I say bring back the TABE.

Response by Cpl David Hall made Mar 25 at 2014 7:10 AM

Cpl David Hall — Tue, 25 Mar 2014 07:10:43 -0400

Bieng a Leader and a NCO is to different things. Second the college educated point Jockeys that I had the displeasure of serving with as an NCO were actually useless as leaders, had About as much use in thier mos as tits on a Boar, as well as usually brown Noses.I find it a character flaw tying to point out your smartness and use that as an eXcuse for promotion.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 25 at 2014 7:35 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 25 Mar 2014 07:35:12 -0400

I think it in many cases it can be arbitrary. I've seen some real rocks go to fast classes and destroy the ASVAB their second time taking it. At the end of the day the were still just oafs with high GT scores. Also, since switching to MI, I've seen borderline genius-types that have no place in a leadership position kill it.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 25 at 2014 10:25 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 25 Mar 2014 22:25:50 -0400

No. I was raised in Kansas City, KS. An urban underdeveloped portion of the city. And I was raised by two incredible parents. Needless to say. They weren't always around when we ran the streets. That being said. There is book smart. Then there's street smart. Making an ASVAB score for NCO's is not the way to go. Ever seen an officer shoot an Azimuth from a Bradley....Let NCOES's garnish the 1059's. Now, the integration of SSD is an tremendous excellent implementation, especially for the Guard. Cept, we get the pleasure of doing these 80 hour courses while managing three kids and listening to wives think we're playing on the computer all day :(

Response by SSG Matthew Thorn made Mar 26 at 2014 10:46 PM

SSG Matthew Thorn — Wed, 26 Mar 2014 22:46:58 -0400

Yes I definitely do not agree with having a minimum GT score. For there are some leaders that are book smart, and not street smart. So you are going to hurt a Soldier who may have great potential to lead on their ASVAB score? I think this is a bunch of crap. I know plenty of Senior NCOS that don't know the basics of paperwork... so are you saying that we should demote them and send them to English classes to learn to be more proficient at writing and conversing?

Response by CW2 Stephen Pate made Apr 13 at 2014 12:44 AM

CW2 Stephen Pate — Sun, 13 Apr 2014 00:44:38 -0400

SGT Dave, I just hope that if you are ever in a leadership position and you are the one deciding your Soldiers careers that you remember this and do that Non-Promotion counseling instead of pushing these types to the board and letting them get promoted. I do get what you are saying about a wish of having a force who has a baseline level of intelligence, but when wars kick off we need personnel, bottom line.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 6 at 2014 10:40 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 06 Aug 2014 22:40:19 -0400

Just because someone doesn't seem to have a strong grasp on the English language or math doesn't necessarily mean that they're an idiot or that they're a bad leader or that they don't know their job.

Is communication necessary? Yes it is. But communication is a two way street. Someone has to speak, but someone also has to listen. Everyone has weaknesses or quirks. Members of a team need to learn to identify, both in themselves and others, what all of those weaknesses and quirks are so they can work together effectively and cover down on eachother to close any gaps left by everyones respective weaknesses.

Response by SGT Chris Birkinbine made Sep 18 at 2014 12:24 PM

SGT Chris Birkinbine — Thu, 18 Sep 2014 12:24:00 -0400

I understand, and can agree in some extent with this mentality, unfortunately there are just too many areas for this to fail. So many things that have nothing to do with intelligence can play a factor in your ASVAB score (Or any standardized test for that matter) A simple matter of race can play a huge role, not because any one race is superior intellectually, but because things can mean different things culturally to different people and can be misunderstood.

It wasn't very long ago that they figured out that non-whites were scoring lower on IQ tests, because the IQ tests were written by white people and utilized questions that were only familiar or relevant to white people. It's called Minority Testing Bias. Sounds like some liberal BS, I agree, but if you look up examples of it, it becomes fairly obvious.

That is just the icing on the cake with any standardized testing.

To continue on, there are many forms of intelligence (by which I don't mean 'book smarts', 'street smarts', etc) while those are real things, they are not categories. I am referring to things like this: Spatial, interpersonal, etc.
The ones important to becoming a good NCO are not always easily identifiable by a written test. You can find great NCO's who are not the brightest intellectually, and you can find NCO's with multiple degrees that can't lead a squad out of my backyard, let alone in combat.

So while I agree that not everyone should be an NCO, that there are certain skills requires (some learned, perhaps some inherent), the ASVAB is DEFINITELY not the way to do it.

Response by SGT Alicia Brenneis made Sep 20 at 2014 10:51 PM

SGT Alicia Brenneis — Sat, 20 Sep 2014 22:51:27 -0400

I do not agree. I struggle with spelling and punctuation. Mostly spelling. That has nothing to do with how I do my job or how I mentor soldiers. It just means I have to use a or dictionary/spell check. I have seen dumb smart soldiers and smart dumb soldiers. A leaders abilities can not be defined by a written/computer test.

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 29 at 2015 10:08 PM

SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 29 Jan 2015 22:08:08 -0500

Being a NCO has nothing to do with your ASVAB score. Being a NCO is all about how you treat your Soldiers beneath you and how well you are able to complete the mission from your superiors. I have dealt with people who have college degrees and have no military bearing or sense, but being a NCO is about the epitome of Army Values and living up to them, not if you can do simple math or spell.

Response by SPC David S. made Feb 21 at 2015 5:48 PM

SPC David S. — Sat, 21 Feb 2015 17:48:59 -0500

While I agree with you SGT Suraj Dave that most individuals would want an experienced, educated, leader this is far from what we are often presented. The reality of it is usually some variation of this perfect trifecta we seek. I think one also needs to be careful in assuming that intelligence always equates to leadership or experience. While the NCO you mentioned lacked an authoritative command of his written and verbal skills I would certainly hope that the promotion board saw it wise to make them an NCO.

To the point about the NCO not being qualified to be your superior. I've had to teach an officer how to start a jeep and others how to rapel. In no way did I ever think they were unfit to be officers I just thought of them being uninformed. That part is fixable the ability to lead not so much in my opinion.

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 21 at 2015 6:24 PM

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 21 Feb 2015 18:24:40 -0500

I agree with this completely, I've had my share of very incompetent NCO's.

Response by A1C Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 21 at 2015 6:34 PM

A1C Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 21 Feb 2015 18:34:40 -0500

The ability to lead may not be based solely on whether or not a person can read or write, I know an NCO who is shaping up to be a great leader, who is still working on his English skills. His math skills on the other hand, are pretty great.

Response by SGM Eric Lobsinger made Feb 21 at 2015 11:34 PM

SGM Eric Lobsinger — Sat, 21 Feb 2015 23:34:05 -0500

Interesting discussion. I can tell you that in the early 1990s at Fort Carson, I had a Soldier who had a very low score on his ASFAB. In fact, I sent him through the GT improvement course 3 times so he could raise his GT to a 100. Now for the other side of the coin, his drive to succeed was incredible, and he was extremely successful in his career. Great soldier. He was brought up in an environment that did not foster the importance of education ... but he knew how to take care of people.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 6 at 2015 11:27 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 06 Apr 2015 23:27:19 -0400

I am sure you have met someone who for that unknown reason just could not test well . If the test was oral or hands on they were stellar . I knew one guy who had the lowest ASVAB score I had ever heard of. He was like this , Thinking it was his reading comprehension skills . That was not his issue . He just said there were too many choices that sounded good to him at the time . Back to the question . Who should be the NCO or Leader ? Do you think it should be the person with good judgment in real world events or the person who could test well and not relate well with others ? I think in my day having my GT score was good at 149 in 1973 . The test has changed and will continue to change as technology changes and skills change to go with it .