Posted on Mar 22, 2014
SGT Suraj Dave
14.5K
84
71
9
8
1

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?

Posted in these groups: Images 20 NCOs
Avatar feed
Responses: 35
Votes
  • Newest
  • Oldest
  • Votes
CPT All Source Intelligence
8
8
0
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.
(8)
Comment
(0)
SGT James Elphick
SGT James Elphick
>1 y
I have been thinking that we needed to bring back the SPC 5,6,7 ranks since I was in. It just makes sense because being proficient at a a job at a high level does not automatically make one a good leader
(0)
Reply
(0)
SSG Ralph Watkins
SSG Ralph Watkins
>1 y
I agree.  Some people are extremely good at their jobs but are not leadership material in the normal sense.  They are experts in their MOS & a good mentor for those in the technical fields.  Don't expect them to lead troops in combat.  Why should the Army get rid of top notch MOS experts all because it wants combat minded people in charge in non-combat jobs.  There is usually a compromise there.  Absolutely don't do this combat arms.  Combat leaders need to be the best & not a meek geek of sorts.
(0)
Reply
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
LTC Paul Labrador
11 y
The issue is one of professional development. Courses should not only be "how to lead", but how to write, how to present, how to analyze, etc. Skills like those can be learned and developed. But we must put emphasis development of those skills. AND we must discrminate when those skills are not being met.
(3)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SGT William B.
7
7
0
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.
(7)
Comment
(0)
SGT William B.
SGT William B.
>1 y
SGT Dave,

Ha, my friend, I'm afraid if you're going to judge everyone you meet based solely on their handwriting, you're going to be sorely disappointed in life. 

All joking aside, it's actually pretty easy for me to take someone like the NCO you gave as an example seriously, mostly because I don't base my full assessment of someone's capability for leadership on my own biased perception of their intelligence and education, but rather the true depth and weight of their character.  The ASVAB can't test for two things:

1. Can they take care of their soldiers? 
2. Can they complete the mission?

What I want to ask is was the leader that wrote that counseling statement a bag of crap, or was he/she an otherwise decent soldier that occasionally stumbled through missions but otherwise took good care of their soldiers?



As an aside, there was a SPC that I work with that approached me and made small talk one day a few months ago.  He's an alright guy, but he's also got a reputation for being a know-it-all and kind of a jerk.  He asserted that he can be a shmuck to other people because of his ASVAB score, a 92, which means that he automatically knows that he's smarter than at least 92% of the Army.  For as smart as he is, he's probably the very last person I would want to see being promoted into a position of responsibility where you can affect the livelihoods of those subordinate to you, if only because of his sheer arrogance.  I think that's probably what bothers me most about this line of thinking, the entire "I'm entitled to treat people like crap regardless of their rank or position and assume I'm superior to you because I'm smarter" trap that so many people (myself included) fall into and can't come out of.  It's toxic.
(2)
Reply
(0)
CW2 Stephen Pate
CW2 Stephen Pate
>1 y
well said SGT Bradley. Maybe I will run into you over there. Be safe.
(0)
Reply
(0)
SSG Claims Representative
SSG (Join to see)
>1 y
As a 98% I will snarkily point out that this does not mean that I am smarter than all but 2% of the Army.   I will make 2 points on this subject.  First the ASVAB does not give you a true percentile score it just gives you a percentile versus the sample group used when the test was updated.  Second the ASVAB does not test for intelligence, it tests for knowledge and comprehension.  If we look at this that just means those who scored lower have a great potential to learn and grow, which could happpens after several years in the Army.
(1)
Reply
(0)
SGT William B.
SGT William B.
>1 y
Something else I was thinking about:  this is pretty much the same argument that I heard (and sometimes made myself) when I was junior enlisted.  Basically, it boils down to the following statement:

"To become X, you should have to score/serve/achieve at least Y on (STANDARD)."

Plugging in the variables, it looks like this:

"To become a leader, you should have to score at least 70 on your ASVAB."

Sound familiar?  It should.

"To become a leader, you should have to score at least 270 on your APFT."
"To become a leader, you should have to score at least Sharpshooter on your rifle qualification."
"To commission, you should have to serve as an enlisted soldier for X number of years."


I've heard this argument restated at least twenty different ways.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SGT James Elphick
6
6
0
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 
(6)
Comment
(0)
SGT William B.
SGT William B.
>1 y
I like this.  Other services have proficiency tests to move up in grade; why not the Army?
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
Avatar feed
Should a minimum ASVAB score be required to be an NCO?
CW3 Armament Technician
3
3
0
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.
(3)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SFC Equal Opportunity Advisor
2
2
0
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.
(2)
Comment
(0)
SGT(P) Wardmaster   Intensive Care Unit Platoon   68 C20   Licensed Vocational Nurse
SGT(P) (Join to see)
11 y
That is one of the things I stress on my fellow NCOs, if I am doing something wrong let me know. I know I am not perfect and I am always looking for ways to improve myself. I want to know if I am lacking in an area or leading troops in a manner that is detrimental. As leaders we need to be able to take criticism, learn and grow for it.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SSG Operations Sergeant
2
2
0
 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.
(2)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SFC Michael Hasbun
2
2
0
Edited >1 y ago
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..

(2)
Comment
(0)
SGT William B.
SGT William B.
>1 y
SSG Hasbun,

I'm rather curious about your reasoning.  I've noticed a lot of your posts before from AKO and RP, and this response piqued my interest because you usually have something worthwhile and logically sound to say when agreeing with a divergent line of thought. 
(0)
Reply
(0)
SFC Michael Hasbun
SFC Michael Hasbun
>1 y
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..
(3)
Reply
(0)
SGT William B.
SGT William B.
>1 y
That's pretty fair; I like how you focused on the quantifiable aspects of the ASVAB.  Thanks for taking the time to respond.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SGT Chris Birkinbine
1
1
0
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.
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
CW2 Stephen Pate
1
1
0
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.
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SSG Matthew Thorn
1
1
0
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?
(1)
Comment
(0)
SGT Suraj Dave
SGT Suraj Dave
>1 y
Almost. Don't demote them, but do encourage them to go to an English class.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

How are you connected to the military?
  • Active Duty
  • Active Reserve / National Guard
  • Pre-Commission
  • Veteran / Retired
  • Civilian Supporter