Posted on Jan 14, 2014
Should an NCO's APFT score be annotated on the NCOER?
34.1K
62
58
7
7
0
NCOER
APFT
Responses: 27
1
1
0
MSG (Join to see)
So if I had 300 PT Soldier that was substandard in performance, is he better than the 180 Army standard more capable as a leader?
(1)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Not necessarily MSG. That is why I defined it as physical aptness rather than an all around Soldier aptness. I do believe that there are physical and academic Soldiers. Neither is necesarily better than the other and neither is a well-rounded Soldier. A PT score is merely a test of your physical aptness while your ASVAB or line scores are more relevant to your mental and cognizant capabilities. If your academic considerations, i.e. college credits received can be written into your NCOER than so should your physical capabilities.
(2)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
What would the army think about giving a Soldier an "excellence" when they scored 100/100/89. A 289, but not 90 in each event. This is why the pt score on the NCOER is too subjective. Or what about an NCO who may have had 300s all year long, and is injured or sick on or test day and scores lousy? The last, most current pt test must be on the ERB, and therefore the Pt test used for the NCOER.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Yes! Too many, especially in the RC are getting promoted to E-6 & E-7 with the minimum scores.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
No. It should be annotated Pass/Fail. The scores are different for people, for males/females. While the "standard" is the same, people are not.
A 140# male will always! run faster a mile than a 220# body builder. A female will always look great on her APFT just because she gets a "Ladies discount."
More important is body fat... but even then, if you pass the PT test and you are in great shape... what does any of it have to do with your leadership and your ability to perform as a professional Soldier/
A 140# male will always! run faster a mile than a 220# body builder. A female will always look great on her APFT just because she gets a "Ladies discount."
More important is body fat... but even then, if you pass the PT test and you are in great shape... what does any of it have to do with your leadership and your ability to perform as a professional Soldier/
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
It should absolutely be on there, as it should for SPC, PVT, and all officers. We are the armed forces not a donut shop. Our troops need to be rated on individual fighting ability, their MOS, and ability to lead at their respective level.
That which you don't measure is sure to fail.
That which you don't measure is sure to fail.
(0)
(0)
MSG (Join to see)
MAJ, NONE of what you said has anything to do with the APFT! I don't recall that I got any kudos for being a great leader because I beat my Co Commander at the 2 mile run. It does not make me a better Operations guy if I can do 70 sit ups. None of what you said makes sense. It was emotional, but not related.
(0)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
It is a matter of discipline and self control. My PT tended to be my top military performers. The fat guys tended to be subpar troops.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Though the Soldiering side of me screams yes, the administrative side screams no. The Army standard is a 180. If you pass the PT test, you are meeting standards. Some people place far to much emphasis in the PT score and it can become an unnecessary discriminator where it should not always be. If you have a problem with the 180, get that changed. Both the Admin and Soldiering me would nod with sage agreement to that course of action.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Yes your score should be on there. As an NCO, your APFT should be important. I have seen many NCO's do the minimum on their APFT and what example does this set for the Soldiers. It is a record of what you have done, and I feel the board members should see it.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Seriously, is the perfect soldier in peak physical condition? Is you job to produce the best Soldiers in the world? How can you expect to do this if you don't set the example? Again, if awards, education, performance, potential, physical appearance, etc is considered at the board, why in the world wouldn't physical fitness?
(0)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
Block IVc. is for Physical Fitness and Military Bearing, so in a way it IS considered for promotions. Just as with anything on the NCOER, meeting the standard doesn't necessarily NEED quantification. Excellence and Needs improvement do, so if you exceed the standard on the APFT, the score should be annotated to justify excellence rating. There is no need to designate space for "scored a 215 on the APFT" and take away from possible other quantifiable bullets just to appease the PT studs out there.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
I think so. I mean, I am not the 300 plus kind of leader, but I have seen those who are satisfied with getting by with 180. Come on now, we are suppose to set the example. Plus, if promotion is a competitive thing, then why not put the APFT score on the report card
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Physical fitness is not only one of the most important keys to a healthy body, it is the basis of dynamic and creative intellectual activity.
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/j/johnfkenn131489.html#2V5rqjQdjjhkzqpJ.99
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/j/johnfkenn131489.html#2V5rqjQdjjhkzqpJ.99
Physical fitness is not only one of the most important keys to a healthy body, it is the basis of dynamic and creative intellectual activity.
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/j/johnfkenn131489.html#2V5rqjQdjjhkzqpJ.99
I guess a better question would be, why shouldn't it be annotated... "I'm an awesome Soldier but I'm not good at PT" Laugh Out Loud.Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/j/johnfkenn131489.html#2V5rqjQdjjhkzqpJ.99
"Physical fitness is not only one of the most important keys to a healthy body, it is the basis of dynamic and creative intellectual activity." - John F. Kennedy quotes from BrainyQuote.com
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I have to add a note to my earlier post. My comment was directed at the board AAR discussion on numerical APFT scores for an NCO on their NCOERs. However after rereading it multiple times it is apparent they are specifically talking about those NCOs whose height increased significantly along with weight over the course of several rating periods. Without that numerical score that is what gives them that impression, in which case I can understand the reasoning.
It still shouldn't be there in my opinion, the increases in height and weight should be everything one needs to know.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google