Should prior enlisted officers be marked higher than officers that have no prior enlisted experience?

Absolutely not. That you were prior service is just as irrelevent to a board as it is to your OER. Current performance and promotion for success at the next level is what determines your place on the OML for promtion not what you did when you were enlisted. Yes, enlisted time may have helped you perform better as an officer..... but then again, maybe it didn't. Do you really want to reward a POS officer who happened to be prior service JUST BECAUSE they are prior service???

The Prior Enlisted Officer (Maverick) has the additional tools in his/her toolbox to better perform duties and therefore stand out among peers....or be an even bigger a-hole then before (I have seen it, so know it happens). They already have a couple advantages, depending on how many years they were enlisted: 1. They only require 10 years commissioned to retire with commission...this only works if they were over 10 years enlisted. 2. Longevity pay... they already have more years in, so do not start at the O-1 under 2 years.... and if they meet criteria, they actually receive the OE pay up through O-3E which is much higher then traditional officers already. No, they do not need preferential treatment when it comes to promotion boards...they SHOULD NOT NEED IT as they already know what is expected and need to turn that into action, instead of trying to learn everything from scratch.

Personally for the most part I find that prior enlisted officers understand the enlisted force better and are more understanding of the enlisted ways. I do not feel that this should have any bearing though for officer promotion boards. Being promoted should be based on your job performance, not on experience. There are experienced people out there who are horrible at their job, and people new to the job who are outstanding performers.