Should we bring back MOS testing as part of a promotion criteria?

I know in the Navy we took test for promotion and we either passed the test but not advanced because they met their quota and you didn't test on enough. Not sure what the Navy does today

When I was assigned to my first Permanent Party duty station in 1972 I worked under an E-5 who had 18 years in. He made E-5 in under 5 years (under the old board system) but when the AF went to a written test system he didn't do well. He could sit down with you and explain the most intricate details of how to do his job and he did it every single day without making mistakes or having to be supervised. He never received a PFE score under 9 in his career.

But, sit him at a desk put paper and a pencil in front of him and he froze. He was forced out at 20 and the AF lost a great man who brought knowledge, pride and devotion to his job. Testing is good but it shouldn't be the be all and end all of fitness for promotion. The person and their ability to do their job needs to be given more weight in the selection process.

No, what should be done is soldiers should be promoted on ability, there are real good test takers that can't do squat. Being able to answer questions about your MOS is different than doing your MOS..I would support this only if there was a written test that counted 20-30% and the rest was Practical Hands on test to go with it!

It would be nice. I have never been asked a question pertaining to my MOS (31B) at a promotion board or any other boards. It'd be nice.

The Army stopped doing SQT (Skills qualification testing) because it cost money to prepare and field the test annually.
In the form I first encountered the test had hands on and written portions, then the hands on portion was eliminated due to the cost burden in the early 80's. The written version followed suit late 80's early 90's. It was a good tool for evaluating someone's general MOS knowledge. The sniveling was ear splitting from many who decried "book knowledge" (read that; those with poor reading comprehension).

When they phased out the SQT, it was a sad day for the military, as I served with an individual that I shall not name, that was a complete idiot, did not know his job, nor could perform it, but was a PT stud, and he wound up making SGM...all by making 300+ on PT tests, and kissing ass...And I understand that the Final year of the SQT, he FAILED IT. You know whom you are, as you were an Engineer...I on the other hand was not a PT stud, always middle of the pack...260s to 280s, but never, EVER failed an SQT, a true measurement of your MOS knowledge.

Hey I am for it, I can attest, the unit I was cross leveled into had another 92L and he did not know jack about his MOS never bothered or wanted to get up to date and would bitch about the LTC wanting us to actually do our MOS, he made the promotion list and once I was transferred out opening up the SFC slot he got promoted. Progressing thru the ranks is all about schools not about how well you know your job.

MOS-SQT was THE one item that, not only kept everyone honest, but also served as an evaluation tool for all ranks. It also allowed the leaders at all levels in their units to evaluate where their strengths and weaknesses were, as a unit, when coupled with additional training events (STXs, FTXs, etc.) (The ARTEP was not to be screwed with!!) This also placed emphasis on senior leaders ensuring that training was being completed (to the required standards). Leaders weren't exempt and had to know their level as well. I was sad to see these go and wish that they could reinstitute the program(s). It truly was a great tool, for separating who knew their jobs and duties, among other things.

Priorities have shifted between the drawdown and the hollow Army that so many warned about. Absolutely, priorities should be shifted towards MOS competency over a pretty record and college degree.

When a infantry Staff Sergeant (11B or 11C) has a CIB, EIB, PH, 4-5 combat tours, and two additional skill badges...however is passed over for a fellow infantryman that has perhaps one combat tour, but has tons of staff time in S3 or in Korea, Irwin, Honor Guard, and/or Polk and a college degree...you would think combat experience would matter more. This is tested in garrison (outside of EIB) in the field, however it is difficult to quantify on an evaluation that one individual is "better" than another.

While you are in an entirely different CMF, it is telling where priories are in the modern military. Being skilled at your MOS should be priority #1.

The Army doesn't currently do that? WTFO! How can you determine if a troop can actually perform their' job? I knew lots of people who could do all sorts of things but NOT their' job. Fortunately, the AFQT weeded those idiots out.