Would you rather see a written exam for NCO promotions in the Army?

2016-07-06T04:28:59-04:00

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 6 at 2016 4:31 AM

2016-07-06T04:31:33-04:00

I think SSD covers that just fine.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 6 at 2016 5:07 AM

2016-07-06T05:07:30-04:00

I prefer how the USAF, USCG, and USN testing works. Career field and basic service related questions.

Response by SSG Roger Ayscue made Jul 6 at 2016 5:23 AM

2016-07-06T05:23:48-04:00

I believe that ALL NCO Promotions should include a written Skills Qualification test. They should also include a Board portion, CONDUCTED IN PERSON and NEVER by a Centralized Board ONLY that can not see the individual nor question them directly.

ALL ACTIONS regarding the promotion or non promotion should be reported to the individual so that NOTHING .... NOTHING .... NOTHING ,,,, not related directly to either qualification or duty performance can at all be considered for any reason.

All factors of RACE, ETHNICITY, GENDER, and now Orientation and Transgender status are ELIMINATED from consideration. Equal Opportunity MUST become EQUAL FOR EVERYONE. ALL "Protected Classes" of individuals MUST BE ELIMINATED, so that only the best qualified Soldiers are selected for promotion, and that all NCOs not selected know EXACTLY why THAT board did not select them. The idea that the career of a loyal hard working NCO be determined by a board of individuals that has never seen them work or at a minimum spoken one word to them is unfair.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 6 at 2016 5:48 AM

2016-07-06T05:48:46-04:00

This question comes up about once a year.
It briefs well; impossible to implement well.
How many Army people would miss out on promotion because they are in joint assignments, at small posts, remote locations, extended TDY, etc? It would be nearly impossible to fit in all the testers in large bases annually. The end centers would be overloaded. Then you have the small units that are hours away from the closest Army ed center.

Response by SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth made Jul 6 at 2016 6:27 AM

2016-07-06T06:27:04-04:00

It would put everyone on an even keel.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 6 at 2016 6:32 AM

2016-07-06T06:32:34-04:00

I believe that your SSDs cover the basic soldier tasks a NCO needs to know but I would like to see MOS specific test.

Response by SFC Rollie Hubbard made Jul 6 at 2016 6:43 AM

2016-07-06T06:43:28-04:00

No the board is the way I went from E4 to E6 then the DA board gave me E7 I think that there could be a written test but you must go in front of the board.

Response by SSG Daniel Deiler made Jul 6 at 2016 6:59 AM

2016-07-06T06:59:59-04:00

The SSD's do cover basic NCO and leader knowledge, but having it online typically means one thing. Cutting corners. There have been plenty of sergeants out there who just clicked "next" over and over again and took the test until they passed or someone gave them an answer key. I don't think the SSD's are an effective tool to teach or sharpen the tools in the NCO's toolbox.

I'd like to see a combo of a SQT test like they used to have along with a face to face board appearance.

Response by MSgt John McGowan made Jul 6 at 2016 8:54 AM

2016-07-06T08:54:12-04:00

SGT let a old AF man say something. Back in the day promotions to the next higher rank was a combination of several things. One was a written test on your job knowledge, the other written test was general military knowledge. With a little studing a test taker could do very well on the test. Some people just can't take test well, I always did good on my test. Written test or fine but I believe a board should be included. If you jsst use written test you still don't know the man, you just know what's on the papers you have. I believe both is needed to judge the man, not just judgeing the paperwork.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 6 at 2016 9:58 AM

2016-07-06T09:58:03-04:00

We used to (yes, I am old) have to take an annual Skills Assessment/ Qualification Test. If you didn't pass it, you were Flagged and couldn't make Specialist, much less an NCO rank. It was difficult to administer, particularly in the Reserve in the days before computers were widespread, but I fully believe this or something like it would solve a lot of problems.

Response by SrA Edward Vong made Jul 6 at 2016 10:01 AM

2016-07-06T10:01:27-04:00

Stretching out to all branches, I believe NCOs should be able to demonstrate the ability to lead. While serving in the Air Force, I have noticed many NCOs that I feel should not be in their position. They were able to stay out of trouble and take a multiple choice test which gave them their promotion.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 6 at 2016 10:16 AM

2016-07-06T10:16:58-04:00

That's essentially what NCOES is for. If it were done that right way... You wouldn't be able to be promoted until you attended your proper NCOES(BLC before you can get E5, ALC before E6, and so on). In the NCOES, you are tested on your leadership and MOS skill capabilities. If anything... Make NCOES more challenging and testing.

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 6 at 2016 1:26 PM

2016-07-06T13:26:32-04:00

Proctored testing would truly evaluate MOS proficiency but then again, how many times have you had to do a job outside of your MOS for an extended time? In my case it was 5 years. How often does the technology change (Signal is a good example where we have fielded increments of gear different from the last every few years, also how many radios do we have now: PRCs 150, 155, 152, 154A, 117F, 117G, 1523E, MBTR, ICOM, etc)? The idea that a Soldier has to self study to remain proficient is unreasonable. They already have a day job.

I would rather see an impartial board process that redacts names and photos and sticks straight to evaluations, assignments and awards. If we are so concerned with photos showing the fatties not reported by our leadership then we can then also assume that all evaluations are flawed as well so our only recourse is to promote those who look good.

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 6 at 2016 9:06 PM

2016-07-06T21:06:14-04:00

We did that before. It was called Skills Qualification Test (SQT). It should be given again

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 7 at 2016 12:13 AM

2016-07-07T00:13:15-04:00

Yes, but at the same time the cheating found in the Navy system is insane.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 7 at 2016 2:11 AM

2016-07-07T02:11:32-04:00

THANK YOU FOR ALL THE COMMENTS AND IMPUT! Nice to see responses from all ranks and branches! GOD BLESS

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 7 at 2016 5:36 PM

2016-07-07T17:36:44-04:00

I wish there was a written and a skills based test. People say SSD is supposed to be the written but honestly the SSD is a joke since Soldiers are just sharing answers now just like they did on the old Army correspondence courses. An actual hands on test would at least show they are competent in their MOS and NCOES will help teach leadership skills.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 7 at 2016 5:38 PM

2016-07-07T17:38:29-04:00

There are already evaluations of one's writing ability in NCOES. With STEP fully implemented, and grade point averages included on the 1059s, there will be a de facto "written exam" put into the process

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 7 at 2016 6:07 PM

2016-07-07T18:07:11-04:00

How about leaders fairly assessing the competence of the Soldiers they rate? We all know the old 1/1 overinflation has been going on for years and is the root of our evils. Well, alongside the need to grow our strength for the war....

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 7 at 2016 7:55 PM

2016-07-07T19:55:53-04:00

Absolutely. I've seen reports, sworn statements, memos, etc etc, from every link in the nco chain that have been absolutely terrible. If you cannot express yourself in writing with proper punctuation, spelling, and grammar, you shouldn't be promoted. You have to be able to express yourself clearly and concisely, because confusion due to misspelling or misuse of words can lead to some serious SNAFUs.

Response by SGT Frank Pritchett made Jul 8 at 2016 10:25 PM

2016-07-08T22:25:30-04:00

My first NCO board was in 1984 and was conducted very professionally, unlike today where a Soldier is humiliated and is based on favoritism. In the 80's the board President was a field grade Officer and his vote did not count. He was there only as protocol representing the Company Commander. All questions and scenarios were based on actual events. It was serious and no playing, my last board was a joke and took place in 2009. The Sergeant Major was playing roundhouse boxing with the NCO's on the board and told jokes all through the proceedings. I was told I couldn't cut the grade and not promoted. Other boards are worse then this so why would you expect an NCO who doesn't know his job to perform and to conduct himself as an NCO when board preceding are like this. I took my rank seriously even though I was not allowed to get beyond E-5 and I retired as an E-5 I was still proud of my service.

Response by Cpl Christopher Bishop made Jul 10 at 2016 1:11 AM

2016-07-10T01:11:01-04:00

I don't truly care about exactly how great the writing skills may or may not be....but in the days where everybody is addicted to their smartphones and laptops, if you don't at the very least type up your junk, use MS Word to help you proofread and spellcheck before printing and submitting...then you're likely an idiot that few are really going to follow anyway, I don't care what rank you wear.

You cannot logically argue you need these devices while not learning how to use them.

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 10 at 2016 3:43 PM

2016-07-10T15:43:35-04:00

OK this is my issue right here, not everyone is good at everything and that's what you seem to think. Everyone must be good at EVERYTHING. I'm a hands on person, it's how I learn not learning from a book. I work my butt off every day for my soldiers and for the mission yet a person that has no clue how to do their job or how to take care of soldiers. But they are fine MEMORIZING the freaking study for the board. It's unfair and I've had to deal with it having to study my butt off for something in my opinion doesn't mean you are a good leader and should be the next rank. I'm a terrible writer and I now that, again I have to work my ass off to do my research so I can do it correctly. Not everyone is good at everything as I mentioned above and not every person that can memorize everything is or should be a leader.

Response by SSG Craig Martin made Jul 12 at 2016 11:01 AM

2016-07-12T11:01:10-04:00

Yes they need to go back to the skill test or MOS Q Test. You have dumbasses that spend all day in the arms room or the orderly room making E-5 while guy's in the motor pool who actually know their MOS get screwed. They need to bring back the SQT and get some real soldiers promoted not desk chair warriors who wouldn't know shit in the motor pool.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 13 at 2016 8:12 PM

2016-07-13T20:12:14-04:00

A written test does not measure leadership skills. The Navy and Airforce do not lead, that's why they test in MOS specific skills. Do we need to improve the promotion system? Yes! The CSM in my last Duty station conducted the promotion board based on scenarios and barely on memorized questions. The supervisor should test the individual's leadership before recommending for the board. However, subordinates are subjected to the ability of the supervisor to mentor and develop future leaders. A quiz proves nothing.

Response by SGM Mikel Dawson made Jul 13 at 2016 8:33 PM

2016-07-13T20:33:34-04:00

SQT Once upon a time it was a big factor in Army promotions. But the Army seen fit to get rid of it. I always thought it was a big mistake.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 30 at 2016 10:08 AM

2016-07-30T10:08:47-04:00

I believe that we can do a better job of incorporating MOS specific questions into the board process to ensure MOS proficiency. The board is also about seeing how an individual acts under pressure. Do you want an NCO that can't communicate with their Soldiers, but can test well. Probably not.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 15 at 2016 3:05 PM

2016-09-15T15:05:16-04:00

There needs to be more training on counseling and writing NCOER. Some NCO's have become to dependent on copy and pasting bullets from Army Writer!

Response by SGT Robert K. made Sep 28 at 2016 5:49 PM

2016-09-28T17:49:31-04:00

I'm an old school guy who remembers the SQT (Skill Qualification Test). It tested you on your MOS specific items at the level you were trying for. But it also included and went hand in hand with the Common Task Testing (CTT). I believe that they should bring this back, it's simple every year you take the CTT - it's a test of common (every soldier should know it) test, then take the SQT for the current rank (skill level), if you pass both of these then you are eligible to take the SQT and the CTT for the next level skill. It's up the command to test correctly as many of tests involve hands on testing. These scores in addition to PT scores, weapons scores and vehicle licenses can be used to list individuals from highest to lowest.

Response by SSG Mark Franzen made Sep 28 at 2016 6:25 PM

2016-09-28T18:25:48-04:00

DO THEY STILL HAVE YOU ONCE A YEAR TEST ON YOUR KNOWLEGE ON YOUR JOB AND ONCE UPON TIME WE HAD MOS TEST ON YOUR JOB AND IF YOU DIDNT PASS YOU WOULD NOT GET PROMOTED THAT WAS OUR BATTALION POLICY.

Response by SGM Erik Marquez made Sep 10 at 2017 10:41 AM

2017-09-10T10:41:55-04:00

" I would like to see MOS specific test."
Is a common response, from those of us that took that very test, we can tell you the grass is not greener on the other side.
1: We often task SM to work outside their assigned MOS...It is not their fault that perishable knowledge is wasting away because the Army will not create a Training room clerk position, that means EVERY company level unit is the Army has an SM working that vital role out of MOS. And there are thousands of other SM working out of MOS every day from 12 month tasking as a life guard to being tasked to be the CDR driver.
2: Flash to bang.... The test was often years behind current equipment fielded.. You had questions on equipment you had never seen, was outdated and replaced before you cam in the Army..yet its still in the inventory, still in the MOS skill AR, so you still have to know it.
3: Not all units are equipped the same, that can be physical equipment or software / hardware systems .. So the 11B in one unit has issued equipment and is an expert on it, but the MOS Q test has questions pertaining to equipment he has never seen. The Automated Supply specialist is a wiz on the software / Hardware system in place in his unit, he can order, track, receive, verify, adjust and supply any line item authorized to he CDR, But the MOS Q test questions for his MOS are based on a newer (or older, or alternate) system he has never seen nor used.
4: The test are standardized for "fairness and consistency" The shear size if the Service means testing will be done over many months throughout the year working with deployments, training, block leave,ect. The test questions are fixed some many months in advance, so unit A in FT Mead gets the 63Y test in January and 63Y SM in unit B in Alaska get the same test in July..... the test was comprised and known after the first few units have taken it, by the time the last units are taking that same test, its hardly "fair" as those so inclined have the test questions in whole to study from, or at least know the "trick" questions they have to study up on knowing its not current info for their current unit, but still tested.
5: The test have to be written to the lowest common denominator, which changes as the enlistment standards go up or down across the year(s) Create the test to challenge and give fair evaluation to the current education standard and you may be unfairly handicapping a demographic from an earlier standard. Write the test to the lowest common denominator and your not getting a good evaluation of those that were required to be educated and experienced to a higher standard upon entrance.

There are other issues like staffing and manpower .... You either have to create thousands of new jobs then fill them with SM as an actual assignment (all out of MOS now, see point #1)
You create these jobs and task them as an additional duty, so now you have taken resources and manpower from a unit for most of the year to facilitate testing..Who is doing their job while they are tasked out? and of course see point 1 above as well.
You create these Jobs, make it a new MOS and then resource it with re class, reenlistments and new enlistments ..but of course now you have created yet another low density MOS that has limited career progression meaning no motivation to excel in the MOS as there is a hugely limited opportunities for promoted and serve in positions of higher responsibility. ...or they are forced reclass after say SSG and now fill a new MOS NCO role having no experience and limited training to perform at the highest levels in the new MOS....Oh ya and next year, they will be taking the MOS Q for their new MOS .......Experts in their rjob? not likely.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 27 at 2018 2:37 PM

2018-10-27T14:37:46-04:00

We used to have an annual mandatory “Skills Qualification Test”. Every year you went down to the Ed center and took it. Some people are not good test takers and some people are. Someone’s career should be partially determined by their ability to take a written test. I’d rather opt for the in person board where humans met other humans and based the decision on an actual face to face meeting.