|
Post by lildavey on Sept 9, 2013 11:32:23 GMT -5
I don't see that you have posted anything about the testing lildavey so nothing was directed toward you. In fact, I wasn't speaking to anyone in particular, just giving my humble opinion about what OPM would, or rather would not, tell an individual who asked in advance about what seem to test-takers to be minor, non-substantive matters related to the testing logistics. I come in peace and fraternity. ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png) No prob. This is such an imperfect medium. Peace.
|
|
|
Post by Buffalogal on Sept 10, 2013 5:56:39 GMT -5
A thumb drive indeed! This whole process threatens to create an industry like the LSAT or the bar exam where the one who knows how to study most effectively and pays the most for their study course becomes a judge rather than the most qualified and experienced.
|
|
|
Post by trekker on Sept 10, 2013 6:55:03 GMT -5
What bothers me more is that when all of us started this process we knew what the rules were regarding confidentiality and that every answer we wrote was to be honest. If we are lucky enough to get chosen to be an ALJ, whether at SSA or some other agency, we will apply those same principles to the individuals who appear before us. And for the mostly unsophisticated and fairly uneducated individuals who appear before an SSA ALJ, those principles are strictly applied. The standard is a false or misleading statement and if an SSA claimant makes one of those, the consequences are fairly severe. I am not surprised that someone would try to make a buck out of this (although since it is not a yearly test, I'm not sure where the profit is), I am appalled that we are not more outraged. It may only be an administrative law judge position (which I for one think is very important), but the claimants and the ODAR staff deserve the best ALJ's we can be. It really saddens me to know that OPM has had to implement rules like no highlighters because it knows that one of us will push the limits and do something dishonest, despite the fact that all of us are lawyers (minimum threshold here) who took an oath to uphold the law. And no I am not naive enough to believe that all lawyers are honest. Just still holding out hope that our profession really is not lower than used car dealers.
|
|
|
Post by Orly on Sept 10, 2013 7:21:44 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sealaw90 on Sept 10, 2013 8:46:50 GMT -5
A thumb drive indeed! This whole process threatens to create an industry like the LSAT or the bar exam where the one who knows how to study most effectively and pays the most for their study course becomes a judge rather than the most qualified and experienced. EXACTLY Buffalogal!!! That is the last thng I want to see happen to the ALJ process. Actually, the best part of this whole process is meeting/talking/blogging with some of the finest, honest and dedicated attorneys I've had the pleasure of conversing with. Whether we agree or disagree, I seriously do not get any vibes about 'sleezy' lawyers here. And the folks I spoke with in DC during the exams were wonderful as well. There are always a few bad apples of course, and rooting them out is all our jobs - any test takers who see something that is not in keeping with the level playing field will most assuradly say something.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on Sept 10, 2013 8:54:28 GMT -5
A thumb drive indeed! This whole process threatens to create an industry like the LSAT or the bar exam where the one who knows how to study most effectively and pays the most for their study course becomes a judge rather than the most qualified and experienced. EXACTLY Buffalogal!!! That is the last thng I want to see happen to the ALJ process. Actually, the best part of this whole process is meeting/talking/blogging with some of the finest, honest and dedicated attorneys I've had the pleasure of conversing with. Whether we agree or disagree, I seriously do not get any vibes about 'sleezy' lawyers here. And the folks I spoke with in DC during the exams were wonderful as well. There are always a few bad apples of course, and rooting them out is all our jobs - any test takers who see something that is not in keeping with the level playing field will most assuradly say something. Amen to that! I am sure that if any of us saw anything crazy stupid like someone with a thumb drive we would all point and gasp like the pod people on Invasion of the Body Snatchers. LOL! And yes, I have to agree, everyone I met seemed dedicated and honest.
|
|
|
Post by sealaw90 on Sept 10, 2013 9:07:03 GMT -5
"Amen to that! I am sure that if any of us saw anything crazy stupid like someone with a thumb drive we would all point and gasp like the pod people on Invasion of the Body Snatchers. LOL! And yes, I have to agree, everyone I met seemed dedicated and honest."
Great visualization! Perhaps Orly can link a clip from the movie for those too young to remember this classic sci-fi film. My government computer won't let me do that (alas).
|
|
|
Post by Buffalogal on Sept 10, 2013 9:28:49 GMT -5
I agree with Trekker that the new process leads to a No Highlighter Rule. Sadly, after all the money spent creating the new exam, it suffers from the same flaw as the old one.
Thanks Sealaw and Sratty for talking me down. I was perilously close to getting up on a soap box about the new process, about which I'm less outraged than resigned. I met some very nice people at the exam too and am pleased to report there wasn't a thumb drive among them.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on Sept 10, 2013 9:37:16 GMT -5
I agree with Trekker that the new process leads to a No Highlighter Rule. Sadly, after all the money spent creating the new exam, it suffers from the same flaw as the old one. Thanks Sealaw and Sratty for talking me down. I was perilously close to getting up on a soap box about the new process, about which I'm less outraged than resigned. I met some very nice people at the exam too and am pleased to report there wasn't a thumb drive among them. And to be clear, there was no mention of WHEN that occurred and it may not have been during this new process. It may have been from long ago and OPM has since kept the same rules to be safe and keep everyone on the same level playing field.
|
|
|
Post by trekker on Sept 10, 2013 9:48:52 GMT -5
I too did not see anything unethical in my test group. Of course, that might be the direct result of not being able to do anything but concentrate on the test. The only concern I had when I posted my comments was that the conversation was going the way of complaining about the "silly" rules rather than outrage against anyone who would even apply for this position and would consider breaching any of the rules set out from the day s/he read the job description and application. And I am not aiming my comments at any one poster since most of us have been subjected to "silly" rules most of our professional life.
|
|
|
Post by Buffalogal on Sept 10, 2013 10:03:24 GMT -5
It's like the bar exam Trekker, if you get the high score and the job, you forget you were bothered by the "silly" rules.
|
|
|
Post by yarddog on Sept 10, 2013 18:06:42 GMT -5
Good luck, All. I like to win, but despise a cheater. You don't need to know the rule number to know you want "persons of unquestioned integrity" to be your judge. This process and contact with the people on this board has certainly been elevating for me. There was an earlier post about participants in DC that didn't know about this board. I found it in about 12 keystrokes, so I have to wonder how they prepared! It wasn't by internet search. Hope to see you in Falls Church.
|
|
|
Post by elmerfuddgantry on Sept 11, 2013 22:17:55 GMT -5
In case anyone is interested, here is how it's done. Now I understand OPM's issue concerning personal highlighters. This is the same principle as the shoe bomber -- since one idiot put a bomb in his shoe, the rest of us must have our shoes x-rayed at the airport. Let's hope no one gets caught with a flash drive in his or her underwear!
|
|
|
Post by ginger on Sept 12, 2013 7:39:11 GMT -5
No flash drive in the underwear or we might all end up flashing everyone! That is the best comment I have read today!
|
|
|
Post by elmerfuddgantry on Sept 12, 2013 8:52:20 GMT -5
Be very suspicious of anyone who brings a rubber chicken to the WD: ![](http://www.toxel.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/flashdrive14.jpg) Chocolate should be prohibited in the exam room: ![](http://www.toxel.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/flashdrive11.jpg) And pay no attention to my prosthetic thumb: ![](http://www.toxel.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/flashdrive01.jpg)
|
|
|
Post by elmerfuddgantry on Sept 12, 2013 8:58:28 GMT -5
Two more thoughts: (1) OPM tests lots of folks besides ALJ candidates, so whoever tried the flash-drive-in-the-highlighter trick may not have had anything to do with the WD; and (2) it's not a very good cheat -- it would be painfully obvious to everyone in the exam room if someone had a highlighter (or rubber chicken) installed in his or her computer.
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Sept 12, 2013 9:01:36 GMT -5
Be very suspicious of anyone who brings a rubber chicken to the WD: ![](http://www.toxel.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/flashdrive14.jpg) Chocolate should be prohibited in the exam room: ![](http://www.toxel.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/flashdrive11.jpg) And pay no attention to my prosthetic thumb: ![](http://www.toxel.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/flashdrive01.jpg) Funny elmerfuddgentry, but let's not be giving ideas to people who may attempt to scam the system and use it to make money from future exam takers. I know you are doing this to show the ridiculousness of the choices, but some of these are possible choices someone could use to attempt to scam the system for profit.
|
|
|
Post by trekker on Sept 12, 2013 9:45:42 GMT -5
On a visit to Chicago one year (a professional visit for my spouse), we were at a hotel and I had brought work with me. The usual brief writing and research that we lawyers have to do. I could not log on to the internet one morning. I complained to no avail. Front desk staff said nothing. That was followed by an incident whereby I heard a child banging on the door next to me. I walked out to inquire -- attorney who has a duty to report. I saw a couple of people sitting outside some of the rooms. They did not respond to the child who was now in distress. I called security. (Family from Europe. Parents had run out to pick up breakfast and one of the children got locked out.) Later that day I was sitting in the lobby waiting for my spouse. Hundreds of people stream out of the upper floor where the meeting rooms were. All at once. I asked what was happening. I was told it was the bar exam (which it turns out is why there were people outside of some of the rooms on my floor (I asked the next day). I then went to the front desk and point blank asked if they had shut the internet down because of the bar exam. Of yes. Pissed me off to say the least.
|
|
|
Post by elmerfuddgantry on Sept 12, 2013 12:02:13 GMT -5
>> some of these are possible choices << >> attorney who has a duty to report. << If you see something, say something ... ![](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-rLs40wrz7S4/UBhV-WhVZeI/AAAAAAAABfk/_sZ-3QSzUgc/s1600/Napolitano+Newspeak.JPG) I have noticed a suspicious increase in sales of rubber chickens lately. And I repeat: It would be painfully obvious to everyone in the exam room if someone stuck a flash drive (of any sort) into their OPM computer.
|
|
|
Post by elmerfuddgantry on Sept 12, 2013 12:54:32 GMT -5
Would it be asking too much for OPM to furnish a web page LIKE THIS with all the rules and regs laid out in advance? This thread is really nothing more than a plea for the following types of information: - Admission Ticket
- Identification
- Items Allowed in the Test Room
- Items Allowed on the Desktop
- Items Prohibited at the Test Center
- Test Center Regulations
- Rights and Responsibilities of Test Takers
- Test Center Violations and Irregularities
- Warning Notices
|
|