|
Post by 71stretch on Aug 20, 2015 19:54:32 GMT -5
The LBMT result is included in the final score. See: "Final Numerical Rating: Applicants who complete all portions of the assessment process and achieve a minimum required score on both the WD and SI will be issued a final numerical rating on a scale of 1 – 100. The rating will be based on the scores assigned for the SJT/Writing Sample/Experience Assessment, WD/LBMT, and SI components of the examination with a maximum possible total score of 100, excluding veterans' preference. If you do not claim veterans' preference, this earned rating will be your final numerical rating. If you claim veterans' preference (other than on the basis of sole survivorship, as described below) and have submitted the required documentation, 5 or 10 points, as appropriate, will be added to your total earned rating to determine your final numerical rating." The difference is that unlike the WD and SI there is no required minimum score on the LBMT to be placed on the register. That's what I meant but did not say very artfully. It seems to me that there was some other info about the LBMT and how that is used, but I could be mistaken.
|
|
|
Post by chinook on Aug 20, 2015 20:06:14 GMT -5
Worry. Stop worrying. The standard is one ALJ, one practicing attorney and one individual from OPM. The reality is one individual from OPM and one or two ALJs. The have a difficult time getting practicing attorneys. You will be asked to sign a waiver if it is two ALJs. On a rare occasion there are not enough ALJs . You will be asked to sign a waiver for this. In theory, you can not agree to waive and come back on another date. It is up to you but I don't know anybody who has not waived. In my view it is no big deal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2015 22:56:40 GMT -5
I agree with Chinook, the format of the SI and how many individuals will be questioning you is irrelevant. You still answer the same questions in the same timeframe. And you will most likely have to sign the waiver for only 2 v. 3 interviewers, but again, same question, same timeframe.
71stretch: I thought that the consensus 2 years ago was that the LBMT was a beta type test that had no +/- effect on your NOR or prospects of making the register, but I don't know! I gave that test no consideration prior to DC and guessed at the last 15 questions real quickly as time was running out. Good luck to all going to DC. tiger! (I was a 10 point vet and could live on the edge, so to speak!)
|
|
|
Post by gary on Aug 20, 2015 23:30:30 GMT -5
I agree with Chinook, the format of the SI and how many individuals will be questioning you is irrelevant. You still answer the same questions in the same timeframe. And you will most likely have to sign the waiver for only 2 v. 3 interviewers, but again, same question, same timeframe. 71stretch: I thought that the consensus 2 years ago was that the LBMT was a beta type test that had no +/- effect on your NOR or prospects of making the register, but I don't know! I gave that test no consideration prior to DC and guessed at the last 15 questions real quickly as time was running out. Good luck to all going to DC. tiger! (I was a 10 point vet and could live on the edge, so to speak!) I'm not sure that there was consensus, but it seems to me there was speculation about the LBMT being in a test phase and not counting toward our scores. OPM, however, said it would count toward our scores (see my post above quoting from the Job Announcement) so it was part of our scores.
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Aug 21, 2015 1:41:06 GMT -5
Worry. Stop worrying. The standard is one ALJ, one practicing attorney and one individual from OPM. The reality is one individual from OPM and one or two ALJs. The have a difficult time getting practicing attorneys. You will be asked to sign a waiver if it is two ALJs. On a rare occasion there are not enough ALJs . You will be asked to sign a waiver for this. In theory, you can not agree to waive and come back on another date. It is up to you but I don't know anybody who has not waived. In my view it is no big deal. My friend chinook has it right, again. Including the "stop worrying" part.
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Aug 21, 2015 7:41:37 GMT -5
Add me to the list of stretch, chinook, Tiger and others that say stop worrying. These tests and interview are measurements of your skills. Not knowledge. Studying might gain you knowledge, but skills are developed over your career. You either have the skills to be an ALJ at this point or you don't. Good luck everyone.
|
|
|
Post by owl on Aug 21, 2015 12:20:21 GMT -5
Funky put it well that the OPM testing is a measurement of skills, not knowledge, so any "studying" geared toward increasing knowledge wouldn't help.
But let's unpack the fact that OPM is testing to measure the skills needed (as deemed by OPM) to be an ALJ.
Ideally, how would you measure the skills needed to do a job? You would have the person actually do the job, right? You would throw them into some sort of job simulation, and observe and rate their performance.
But that is not realistic, of course -- at least, not with present technology; maybe a couple generations in the future ALJ wannabes will summoned to OPM in DC to don virtual-reality helmets and conduct simulated hearings and do other things that ALJs do! But in the meanwhile, creating some sort of live-action simulation scenario - that is exactly the same for dozens/hundreds/thousands of applicants at once - to perfectly measure their skills would be wildly cost-prohibitive, obviously. Therefore, OPM must instead use a somewhat blunt instrument - the testing procedure - to approximately measure those skills.
And therein lies the reason that I would disagree a bit with the notion that "there's no sense preparing; you either have it or you don't."
IMHO, you most definitely can, and should, prepare, because any test is, first and foremost, a test of test-taking, and even more specifically, a test of your test-taking ability with respect to the format being used. OPM is trying to measure your skills, but you only get to express them through the format OPM has prescribed. I mean, think back to the SJT. Without compromising the confidentiality of the test, it's obvious what sort of skills OPM was trying to measure through that test, right? But your demonstration of those skills still had to be filtered through the multiple-choice answer format. Remember, OPM promulgated official SJT sample questions - did it not help you to practice that format before taking the actual live SJT?
So you are going to DC to take a WD, LBMT, and SI. The fact that everybody here is sworn to secrecy and that there are no official OPM sample questions, no available past exams, and no bar-review-type prep course, does not, however, mean that there is nothing that can be learned about those formats and prepared for.
Start with the WD. Here, from the job announcement, is what OPM tells you beforehand about the WD: "The purpose of the WD is to evaluate an applicant's ability to prepare a clear, concise, and well-reasoned legal decision of the type that one might be expected to write if employed as an ALJ." So, news flash: they aren't going to be asking you to write an essay on "What I Did on My Summer Vacation." No, there are no past samples, but you would do well to seriously contemplate what OPM has said, and if you can figure out a way, practice. Some of us have jobs that come with those opportunities for practice built right in (decision writers represent!), but for those who aren't already judges or decision writers or some such, here is some good advice right here from this thread:
I read somewhere maybe an online becoming an ALJ article that just practicing writing some essays like from state tests might help with the written demonstration. If it would calm your nerves it might be worth doing. I personally would do it; however, I spend all day writing (not at SSA) on a variety of legal issues so I figure I can just more actively write at work (to practice). (Actively write at work for me means trying to get some of the cases with the more interesting legal questions and ones likely to be challenged in district court on my docket, as opposed to many more routine matters on my docket). For the LBMT, you can find general logic-test practice aids, questions, etc. I didn't spend hours taking practice tests but I didn't let my first familiarity with these types of questions occur in DC, either.
And finally, for the SI: "The objective of the SI is to evaluate an applicant's responses to competency-based questions related to being an ALJ. A panel will conduct the interview and evaluate the responses provided by the applicant." So right there, you know the SI is not a "tell us about yourself and why you want the job" free-wheeling BS session. Oh, and right in the job announcement, OPM also tells you: "the competencies ... essential to performing the work of an ALJ ... include: Decision Making, Interpersonal Skills, Judicial Analysis, Judicial Decisiveness, Judicial Management, Judicial Temperament, Litigation and Courtroom Competence, Oral Communication, Problem Solving, Professionalism, Reasoning, Self-Management, and Writing."
If you have not been through any type of SI before (they are certainly not exclusive to government hiring but probably cannot yet be said to be widespread), research it online. Research how, if you were on the panel, you would be scoring an applicant's responses - and then research how to give responses that are likely to be scored well. The SI is a testing format. You should think of it that way and approach it accordingly. You are not interviewing with decision-makers who can give you a job and you are not trying to convince your interviewers to hire you. You are taking a test and will be given a score (a score you will never find out other than pass/fail, but I digress), and the score will be based on the competencies they have specified. Your goal is to score as many points as possible. Research and develop a strategy for doing this.
Good luck all!
|
|
|
Post by anotherfed on Aug 21, 2015 12:26:31 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by hapi2balj on Aug 21, 2015 13:40:14 GMT -5
Owl, I like your analysis, this coming from one who already has opined "we either have it, or we don't" in this thread. With apologies to the group, I fear that sounds way more cavalier than I intended - regardless of what we "have" some prep isn't a bad idea.
|
|
|
Post by cafeta on Aug 21, 2015 14:32:34 GMT -5
Owl, excellent write-up! This is greatly appreciated!
|
|
|
Post by owl on Aug 21, 2015 17:11:28 GMT -5
Owl, I like your analysis, this coming from one who already has opined "we either have it, or we don't" in this thread. With apologies to the group, I fear that sounds way more cavalier than I intended - regardless of what we "have" some prep isn't a bad idea. Well actually, I think the statement "you either have the skills or you don't" is probably quite true. It's just that having the skills is useless unless we can show it through the peculiar mechanisms that OPM limits us to.
Actually, my personal belief is that probably most of the 6,000 people who initially applied "have the skills," and in spades. However, many, many well-qualified candidacies have foundered along the way because they assumed those skills would be more or less self-evident, or they were not given opportunities to demonstrate them that matched their strengths, or they did not pay close enough attention to the methods they were given by OPM to demonstrate them.
The Heisman Trophy is given to the best all-around football player after a season-long, holistic examination of statistics, accomplishments, character (?), etc. OPM is handing out little Heisman Trophies - spots on the Register - but is using a Punt, Pass, and Kick competition to determine who gets them.
|
|
|
Post by phoenixrakkasan on Aug 21, 2015 18:20:01 GMT -5
Really? I think we need to give OPM more credit than this.
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on Aug 21, 2015 18:48:37 GMT -5
Really? I think we need to give OPM more credit than this. Or the Downtown Athletic Club less.
|
|
|
Post by zepplin on Aug 21, 2015 19:02:12 GMT -5
Owl, I like your analysis, this coming from one who already has opined "we either have it, or we don't" in this thread. With apologies to the group, I fear that sounds way more cavalier than I intended - regardless of what we "have" some prep isn't a bad idea. Yeah. And just... I know (think) we aren't technically breaching the confidentiality contract... but there is a lot of information being shared that some people who tested early and are waiting still weren't privy to or didn't have pointed out for them. So, meh. Some advice is good, some not so much. Good luck all.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on Aug 21, 2015 19:55:12 GMT -5
Owl, I like your analysis, this coming from one who already has opined "we either have it, or we don't" in this thread. With apologies to the group, I fear that sounds way more cavalier than I intended - regardless of what we "have" some prep isn't a bad idea. Yeah. And just... I know (think) we aren't technically breaching the confidentiality contract... but there is a lot of information being shared that some people who tested early and are waiting still weren't privy to or didn't have pointed out for them. So, meh. Some advice is good, some not so much. Good luck all. Agree.
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Aug 21, 2015 21:42:14 GMT -5
Yes, we are getting mighty close here to giving a leg up to subsequent applicants. Pix.
|
|
|
Post by christina on Aug 22, 2015 8:02:14 GMT -5
so, i got my suit and look nice and judicial (in the suit at least ) my plan in DC is to try to keep myself relaxed and loose. Confident but not brash. was getting myself stressed last week but figured it's best to combine having fun and being serious when needed on this trip. Cause for me, that is likely how i will do best on it. and too all going. we have already gone through the ....., im not going to be a judge 2 years ago when we got the notice we were not moving on. and hey, life moved on... last 2 years have been pretty decent on my end. so as much as we would like or think we would like being a judge, we have other options too if this does not work out and im sure a lot of great things going on it all of our lives. and i mean that in the sense that is not the end all so don't go in like it's an all or nothing deal. unless that mindset is the one that makes you thrive and do your best! all the best to all of you, unless you get a better score than me and we are vying for the same city as our dream locale. than i hope you do slightly worse than me and get your second spot so i can grab the top spot!!! look forward to meeting some or perhaps many of you in the near future, C
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Aug 22, 2015 8:20:51 GMT -5
You rock Christina. Really pulling for you. Be yourself and you will kill it.
|
|
|
Post by phoenixrakkasan on Aug 22, 2015 8:27:20 GMT -5
My advice is to take it one step at a time. Focus on the WD, LBMT, and SI. The next step is to make the Register. Stop thinking about the ODAR city selection process. By focusing on the forest at this time, you may run into a tree head on.
|
|
|
Post by christina on Aug 22, 2015 8:30:05 GMT -5
thanks funky! i am not changing my profile pic to Elvis if i get it though! hope you still pull for me after that disclosure! got a laugh yesterday when i saw the post from our new guys about Tupelo, i thought, oh boy, i better keep scrolling cause this is about to get fun!!! how could he have known what he walked into ? crapland works fine for me too, ive already been b.... about how insanely high the DC hotels are. Geez. and agreed on another comment that was just made. yeah, city does not matter if i dont survive the next step. the city comment was made more in fun as part of my staying loose and having fun with this strategy.
|
|