|
Post by merlot on Jun 26, 2017 8:23:12 GMT -5
Do we know how many of those who took the second round of testing (WD/Logic Based/SI) had a 3 member SI panel and how many had 2? I and several others had 2 mempber SI panels. foghorn 11/16, 2 mbr
|
|
|
Post by merlot on Jun 26, 2017 8:24:00 GMT -5
Do we know how many of those who took the second round of testing (WD/Logic Based/SI) had a 3 member SI panel and how many had 2? I and several others had 2 mempber SI panels. foghorn 11/16, 2 mbr p.s. no id by either.
|
|
|
Post by merlot on Jun 26, 2017 8:25:41 GMT -5
I'm beginning to worry I sent in my appeal via XXXXAPPEALXXXX and received the Notification of Issue Registration, Status: Request response fairly quickly, however it has been two days and I have not received the elusive status change e-mail yet. Not sure what to make of this development. I am sure they are getting deluged about right now and it will probably take longer to get them assigned. It will come though. Mine seemed a little delayed but it arrived! deckhand, thanks for talking me off the ledge. My second e mail came in this morning. On to the next.....
|
|
|
Post by Prrple on Jun 26, 2017 8:39:02 GMT -5
Date appeal e-mail sent: 6/21; date e-mail arrived noting status change to appeal: 6/26
|
|
|
Post by jonnya on Jun 26, 2017 9:55:53 GMT -5
2 member panel, I do not know who was who.
|
|
|
Post by hopefulop on Jun 26, 2017 10:11:15 GMT -5
I finally got my second email on the appeal
|
|
|
Post by prescient on Jun 26, 2017 12:23:38 GMT -5
In the past the appeal process was lengthy. I think it will take even longer this time as about 50% of the applicants didn't make it. Probably most were due to failure of the WD. It is going to take a while to regrade all of those tests. I think at least some of you will have it regraded by a different examiner and come out of it with a passing grade. At least I hope so. The SI is a different animal. I think less chance for a favorable result there than with the WD. Pixie This may be the crazy "never give up" masochist in me, but what do those "in the know" think there is a serious possibility that OPM overcompensated from 2013 (~5 certs?! and I assume a huge registry?), made the minimum scores too high, axed way too many people and but be VERY generous on the appeals/re-evaluations, in an attempt to re-populate a potentially inadequately short registry? I apologize if this has been done before, but 5 months of testing= ~22 weeks (rounding up), 4 "rounds"/week, 30 people a "round", that's 2,640 people who tested in DC. I that cut approximately half, that means the registry has only 1,320 people. If they plan on hiring 250 people/year for the next three years, AND while many, many people applied for all GALs, many applicants can on consider one or two locations. Also I'm someone a relatively rural region, there are a lot of ODARs that people will not want to go, or get stuck with soon, and leave after a year. 1,320 people for 750 spots? Factor in that many applicants have very limited GALs? Will they even cover? I doubt they'll publically come out, admit they made a mistake and lower the minimums (correct me if you think I am wrong, please). However, like I said, in a year or two, is there a possibility that OPM (SSA, whoever?) will be relatively generous in re-evaluating appeals, in an attempt to fill a rapidly depleted registry? I imagine they would do that, instead of going through the process again (but again, I can only speculate)? Thoughts? I appreciate your optimism, but I doubt it. OPM has repeatedly indicated that those pass through their gauntlet are perfectly suitable to be hired, and those who fail are not, regardless of SSA's or any other agency's view of the cert candidates. I'd lobby more for a scrapping/complete revision of the testing process for the next go around.
|
|
|
Post by aljwishhope on Jun 26, 2017 14:24:58 GMT -5
This may be the crazy "never give up" masochist in me, but what do those "in the know" think there is a serious possibility that OPM overcompensated from 2013 (~5 certs?! and I assume a huge registry?), made the minimum scores too high, axed way too many people and but be VERY generous on the appeals/re-evaluations, in an attempt to re-populate a potentially inadequately short registry? I apologize if this has been done before, but 5 months of testing= ~22 weeks (rounding up), 4 "rounds"/week, 30 people a "round", that's 2,640 people who tested in DC. I that cut approximately half, that means the registry has only 1,320 people. If they plan on hiring 250 people/year for the next three years, AND while many, many people applied for all GALs, many applicants can on consider one or two locations. Also I'm someone a relatively rural region, there are a lot of ODARs that people will not want to go, or get stuck with soon, and leave after a year. 1,320 people for 750 spots? Factor in that many applicants have very limited GALs? Will they even cover? I doubt they'll publically come out, admit they made a mistake and lower the minimums (correct me if you think I am wrong, please). However, like I said, in a year or two, is there a possibility that OPM (SSA, whoever?) will be relatively generous in re-evaluating appeals, in an attempt to fill a rapidly depleted registry? I imagine they would do that, instead of going through the process again (but again, I can only speculate)? Thoughts? I appreciate your optimism, but I doubt it. OPM has repeatedly indicated that those pass through their gauntlet are perfectly suitable to be hired, and those who fail are not, regardless of SSA's or any other agency's view of the cert candidates. I'd lobby more for a scrapping/complete revision of the testing process for the next go around. i sure wish they would scrap this process. I am still stuck on the revelation that it costs 2 million dollars.Could not that money be better spent. I would utilize more internal hiring as a "sort of" career ladder to ALJ and some other simplified hiring system for outside candidates. My agency off the same job announcement will hire internal and external candidates as judges. The internal bring agency expertise while the external bring litigation expertise. Both have subject matter expertise. I know the test is for all agencies. I am by no means a hiring or testing expert or even seriously equipped with knowledge of either. But from my personal experience it is awful being a candidate for a job for years. If I get an offer ever it would likely be about 5 years after I applied. I am kind of grateful I got cut at one point so it has not been a continuous process. I know that I am a great candidate for this job especially in terms of productivity. However if I were to never receive an offer on this registry I would not persist in applying next exam (unless the alj hiring process changed significantly or of course my agency downsized and I was unemployed.
|
|
|
Post by redryder on Jun 27, 2017 14:48:04 GMT -5
The OPM process has always been and probably always will be a complete mystery. Who knows how the current testing was determined to be the best process? But you have one advantage that was absent when the register first opened up in 2007 and continued at least through 2009. Now the register is open for a specific number of days and you can apply, knowing your application will receive some consideration if it is filed by the deadline. Originally, there was a definite opening date but the closing date was a moving target. The application process closed at midnight of the day OPM logged in the receipt of a certain number of applications. And the number was not all that many because the time to file was never open for more than 2 or 3 days. I hope OPM never resurrects that procedure.
|
|
|
Post by merlot on Jun 27, 2017 15:17:40 GMT -5
The OPM process has always been and probably always will be a complete mystery. Who knows how the current testing was determined to be the best process? But you have one advantage that was absent when the register first opened up in 2007 and continued at least through 2009. Now the register is open for a specific number of days and you can apply, knowing your application will receive some consideration if it is filed by the deadline. Originally, there was a definite opening date but the closing date was a moving target. The application process closed at midnight of the day OPM logged in the receipt of a certain number of applications. And the number was not all that many because the time to file was never open for more than 2 or 3 days. I hope OPM never resurrects that procedure. Wow, talk about some Hunger Games-like process. I guess things can always be worse.
|
|
|
Appealing
Jun 27, 2017 15:18:27 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by LadyJR on Jun 27, 2017 15:18:27 GMT -5
Trying to get an idea of distribution of panels, for the 2016-2017 testing, for the SI did you have 2 or three interviewers? If you had 2, was one an ALJ? Thanks! You can message me. Foghorn, I tested in 11/16 and had 2 interviewers for the si panel. If I were a betting person, then I would say one was an Alj and the other was an opm hr person. I don't know anyone who appealed the si but several who are appealing wd and not active on this board.
|
|
|
Post by jonner on Jun 28, 2017 18:13:51 GMT -5
In the past the appeal process was lengthy. I think it will take even longer this time as about 50% of the applicants didn't make it. Probably most were due to failure of the WD. It is going to take a while to regrade all of those tests. I think at least some of you will have it regraded by a different examiner and come out of it with a passing grade. At least I hope so. The SI is a different animal. I think less chance for a favorable result there than with the WD. Pixie I hate to be a bother, but how lengthy? Like 3-5 weeks or 7-10 months?
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Jun 28, 2017 19:02:17 GMT -5
Like maybe a year? Seems I remember other members who had appealed had to wait months, maybe even a year, before they got an answer. Maybe someone who has been through the appeals process can tell us.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeKnot on Jun 28, 2017 21:47:11 GMT -5
NOR 5/1/13. Appeal received 5/3/13. Appeal denied 6/1/15. Don't hold your breath folks.
|
|
|
Post by Prrple on Jun 28, 2017 21:48:27 GMT -5
NOR 5/1/13. Appeal received 5/3/13. Appeal denied 6/1/15. Don't hold your breath folks. Thanks for the reality check.
|
|
|
Appealing
Jun 29, 2017 4:40:09 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by JudgeKnot on Jun 29, 2017 4:40:09 GMT -5
Keep in mind that I got bounced because I didn't put my date of admission to the bar. I had month and year but not date. They release all appeal results at one time. I don't know when the test results were released from that app cycle but they were long after I was bounced. Maybe someone else can remind us when the test NORs came out so we can better approximate when the appeal results will be released.
|
|
|
Post by gary on Jun 29, 2017 6:45:53 GMT -5
Keep in mind that I got bounced because I didn't put my date of admission to the bar. I had month and year but not date. They release all appeal results at one time. I don't know when the test results were released from that app cycle but they were long after I was bounced. Maybe someone else can remind us when the test NORs came out so we can better approximate when the appeal results will be released. This appears to have changed for preliminary qualifications appeals. The 2013 JOA said: "Appeals Process: An ALJ Appeals Panel (Panel) will be convened to adjudicate any appeals after all final numerical ratings have been assigned to all applicants who applied during this ALJ Job Opportunity Announcement open period. The Panel will accept and adjudicate an appeal from the following four categories of applicants who believe their ratings were assigned in error: 1. An applicant who received a NOR indicating "ineligible" at any stage of the ALJ assessment process. 2. An applicant who received a NOR indicating that his/her SJT, Writing Sample, and Experience Assessment score was not within the range for the higher-scored sub- group of all the eligible applicants and therefore did not receive further consideration for this current ALJ Job Opportunity Announcement. 3. An applicant who did not receive a minimum required score on the WD and/or SI, did not receive a final numerical rating, and was not placed on the ALJ register. 4. An applicant who received a NOR with a final numerical rating, for appeal of the entire examination." While the corresponding portion of the 2016 JOA says: "Appeals Process: An ALJ Appeals Panel (Panel) will be convened to adjudicate preliminary qualification appeals before all other ALJ assessment appeals. All other ALJ assessment appeals (i.e., ratings indicating "ineligible" at any stage of the ALJ assessment process, after the preliminary qualifications process) will be adjudicated after all final numerical ratings have been assigned to all applicants who applied during this ALJ Job Opportunity Announcement open period. The Panel will adjudicate such appeals from the following categories of applicants who believe their ratings were assigned in error: 1. An applicant who received a NOR indicating that his/her SJT, Writing Sample (WS), and Experience Assessment (EA) score was not within the range for the higher-scored sub-group of all the eligible applicants and therefore did not receive further consideration for this current ALJ Job Opportunity Announcement. 2. An applicant who did not receive a minimum required score on the WD and/or SI, did not receive a final numerical rating, and was not placed on the ALJ register. 3. An applicant who participated in the SJT, WS and EA, the WD/LBMT and SI components and after further review of his/her bar status does not satisfy the licensure requirement. 4. An applicant who received a NOR with a final numerical rating, for appeal of the entire examination."
|
|
|
Post by rhd on Jun 29, 2017 14:22:46 GMT -5
Keep in mind that I got bounced because I didn't put my date of admission to the bar. I had month and year but not date. They release all appeal results at one time. I don't know when the test results were released from that app cycle but they were long after I was bounced. Maybe someone else can remind us when the test NORs came out so we can better approximate when the appeal results will be released. I searched the term "appeal low score" and repeatedly in the 50 pages of results on this board, I learned that they take about two years. I made some popcorn. I put on my comfortable slippers.
I've been licensed continuously for over 30 years. I used month/year for my bar admission "date." I slid through to DC. It's a crap shoot if, on the second time around, they "discover" that I am ineligible based on that. Luckily, this was a Plan B for me, but still....two years of popcorn is a lot of popcorn.
Do these slippers make my butt look fat?
|
|
|
Appealing
Jun 29, 2017 14:32:45 GMT -5
via mobile
rp likes this
Post by gary on Jun 29, 2017 14:32:45 GMT -5
Keep in mind that I got bounced because I didn't put my date of admission to the bar. I had month and year but not date. They release all appeal results at one time. I don't know when the test results were released from that app cycle but they were long after I was bounced. Maybe someone else can remind us when the test NORs came out so we can better approximate when the appeal results will be released. I searched the term "appeal low score" and repeatedly in the 50 pages of results on this board, I learned that they take about two years. I made some popcorn. I put on my comfortable slippers.
I've been licensed continuously for over 30 years. I used month/year for my bar admission "date." I slid through to DC. It's a crap shoot if, on the second time around, they "discover" that I am ineligible based on that. Luckily, this was a Plan B for me, but still....two years of popcorn is a lot of popcorn.
Do these slippers make my butt look fat?
Yes, but only because they're Velcro'd to the seat of your pants.
|
|
|
Post by wenwen on Jun 29, 2017 21:23:08 GMT -5
I also interviewed on 11/16 with 2 interviewers...merlot and LadyJR also interviewed on 11/16. If all three of us voted in the poll then 3/6 of us interviewed on 11/16. 😳
|
|