|
|
Post by interested on Feb 24, 2009 14:30:41 GMT -5
Has anyone considered that the new applicants are aware that whatever they put in their "essays" will not be fact checked by OPM? I bet many of these applicants will sound much better than those left from the first essay contest.
|
|
|
|
Post by george007 on Feb 24, 2009 14:48:26 GMT -5
If you are implying that the new applicants would exaggerate their experience in the application (I'm assuming that's what you meant by "essays"), I would think they would be afraid of being found out and eventually fired for something like that. At our agency, we have fired for that before. Even if OPM does not "fact check" (I have no idea what happens), you could still be "fact checked" by the agency that hires you if you are indeed hired. If you lied or exaggerated, I'd be afraid for your job and career.
|
|
|
|
Post by ishmael on Feb 24, 2009 15:41:54 GMT -5
Are you expecting the new scores to be higher than the current scores, interested?
|
|
|
|
Post by interested on Feb 24, 2009 16:12:38 GMT -5
My recollection is we had about 200 words to describe our greatest accomplishment in several areas. Who knows how that figured into the score. Without getting into whether your own unverified "essay" is any indicator of your fitness to serve as an ALJ, perhaps those testing this time around would be less likely to worry about exaggeration, within reason of course. Perhaps those with lower scores "puffed" their accomplishments less. Once again, who knows...
|
|
|
|
Post by oldjag on Feb 24, 2009 21:32:14 GMT -5
A PM from Zero brought home just how stressful it is for all of you. I had forgotten just how tough that wait was for me (can you say bar exam results?). Fortunately it was so many years ago that time has softened the pain. I didn't even have a board to share with good people such as you-all. Hell, I didn't even have a computer (yes, I did have electricity). Back then I was dictating to a stenographer!
If any of you have felt offended by my lame efforts to lighten the mood, please accept my apology. This is a fantastic job and well worth the wait and the effort. If you are out to stroke your ego and revel in being a "judge", perhaps you should consider running for a state court bench. But when you can see the faces of people that have waited so long for the benefits they deserve and are at their wit's end and then get a bench decision--the admission price is very much worth it. Even when the decision is a denial, you can bring an end to long periods of waiting.
My point? Please remember how you feel now, when you are on the bench. And remember that the claimants have had the same anxiety--without a paycheck--some for as long as you have waited. When you get this job--do justice and do it in a fair and timely fashion. The reward will be greater than anything you have felt in a long time.
Pax
|
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Feb 24, 2009 21:38:03 GMT -5
OJ, a very important message. How accurate you are! Pix.*
____________
*Are you copying me? Just because a poster in another thread thought he noticed some similarities between us, doesn't make it so!
|
|
|
|
Post by pm on Feb 24, 2009 22:58:35 GMT -5
I'm expecting the new scores to be lower.
|
|
|
|
Post by ladyinwaiting on Feb 25, 2009 11:04:52 GMT -5
pm: Why are you expecting the scores to be lower?
|
|
|
|
Post by pm on Feb 25, 2009 23:22:17 GMT -5
pm: Why are you expecting the scores to be lower? I'm just comparing two groups of candidates with the similar two groups from last year. The 1st group is people I know personally who have applied. The 10 or so I knew who applied last year were averaging almost 20 years of legal experience with a very broad range of good experience. These people also largely understood the game even before it started. They knew the app questions wereprobably going to be evaluated similar to KSA's for example. The people I know personally who have applied this year are all younger with less experience and don't even know what a KSA is. Nor are they interested in learning. While people from last year sought out the old book on how to apply for the ALJ position, even going so far as to bid for it on ebay, no one this year even tried to find it. This year I know some candidates who primarily have ODAR experience and little else. That's going to hurt them with OPM. The second group is the people who post on this board. Last year's group had some very focused people with great backgrounds (judicature for example) . If they didn't understand how the system worked when they came here they searched old posts and got up to speed quickly. Many of the people posting here this year have no idea what is going on. They are only vaguely aware that OPM and SSA are two completely different agencies. They don't search old posts, but ask questions that in some cases have actually been answered dozens of times. Many of the posters this round seem younger, less experienced, and less focused on the job. Of course it's entirely possible that my observations are not going to translate to the entire candidate pool. But I find it interesting that what I have been observing in the real world is mirroring what I see on this board. Of course how OPM grades this year is a completely random factor. Apparently some grading last year was done by contractors while all grading this year is apparently being done in house. What effect that will have, I do not know, but I suspect it could result in lower scores for those with primarily ODAR experience. |
|
|
|
Post by deaddisco on Feb 25, 2009 23:28:54 GMT -5
pm...while you have a rather caustic posting style, I find myself agreeing with your opinion the great majority of the time.
And my friend, you knocked it out of the park with this last post. Your experience mirrors my own when it comes to my perception of the most recent round of applicants.
|
|
|
|
Post by george007 on Feb 26, 2009 9:10:19 GMT -5
Interesting PM. My experience is different. I know of 9 people who applied. NONE of them have only ODAR experience (in fact, half of them have NO ODAR experience). All of them have at least 10-15 years of experience. Of course, that's in my tiny little word. I do think you're being a little harsh in your posts about people who are missing older threads. I try not to spend TOO much time researching old threads since I'm too busy. And, sometimes, you just miss the topic. I don't think it's a bad thing to ask the same question again.
|
|
|
|
Post by pm on Feb 26, 2009 9:59:39 GMT -5
Interesting PM. My experience is different. I know of 9 people who applied. NONE of them have only ODAR experience (in fact, half of them have NO ODAR experience). All of them have at least 10-15 years of experience. Of course, that's in my tiny little word. I do think you're being a little harsh in your posts about people who are missing older threads. I try not to spend TOO much time researching old threads since I'm too busy. And, sometimes, you just miss the topic. I don't think it's a bad thing to ask the same question again. Did I say it was a bad thing to ask a question had already been answered? How are facts harsh? 10 years of experience barely gets OPM's attention. The candidates I knew last year AVERAGED 20 years. As for spending time researching old threads, we have people this year that ask the same question that was asked a few days previously in a thread of that name. For example, someone may have started a thread on a Monday with the title "how do I change my geographic preference" and on Wednesday someone asks that same question in a different thread. The second person spent no time researching that topic. Some weeks I see the same question asked 3 or 4 times. Clearly many newbies are exerting no energy of any kind to search threads. I am not saying they are bad or evil or criminals. I am saying they are less prepared than last year's candidates and less inclined to search for answers. Candidates last year were more inclined to look for the answer. Candidates this year are not. Candidates last year were willing to put more into the search. My conclusion is that last year's candidates were better prepared for the OPM experience and may have scored higher. |
|
|
|
Post by valkyrie on Feb 26, 2009 10:17:46 GMT -5
Interesting post from pm. As someone with a score in the high 60's, the subject of the level of the new scores has been very important. A generalized increase/decrease in the scores would probably have a significant impact on my chances for better or worse, as past results suggest that I am in a grey area of competitiveness. However, I had never thought about the recent quantity and quality of the posts on this board. I have to agree with pm's assessment. I can't think of many people new to this site, let alone new posters that have had any significant experience with the hiring process. The new posters have not shown the level of inquisitiveness or aggression as before. Of course, as has been noted many times before, this site represents only a fraction of the candidates.
|
|
|
|
Post by lawandorder on Feb 26, 2009 10:32:27 GMT -5
Interesting PM. My experience is different. I know of 9 people who applied. NONE of them have only ODAR experience (in fact, half of them have NO ODAR experience). All of them have at least 10-15 years of experience. Of course, that's in my tiny little word. I do think you're being a little harsh in your posts about people who are missing older threads. I try not to spend TOO much time researching old threads since I'm too busy. And, sometimes, you just miss the topic. I don't think it's a bad thing to ask the same question again. Did I say it was a bad thing to ask a question had already been answered? How are facts harsh? 10 years of experience barely gets OPM's attention. The candidates I knew last year AVERAGED 20 years. As for spending time researching old threads, we have people this year that ask the same question that was asked a few days previously in a thread of that name. For example, someone may have started a thread on a Monday with the title "how do I change my geographic preference" and on Wednesday someone asks that same question in a different thread. The second person spent no time researching that topic. Some weeks I see the same question asked 3 or 4 times. Clearly many newbies are exerting no energy of any kind to search threads. I am not saying they are bad or evil or criminals. I am saying they are less prepared than last year's candidates and less inclined to search for answers. Candidates last year were more inclined to look for the answer. Candidates this year are not. Candidates last year were willing to put more into the search. My conclusion is that last year's candidates were better prepared for the OPM experience and may have scored higher. I totally concur with you and I am so glad that you have verbalized so well what I feel is happening with some posters. It's so easy to go to the "search" icon and research a topic. I think that if you don't do your own search before posting on an already discussed topic, you will necessarily appear in a pretty bad light. |
|
|
|
Post by northwest on Feb 26, 2009 17:36:29 GMT -5
Clearly many newbies are exerting no energy of any kind to search threads. Or maybe we're just ignorant. I've been diligent in running searches, but I just found out that the Google search of the board at the bottom of the page does not give all the hits. To get a good search, you need to use the search icon at the middle of the top of the board. |
|
|
|
Post by gadourylaw on Feb 26, 2009 17:52:58 GMT -5
Well I have to say I am extremely humbled by PM's post re: the scores. After I read his comments I was immediately embarrassed. I thought of my recent post re: geographical preferences and thought he might be referring to me. Then I read his follow-up post and found out that he probably was. I know this might sound incredible but I never noticed the search feature before and had in the past performed searches manually. In any event I am sorry and this is addressed to the entire board. Thank you PM for some very valid observations/insights.
Sincerely
Mike G.
|
|
|
|
Post by lawcat on Feb 26, 2009 18:13:55 GMT -5
Mike and Northwest: you have nothing to apologize for; I for one am glad that you post questions because it gives us all something to read as we enter this final stretch. My own personal experience with the recent candidates ("newbies") is that we are a fine group of qualified, intelligent people who are just as competent as the last group  . I think we are all just a little on edge right now: my husband is ready to kick me to the curb. |
|
|
|
Post by pm on Feb 26, 2009 21:23:16 GMT -5
Clearly many newbies are exerting no energy of any kind to search threads. Or maybe we're just ignorant. I've been diligent in running searches, but I just found out that the Google search of the board at the bottom of the page does not give all the hits. To get a good search, you need to use the search icon at the middle of the top of the board. Everyone was ignorant at one time. I remember tryting to figure out the search function too. But I did figure it out because I was motivated to do so. I am not seeing that motivation this year. |
|
|
|
Post by hod on Feb 26, 2009 21:26:21 GMT -5
lawcat and gadourylaw- I have to admit that I am also somewhat humbled by the new information and I am very happy that there is a new post thread laying it out in detail. But I too am at the point where every non-working moment I look to this board for encouragement of anything even a rumor. At this point no one in my family wants to even mention the topic and personally I am tired of telling people that the whole thing is up in the air. Although that may be preferable to next week if I have to tell everyone that the subject is down in the dumps.
Good luck to everyone.
|
|
|
|
Post by pm on Feb 26, 2009 21:28:28 GMT -5
Well I have to say I am extremely humbled by PM's post re: the scores. After I read his comments I was immediately embarrassed. I thought of my recent post re: geographical preferences and thought he might be referring to me. Then I read his follow-up post and found out that he probably was. I know this might sound incredible but I never noticed the search feature before and had in the past performed searches manually. In any event I am sorry and this is addressed to the entire board. Thank you PM for some very valid observations/insights. Sincerely Mike G. It wasn't directed at you Mike G, in fact you are one of my favorite newbie posters. And I'm not mad at anyone. In fact I am somewhat happy that many newbies don't seem as aggressive about getting this job as the folks from last year. For the person who said they don't have the time to search the threads here, I'm sure that is true. But the folks last year probably had just as little time as you do. The difference is that they took the time because they were more focused on getting the job, and thus I suspect their scores will eventually prove to be higher. |
|
. I think we are all just a little on edge right now: my husband is ready to kick me to the curb.