tater
Full Member
Posts: 73 
|
Post by tater on Mar 3, 2009 13:35:32 GMT -5
These scores appear to be much lower than on the previous go around. Wonder why?
|
|
tater
Full Member
Posts: 73
|
Post by tater on Mar 3, 2009 13:38:30 GMT -5
These scores appear to be much lower than on the previous go around. Wonder why? PS- If there are not enough to fill the 150 hires, do they revert to the prior register? |
|
|
|
Post by jerseymom on Mar 3, 2009 14:01:48 GMT -5
The "old register" isn't going anywhere. It will have names added to it from this exam. The new Cert will have names from this regiser, some from prior certs and some new. With the new names added, there should be pleanty of names.
|
|
|
|
Post by pm on Mar 3, 2009 16:21:00 GMT -5
These scores appear to be much lower than on the previous go around. Wonder why? PS- If there are not enough to fill the 150 hires, do they revert to the prior register? There is only one register. The new folks are simply added to the old register. |
|
|
|
Post by pm on Mar 3, 2009 16:22:35 GMT -5
These scores appear to be much lower than on the previous go around. Wonder why? I had a long post on that issue in another thread last week. If you search through my old posts it should be easy to find, then you can read the follow ups in that same thread. But first be sure your sense of irony is intact. |
|
tater
Full Member
Posts: 73
|
Post by tater on Mar 3, 2009 20:31:02 GMT -5
What a mess. There just has to be a better way of doing this.
|
|
|
|
Post by pm on Mar 3, 2009 20:35:46 GMT -5
What a mess. There just has to be a better way of doing this. There'a thread on that too |
|
|
|
Post by jagghagg on Mar 4, 2009 7:20:10 GMT -5
Given that the WD and SI was exactly the same as last time, it is entirely possible that the scores are somewhat lower this time around - (although we have but a small sampling from which to make assumptions) - because the population didn't really expand all that much. As we recall, the initial opening over a year ago lasted 4 days and garnered 1250 applicants in that short period of time. Only 600-650 of those went forward after the initial cut off the application scoring. So it is not unreasonable to assume that, at least in part, the applicants for the Register THIS time around are repeats. (Some will be repeats; some will be vets trying to increase their score; some will be those luckless souls who had been out of town during those 4 critical days in 2007, and some will be completely new to the process - as can be seen here on the boards.) Assuming the population from which applicants are "drawn" remains relatively static over a 12-18 month period, and the level of experience doesn't really increase all that much (meaning how much more relevant experience can one actually achieve during that limited time?), it stands to reason that those 600+ who didn't make the cut last time worked on their application packages in the interim and (many) made it this time - but if the basic material does not change, you can improve - through wordsmithing - only so much. I don't think the scores are all that much lower, myself. Since the scores done in hundredths of a point, and ranked accordingly (60.98, 60.97, 60.55, 60.42, etc.) a LOT of candidates are grouped within 1-full point of each other. There will be, as JerseyMom states, plenty of names from which SSA/ODAR will fill their slots in 2009. Good and Plenty!!!  |
|
|
|
Post by flannery on Mar 4, 2009 7:37:56 GMT -5
JH--quite possibly so, you make some excellent points. But the median could also be running about a point lower (see my other thread--Trying to Follow the Curve) because a contractor was not used this time around to score; OPM calculated the scores. AT least that is what some reliable posters have stated. Thus, another explanation for the deviation is not that there is anything different about the "material" this time around, but there is something different about those assessing the "material." But in the end, who knows--all we can do is guess...
|
|
|
|
Post by jagghagg on Mar 4, 2009 8:56:34 GMT -5
I "guess" that's as good as it gets!!!!
Last time, the SSA and OPM were working together under the auspices of an "intercomponent workgroup." The intercomponent workgroup was responsible for the background investigation "acquisition process" and made the contract award to OMNISEC International. Additionally, the intercomponent workgroup "developed the interview questions" posed by SSA to the 421 ALJ candidates in January and February 2008. OPM personnel were directly involved, along with SSA personnel, in authorizing these background investigations and defining the scope of those investigations. Since SSA pays the majority of the costs of OPM's endeavors, then one must assume that SSA concurred in the use of contractors in scoring the applications this time around.
|
|
|
|
Post by jack21 on Mar 4, 2009 17:54:56 GMT -5
Jagghagg, if this 2009 WD test is identical to the 2008 test, then low scores represent test takers who had not already planned and practiced thier answer beforehand. It becomes a speed typing exercise for those with their answer planned out.
For everyone else it is a trap!
I doubt Princeton test manangers would agree with the OPM approach of using the same essay questions over and over, or bar examiners for that matter.
|
|
|
|
Post by pm on Mar 4, 2009 18:10:25 GMT -5
And how exactly would 2009 test takers know what was on the 2008 test? No one could have their answer planned out because no one so far has taken it twice.
There are also at least 3 different WD tests. OPM told my group there were 3 being used that day. The implication was that there might be others used on other days. As I recall, I had version "B". When the 2010 reopening occurs, I assume OPM will make sure everyone who is retaking it, gets a different version.
So, the scores have nothing to do with anyone having prior experience with the WD. They most likely have something to do with how much energy and time people put into preparing for the entire process.
|
|
|
|
Post by jack21 on Mar 4, 2009 19:21:10 GMT -5
So, if I knew and asked newly selected judges what was on their test, for they would have no reason to withhold inofrmation, I could have found out what the actual WD test questions were ahead of time?
Ergo, it is who you know, who has the answer, and if they are willing to tell you.
A game of who you know, NOT what you know.
|
|
|
|
Post by pm on Mar 4, 2009 19:37:05 GMT -5
Yes, they would have reason to withhold information because we agreed to do so.
And you are forgetting there are at least three tests.
And knowing the test questions does you almost no good at all if you don't know the facts. The WD is a bar exam type test, except you are given both the facts and the law. The "questions" are very broad and based on the lengthy facts. The potential answers are very broad.
And the WD is not really based on what you know anyway. It is based on how well you can read, analyze and write under pressure and time limits. You don't need to know any specific law at all to take the WD.
Even if I had violated my agreement and told someone what my test was like 5 minutes after I walked out of the exam, the help that would have given them would have been minimal, even if they had the same exam I did. There is no one correct answer to the test. The test is about issue spotting, writing and analyzing, and even if you knew the basic facts going in, you still would have to write the test yourself and figure out your own answers.
And by the way, there is no evidence that anyone cheated on the WD in any respect.
Are you an attorney?
|
|
|
|
Post by jack21 on Mar 5, 2009 3:55:54 GMT -5
Agreeing not to talk means the answers were whispered or phoned around, not emailed.
My best guess is government attorneys, socilaizing with eachother, would have easiest access to the test questions.
If it's a stress test with time limits there is a distinct advantage for those who know the issues to look for. have a canned answer and do have to analyze too deeply.
The King has no new clothes on and the test favors some over others.
|
|
|
|
Post by jagghagg on Mar 5, 2009 6:33:50 GMT -5
No one could have their answer planned out because no one so far has taken it twice. Oh. My. A place where PM is patently wrong. Preference-eligible Veterans were allowed to take the test a second time if they so desired - even if they hadn't been on the Register for a year. I know a vet who did. I was told by that vet that the WD was exactly the same. There are also at least 3 different WD tests. OPM told my group there were 3 being used that day. The implication was that there might be others used on other days. As I recall, I had version "B". When the 2010 reopening occurs, I assume OPM will make sure everyone who is retaking it, gets a different version. Perhaps what you were told and what actually took place is somewhat different... So, the scores have nothing to do with anyone having prior experience with the WD. I don't believe the suggestion was that "prior experience" with the WD was influencing the scores. I believe the suggestion was - since it was mine - was that the WD would be a neutral factor, -- a baseline, if you will - being the same for everyone. They most likely have something to do with how much energy and time people put into preparing for the entire process. Wow, do you ever really listen to yourself ? So, if I knew and asked newly selected judges what was on their test, for they would have no reason to withhold information, I could have found out what the actual WD test questions were ahead of time? PM is correct that we were all required to agree NOT to discuss the substantive aspects of the process – could not “tell” what was “on” the WD, nor how the SI was conducted and the questions therein. They And by the way, there is no evidence that anyone cheated on the WD in any respect. Did anyone suggest there was “cheating” ? I don’t think so. If it's a stress test with time limits there is a distinct advantage for those who know the issues to look for. Have a canned answer and do[n’t] have to analyze too deeply. Are you ? ______________________________________________ I'll repeat my suggestion which is in response to the subject of this thread: why are the scores lower this time ? It may be that they are slightly lower. We can't really tell because we have a very small sampling and because of the size, the information may be skewed. In any case, I suggest that the population from which the candidates are drawn has, for the most part, remained static. Experience hasn't increased dramatically nor has a whole slew of individuals who had never even HEARD of ALJs before suddenly appeared on the horizon and rushed to apply to OPM. The new people on the cert are - IMHO - most likely drawn from the 600-650 people who didn't make the cut the first time but, this time, improved their initial application to get through to the WD and SI. Remember that within a single digit difference between scores, there can be dozens of names. |
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Mar 5, 2009 7:27:33 GMT -5
As usual, jagghagg is correct in all aspects.
|
|
|
|
Post by zero on Mar 5, 2009 8:35:43 GMT -5
I've exchanged some PMs with Jagghag and found her to be extraordinarily thoughtful and insightful. Whether her theory is right or wrong, she is not a crackpot. She also knows much more about what's really going on than she lets on..
|
|
|
|
Post by Legal Beagle on Mar 5, 2009 9:49:37 GMT -5
I know in my WD group, there were at least 2 people there who got verbally upset because they were not allowed to leave the room right when they finished, and were afraid they would miss their plane. That seemed pretty stupid to me - either an indication that they did not have good judgment in making their travel arrangements, or did not really want the job. I wondered at the time if (and selfishly hoped that) the 'proctors' were taking notes!
|
|
|
|
Post by morgullord on Mar 5, 2009 10:43:54 GMT -5
"Agreeing not to talk means the answers were whispered or phoned around, not emailed."
Jack21, if that is all an oath means to you, I would not want you as a colleague.
"My best guess is government attorneys, socilaizing with eachother, would have easiest access to the test questions."
That reminds me, I need to register for the next GovHack convention.
|
|
