|
|
Post by traceb on Mar 5, 2009 12:43:24 GMT -5
I'm completely new to the cert. Missed it last year and barely made my online application before the announcement closed. I have had no prior experience with the process, I'm very happy with my score. I'm right where I wanted to be. I have not been overly dissatisfied with the process, to date. I am not an SSA insider, although I have had significant practice before it. I have faith that if I am meant to be offered a position; I will be offered a position, if not; I gave it my best shot and something better might be on the horizon.
|
|
|
|
Post by aaa on Mar 5, 2009 12:51:30 GMT -5
I'm not sure I even remembered my test question 5 minutes after I walked out of the WD, let alone be able to rattle off to someone the questions. This isn't the kind of test you can cheat on. It tests your ability to write a clear, concise decision after identifying the issues. Me telling someone else what I perceived the issues to be really wouldn't be worth much since everyone's style and ability and method to break down the information given and organize an answer differs. I don't believe that I violate any nondisclosure agreement by saying that the exam what exactly what I expected it to be and what many others have said - a law school type essay exam on administrative law, and that's how I prepared for it. I used a law school admin law textbook to review basic admin law principles and I reviewed ALJ decisions for various agencies on the internet so I could get a feel for the style my decision would take. Once in the room I read the question, planned my answer, and allotted my time accordingly. I'm sure my spelling and grammatical errors were numerous and my answer was certainly not all it could have been.
Perhaps knowing the answers and format of the SI would have been more helpful. However, that was such an odd set up and lacked some basic interpersonal foundations, that I'm not sure that knowing the questions would have helped me any.
All I can really say is that I feel so very fortunate to have been selected last year and I do wish all of you the best in the weeks to come. The ALJ position for me has been very rewarding. I am enjoying it immensely.
|
|
|
|
Post by pm on Mar 5, 2009 14:06:26 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. Perhaps what you were told and what actually took place is somewhat different... 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. Wow, do you ever really listen to yourself ? 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. Did anyone suggest there was “cheating” ? I don’t think so. Are you ? ______________________________________________ So one PE vet has taken the WD twice? How could I possibly have not known about that one person? Clearly my entire thesis, that retakers could not be spreading information about the WD, must be reconsidered. Clearly that one person has been spreading information about the WD which has been used to raise scores....except that scores have lowered..... Thank you so much for enlightening me about a WD conspiracy theory which never crossed my mind - that one person that I did not know about has been spreading the word about that one test. With respect to whether OPM lied to us about the number of tests, I'm sure that in your world you assume that everything OPM tells you is a lie and that everything ODAR tells you is a lie, and that they told these lies just to keep from hiring you because there could not possibly have been any other reasons for not hiring you. In my world however, I assume that both OPM and ODAR are tellling the truth until someone proves otherwise, which hasn't happened on this board. And I don't need any conspiracy theories to help me figure out why you were not hired. Yes, someone did suggest there was cheating. They suggested that people were telling other people about the contents of the exam. That would be cheating..... And no, we don't have a very small sampling here. We appear to have from 20-35% of those who received scores this round. Am I an attorney? I have been a judge twice already in my career. How many times for you? |
|
|
|
Post by pm on Mar 5, 2009 14:08:37 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.. Maybe someday she will share that thoughtfullness and insight with the rest of us..... |
|
|
|
Post by jagghagg on Mar 5, 2009 14:50:40 GMT -5
It seems to me that the bottom line is that the process wasn't compromised through either duplication or revelation; 20%-35% is not statistically reliable to actually know whether the scores are indeed lower; but IF they are, then a point or two lower for an entire population isn't going to make any difference in the long run (because everybody's score will be lower), and now all one has to do is await notification that you are on the cert sent to the agency. Nothing more to be done.
|
|
|
|
Post by deaddisco on Mar 5, 2009 15:00:25 GMT -5
this is now my favorite thread in the history of this board  |
|
|
|
Post by samone on Mar 5, 2009 15:06:36 GMT -5
Any idea when the notifications will be sent?
|
|
|
|
Post by Legal Beagle on Mar 5, 2009 15:38:26 GMT -5
Or if they will be all via e-mail or will we actually get some paper this time?
|
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Mar 5, 2009 15:51:26 GMT -5
Just like USAJobs, its email all the way...
And yo, deaddisco, I'm wid ya!
|
|
|
|
Post by statman on Mar 5, 2009 22:57:12 GMT -5
There are apparently a higher percentage of responders in this poll. If we assume that test takers with the higher scores respond faster and in greater numbers then we would expect that the greater percentage of responders the lower the scores. This also explains why the median score has decreased with time.
|
|
|
|
Post by zero on Mar 6, 2009 9:08:22 GMT -5
I don't see how scores are any lower. The only poll I found for comparison is Global Panda's poll about people who made cert. Her latest poll was for all scores. Even so, the median score for the newest poll is around 67 while the median score for the 2008 people who made cert is around 69. Am I missing a data point? Was there a poll for all people on the register in 2008? If so, I didn't find it.
In fact, I don't see a significant bias for people who did make high scores. In otherwords, when you compare these two polls, one wonders whether having a low score really hurts your chances at landing on the cert.
|
|
|
|
Post by atlantis on Mar 6, 2009 10:13:45 GMT -5
"Low Score" is a matter of perspective. For instance last year the large cert of 450, the lowest score on the list was middle 50s, the highest was in the high 80s. Everyone on the list received an offer to interview with SSA, but offers to become a judge did not reach that low. Keep in mind that the makeup of the list also depends on what a person put down for geographic preferences. If you have a high score but the places you said you would go did not show up on the city list supplied by the Agency to OPM, then you did not make the cert.
|
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Mar 6, 2009 10:31:08 GMT -5
There were more than a few folks who scored in the 90's and some of them got picked up by other agencies.
|
|
